Hung parliament - who can deliver a stable gov't?

[Bushman]

We are in an unprecedented position in terms of our federal government, with the first hung parliament in modern times.

So who do punters think have the best chance to deliver a stable government or is that impossible given the likely 'lay of the land' of 72/73 seats for Libs/Labour, 4 independents and one green?

Liberals:
1. Surely the Libs have the mandate given the massive swing to them in the primary vote?
2. The practical issue for them is they need Hasluck to fall to them to have any chance of forming a minority party as Adam Bandt would rather vote for the Queen in a referendum on the monarchy then get into bed with 'Stop the Boats' Tony.
3. If they have 73, they are in the ball game as the three Independents are all ex-Nats with a rural/conservative constituency. However the animosity to the National Party is there for all to see, especially when you have the ill disciplined maverick Barnaby Joyce out there calling these guys names live on air? Get BJ a muzzle should be included in the monotonous 'stop the debt, stop the boats, stop the ...' drudgery that Abbot has been seving up.
4. After all this, is there any point as the Greens will hold the balance of power in the senate?

Labour
1. The 'faceless men' will need to be removed as factionalism is now up there with 'boat people' and 'terrorism' in the mind mind of the voting public. The so called 'right-wing factional heavyweights' (NSW senator Mark Arbib, Victorians Bill Shorten and senator Dave Feeney, South Australian Don Farrell and union leader Paul Howes) will be chewing their fingernails to the quick.
2. I don't think the Labor party will be able to stop itself imploding given the inevitable blood-letting which this party does in such dramatic style. Hate for your factional opposition often seems to take precedent over taking on your opponents in the Labour party.
3. Then there is the spectre of Kevin'07, who seemed to be dancing on Julia's grave in his post victory flush in a display of petulance rarely seen before on the political landscape.
4. All three the conservative independents (even Bob Katter during his ramblings about recreational fishing righst - WTF Bob?) have said they want a 'stable government' so this volcano brewing in the Labour party machine must be a worry.
5. However, there is the Greens (and possibly the bloke from Denison) who would be very unlikely to hop into bed with Tony Abbot despite Bob Brown's assertions to the contrary.

Wow, politics is alive and well again in Australia despite the negative drudgery of the last campaign. 'stop the boats' vs 'workchoices' was cynical focus-polling policy dumb-downed rubbish beyond what I could bear and this result will see a much wider array of policies make it into the mainstream consciousness than before. The risk is the 'agrarian socialist' paradigm which Katter and co will require but longer-term this could reinvigorate the Australian bread bowl.

It is hard to pick, but if you take the recent precedent in the UK, my money is on Abbott if the Libs can take Hasluck and get to 73. He has the momentum and the Labour party appears a tinder box ready to explode after a quite spectacular fall from grace.

If it is 73 for Labour (plus the two southern Greenies), then they will be able to buy off one of the 'my electorate's fishing rights or my life' independents and form a tenous government at best. Under this scenario, I am predicting we will be back at the polls as Labour party blood-letting will be a messy affair with the factions willing to rat err fornicate (to borrow from the vernacular from the poisonous ex 'dear leader') the nation to ensure the power base of the NSW Right is kept above less inconsequential matters such as the Australian nation and sovereign risks.

My 2c only; the thoughts of others?

 

[noco]

We are in an unprecedented position in terms of our federal government, with the first hung parliament in modern times.

So who do punters think have the best chance to deliver a stable government or is that impossible given the likely 'lay of the land' of 72/73 seats for Libs/Labour, 4 independents and one green?

Liberals:
1. Surely the Libs have the mandate given the massive swing to them in the primary vote?
2. The practical issue for them is they need Hasluck to fall to them to have any chance of forming a minority party as Adam Bandt would rather vote for the Queen in a referendum on the monarchy then get into bed with 'Stop the Boats' Tony.
3. If they have 73, they are in the ball game as the three Independents are all ex-Nats with a rural/conservative constituency. However the animosity to the National Party is there for all to see, especially when you have the ill disciplined maverick Barnaby Joyce out there calling these guys names live on air? Get BJ a muzzle should be included in the monotonous 'stop the debt, stop the boats, stop the ...' drudgery that Abbot has been seving up.
4. After all this, is there any point as the Greens will hold the balance of power in the senate?

