The Liberal Party has been forced to reprint the how-to-vote cards of Indi candidate James Trenery after reports surfaced of an ‘unconscionable’ land transfer undertaken by independent candidate, Mark McFarlane.

Mr Trenery’s first how-to-vote card has been distributed on a flyer across the electorate, preferencing Mr McFarlane at number five, ahead of the incumbent Dr Helen Haines.

According to the Herald Sun, Mr McFarlane was involved in a civil case in 2021 that has been described by some lawyers as a ‘textbook example of elder abuse’.

In 2018, State Trustees commenced proceedings on behalf of Mr McFarlane’s mother. In 2021 the Supreme Court found the transfer of the home of Mr McFarlane’s mother to her son occurred by ‘undue influence and was unconscionable’. It ordered the home to be transferred back into his mother’s name.

“The judgment shows Mrs McFarlane was frightened of her son because he was very angry and he had two guns,” Dr Haines said.

“In evidence to the court, Mrs McFarlane said ‘He got so angry I thought he was going to hit me if I didn’t write that he was in charge of my residence’.”

The preferences of the Liberal Party, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and Family First put Mr McFarlane ahead of Dr Haines in their attempts to return the seat of Indi to the Liberal Party.

Dr Haines said this was another example of Mr Trenery failing to do his research before making claims or decisions.

“Mr Trenery has once again failed to do his homework,” she said.

“I am pleased he has decided to rectify his gross mistake. It is now incumbent on Family First and One Nation to do the same and direct their preferences to Mr McFarlane last.

“The conduct found by the court is completely unacceptable in every situation, particularly from someone seeking to represent our community in Parliament.

“The people of Indi deserve to know the true character of the people seeking their vote.

“This is a serious error in judgement by Mr Trenery,” Dr Haines said.

She called on Mr Trenery to say whether he put forward the proposed preferencing or if it was a head office decision.

“If Mr Trenery put forward this preferencing, he failed to do even a basic online search before making an important decision.

“If the preferences were decided by his party office, it shows Mr Trenery has no control or influence within his own political party.

This article appeared in Corryong Courier, 24 April 2025.