They probably followed the Jesus Christ super star (aka Mark Latham) and posted a blank ballot paper.
Agree, Sails. Certainly the three Independents are hugely enjoying themselves, even getting quite silly with their ideas e.g. Oakshott today suggesting he might "get cheeky" and put up the idea that Cabinet should be mixed from all parties. He seemed to think it might be just hunkey dory for an Abbott government to have Kevin Rudd as Foreign Minister, as just one example.
If this is an example of how their thinking is going to play, heaven help us all.
Initially, I thought the result might be a vote for a greater level of democracy, but now it seems more likely it will reflect the grandstanding and egoism of a few, with the nation the poorer.
That's quite true. You have to wonder if these people had instead voted properly a number of the seats currently in doubt may have been clearly decided. Hope these people will think more clearly next time.
Agree, Sails. Certainly the three Independents are hugely enjoying themselves, even getting quite silly with their ideas e.g. Oakshott today suggesting he might "get cheeky" and put up the idea that Cabinet should be mixed from all parties. He seemed to think it might be just hunkey dory for an Abbott government to have Kevin Rudd as Foreign Minister, as just one example.
If this is an example of how their thinking is going to play, heaven help us all.
Initially, I thought the result might be a vote for a greater level of democracy, but now it seems more likely it will reflect the grandstanding and egoism of a few, with the nation the poorer...
Do you know how that's determined? The swings for Liberal, Liberal National of Qld, Nationals, and Country Liberals total +1.42, which is close enough to the informal +1.69 that it's not a major concern. Only I'm not sure if adding them together is the way to work out the swing?The informal vote had a bigger national swing than the coalition..
Sails, Tony Abbott cannot form government without the three independents and Tony Crook ( the National who knocked off Tuckey). All four have massive grudges against the Coalition.
If he gives in to the demands of these opportunists and forms a government on their terms it will have a very short life.
I would prefer the Coalition to stay in opposition and let Julia Gillard cope with these grandstanding buffoons. At least it would retain the moral high ground.
Worrying signs - neither side can offer a stable govenrment if Labour can't, as the Coalition would be a lame duck government with the Greens holding the balance of power in the senate. We'd be back to the polls fairly shortly if that occurred.More evidence of turmoil in the Labor Party. They just can't help themselves from blaming each other for things going wrong.
How can they possibly offer a stable Government?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ng-bid-for-power/story-fn59niix-1225909632518
Worrying signs - neither side can offer a stable govenrment if Labour can't, as the Coalition would be a lame duck government with the Greens holding the balance of power in the senate. We'd be back to the polls fairly shortly if that occurred.
Surely the worst government ever in NSW.
I do not support this theory. We do not need a Labor government in power once the Greens senate balance of power kicks in next year, having a combined flakiness contest.Abbott might be best served to give Labor the chance to destroy itself completely.
The difference in political idealogues between the Dems/Libs at the time does not reflect the gulf between the Greens and the current Liberal party.There have been many governments with a hostile senate in the past.
Why do you think we have the complicated GST arrangements we have now? because of the Aust Dem comrades holding balance of power in the Senate.
It might not be comfortable for the Libs (if they cobble together a gu'mint), but it is a non-sequitur to suggest they would be unable to offer stable government because the Labor Marxist cannot.
Not saying they can or cannot, just that it does not necessarily follow.
True, but the actual number of sitting days in parliament is quite low in the meantime the Libs wont hold sway in the upper house either.- The Greens won't have the Senate balance of power until July 2011. That's a long time in politics.
Sure is, and given the inevitable volatility with any of the possible permutations that can form government, there will be plenty of opportunity for disaster before the Greens have their longed for supremacy.Hang on, three points here:
- The Greens won't have the Senate balance of power until July 2011. That's a long time in politics.
You're probably right. But they're sure as hell milking the publicity for all they're worth at present. The more I hear them, especially the loony Katter, the less faith I have in any sort of control they will exert.- The conservative independents are playing a flaky shell game with the Australian public, and a dangerous one for themselves.
Their electorate percentage of Labor voters are:
Windsor - 8%
Oakeshot - 13%
Katter -20%
They will come to heel, after they've had their 15 minutes.
Agree absolutely. Labor need to go away and do their blood letting in private, not take their internal frustrations and anger out on the country.I do not support this theory. We do not need a Labor government in power once the Greens senate balance of power kicks in next year, having a combined flakiness contest.
They will do too much damage in the meantime, starting with maxing out the national credit card in a desperate bid to shore up their support.
Good summary. It's becoming increasingly more difficult to see any sort of stable alliance happening.Listening to today's National Press Meeting with the 3 independents and Adam Bandt,
Bob Katter was quiet emotional in relation to a carbon tax and a RSPT. I can't see him and Adan Bandt agreeing on too much.
Adan Bandt confirmed the Greens still support the original RSPT, however Tony windsor does not. Tony does support support a resources profit tax but in the context of reforming state royalties. Adan Bandt also confirmed a shoot first approach to introducing a carbon tax.
Neither side I suspect will want Bob Katter (stability ?). This makes it akward for the Coalition with 73 seats. Labor could do it with 72 seats, Adan Bandt (Green), Andrew Wilkie and the two national independents. For the latter two though, it would be a massive risk as the bed they are in would include both Labor and the Greens.
I suspect we will be back to the polls soon if one of the major parties can't secure 74 seats.
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles...nl&emcmp=Punch&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=MemberBoth Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor are level-headed men, decent and competent politicians, and would do a better job inside Cabinet than many of the people either side could serve up.
But even so, should we risk sidelining or subjugating the interests of voters in 150 electorates to a trio of men representing just three electorates?
And when the third MP in this triumvirate is Bob Katter, it becomes a more troubling proposition, as his rhetoric over the past few days has been framed around a totally unjustified sense of betrayal where he’s accusing city people of callous indifference to the plight of rural communities.
Both Windsor and Oakeshott have said that they will not use the whip-hand they now enjoy through an accident of democracy to extort benefits for their electorates at the expense of the nation. Their track record in politics, firstly at the NSW state level in the 1990s and now at the federal level, suggests that they can be taken at their word.
It matters less what they say than what the major parties do in order to attract their support. Things are so desperate on the Labor and Coalition side that all sorts of inducements will be thrown around.
Oakeshott has displayed an infectious brand of optimism by proposing “a new politics” and has made some compelling points about how so much important parliamentary committee work, and the thoughtful proposals from major policy exercises such as Ken Henry’s tax review, are often crushed by machine politics and poll-driven short term political expediency. But his proposal for some kind of government of national unity, possibly with ministers drawn from across the parties, is totally unworkable, although it did at least give us all a laugh at hearing Tony Abbott talking up the prospect of “a kinder gentler polity”.
But the biggest problem is Katter. The former Howard Government minister has made it clear that it’s his explicit intention to massively redirect the efforts and energy of Canberra towards rural Queensland and, presumably, the rest of the bush.
He bases this on a very hostile and unfounded sense of persecution. This old-school agrarian socialist appears blissfully ignorant of the billions that are spent on rural assistance, on adjustment packages for industry sectors such as sugar or dairy which have been affected by liberalised trade arrangements or competition policy. He even makes the fanciful and baseless claim that city people and the city media doesn’t care about issues such as rural suicide, ignoring the fact that when the drought was at its worst city people gave millions through the media-led Farmhand campaign to reach out to rural communities, aside what they do already through their taxes.
He also epitomises the unrealistic rural conviction that it’s the job of government not only to support good businesses, but to underwrite businesses which are plainly unviable. No-one whose small business goes south in the city gets any government assistance; yet the Katter view of the world is that if you choose out of a sense of tradition or familial loyalty to grow things in a place which has always been marginal, the state should save you from your own misfortune or lack of sense.
Katter made it clear in his statement on Sunday that he wants to massively shift the focus of Canberra. He said it’s “not payback time but pay-up time”, suggesting that in this overwhelmingly coastal, city-dwelling nation of ours that the suburbs have had it too good for too long.
He’s mused about how it’s no longer even legal to “boil the billy” in this country, suggesting a warped sense of what constitutes our national identity, with putting jumbucks in the tucker bag no doubt next on the politically correct list of forbidden activities.
His stroppy remarks on 3AW made plain how his sense of persecution would determine which party he supported, on the basis of what they’d do for his seat.
I’ve made my position perfectly clear 400 times, so for the 400th time i said if it’s up to me personally, as far as I’m personally concerned, I would give the gong to whoever gives us the right to survive. We haven’t enjoyed that right for 25 years. All we’ve ever seen is our businesses going down, down, down, our farmers just collapsing completely…these are not just figures plucked out of the air, concepts plucked out of the air, I can give you the actual figures, that’s why I’m carrying this briefcase around with me everywhere, i can give you the actual figures. No you listen to me because we have had it up to here with the media, you people have given a run to every single idea known to man, except us. And we got to a stage under successive governments where every four days a farmer in Australia was committing suicide. Did you ever give us a run? No. Now that we’ve got a bit of power you’ll be listening to us, my friend, not dictating to us. I just got 74-75 % of the vote, right? I think there’s a bit of trust there. And I’ve lived with them all my life with my daddy and my granddaddy before that and I would like to think I know a little bit of what’s going on there.
In this election 85 per cent of the country voted for either of the two major parties. Rather than reflecting the will of the majority we now risk government by the few, flimsy and unsustainable government where the interests and appetites of three men who represent 300,000 people will inordinately influence the lives of 21 million. The fact that one of these men is waging some fanciful war in his own mind on the big cities of Australia is reason enough to go straight back to the polls.
Rather prescient article, especially in his portrayal of Katter - Katter spoke out against free trade in his NPC address today. Basically, it seemed like Katter read the article then set about to prove Penberthy correct on every point today.The following extract from an article by David Penberthy of "The Punch" seems right on the money.
Neither side I suspect will want Bob Katter (stability ?). This makes it akward for the Coalition with 73 seats. Labor could do it with 72 seats, Adan Bandt (Green), Andrew Wilkie and the two national independents. For the latter two though, it would be a massive risk as the bed they are in would include both Labor and the Greens.
Not sure I can agree with anything less right wing than the libs being automatically labelled Marxist either, but each to their own.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?