Labour
1. The 'faceless men' will need to be removed as factionalism is now up there with 'boat people' and 'terrorism' in the mind mind of the voting public. The so called 'right-wing factional heavyweights' (NSW senator Mark Arbib, Victorians Bill Shorten and senator Dave Feeney, South Australian Don Farrell and union leader Paul Howes) will be chewing their fingernails to the quick.
2. I don't think the Labor party will be able to stop itself imploding given the inevitable blood-letting which this party does in such dramatic style. Hate for your factional opposition often seems to take precedent over taking on your opponents in the Labour party.
3. Then there is the spectre of Kevin'07, who seemed to be dancing on Julia's grave in his post victory flush in a display of petulance rarely seen before on the political landscape.
4. All three the conservative independents (even Bob Katter during his ramblings about recreational fishing righst - WTF Bob?) have said they want a 'stable government' so this volcano brewing in the Labour party machine must be a worry.
5. However, there is the Greens (and possibly the bloke from Denison) who would be very unlikely to hop into bed with Tony Abbot despite Bob Brown's assertions to the contrary.

Wow, politics is alive and well again in Australia despite the negative drudgery of the last campaign. 'stop the boats' vs 'workchoices' was cynical focus-polling policy dumb-downed rubbish beyond what I could bear and this result will see a much wider array of policies make it into the mainstream consciousness than before. The risk is the 'agrarian socialist' paradigm which Katter and co will require but longer-term this could reinvigorate the Australian bread bowl.

It is hard to pick, but if you take the recent precedent in the UK, my money is on Abbott if the Libs can take Hasluck and get to 73. He has the momentum and the Labour party appears a tinder box ready to explode after a quite spectacular fall from grace.

If it is 73 for Labour (plus the two southern Greenies), then they will be able to buy off one of the 'my electorate's fishing rights or my life' independents and form a tenous government at best. Under this scenario, I am predicting we will be back at the polls as Labour party blood-letting will be a messy affair with the factions willing to rat err fornicate (to borrow from the vernacular from the poisonous ex 'dear leader') the nation to ensure the power base of the NSW Right is kept above less inconsequential matters such as the Australian nation and sovereign risks.

My 2c only; the thoughts of others?

A lot will depend on the outcome of the three seats in doubt and the decision taken by the three independants who were all ex nationals.

As you say, there will be a lot of instability in the Labor Party which is about to implode, and the contributing factor of the pro Labor Governor General and Anna Bligh who is now the Labor Party Preisdent. I hope the independants take these factors into account together with the history of broken promises by the Labor Party over the past 3 years.

IMHO, I beleive Abbott can offer stability and will carry out the commitments he has made.

I give Abbott a 75 % chance.

 

[glenn_r]

The current tie just shows you the "quality" of the politicians we have to choose from at the present time.

You can see during the Bill Shorten interviews with different journo's over the weekend as to why he didn't stand to be the leader of the ALP....

Abbott looks like being the new PM but there are a few postal votes to be counted first.

 

[Calliope]

Stable government? You're joking. Australia is now held to ransom by the gang of five. Government will go to the highest bidder unless these people can put their parochialism on hold. It is difficult to see them doing this for three years.

 

[Bushman]

Stable government? You're joking. Australia is now held to ransom by the gang of five. Government will go to the highest bidder unless these people can put their parochialism on hold. It is difficult to see them doing this for three years.

Make that the 'gang of six'. Not such a happy Coalition after all.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-gain-my-support/story-fn59niix-1225908762892

 

[Logique]

I think the telling line was if the ALP can't offer stability with a large majority of seats, how could they do it within a hung parliament?

Recriminations already. Morris Iemma already calling for (campaign director) Carl Bitar's head this morning, and already in the SMH, betting on the leader at the next election (Bill Shorten favourite).

 

[Calliope]

I feel pretty relaxed about whichever way it goes. It will be a poison chalice for the winner. Abbott having to work with a hostile Senate and maverick independents, and Gillard having to kowtow to the Greens and having to continually watch her back for the baby-faced assassin.

Sit back and enjoy. Stability is a pipe dream.

 

[Mofra]

Coalition can't with Greens holding the balance of the power in the senate.
Labor still have some bloodletting to get through and that process could take months - if the vote is put back to the Australian people anytime soon, they could feasibly lose more seats whilst any public recriminations occur.

The most lacklustre campaign in generations has delivered the most interesting result.

 

[Logique]

Indeed Mofra and Calliope,
as someone else said on these boards, could be a good election to lose.
Looks like 18 to 36 months of government inertia and parliamentary infighting, whichever way this breaks.

Hey Calliope, must be about due for the Todster and Smelly Terror to be back in town.

'..Well..', they'll say, '..we go away for a week and the whole operation falls apart..'

 

[noco]

Indeed Mofra and Calliope,
as someone else said on these boards, could be a good election to lose.
Looks like 18 to 36 months of government inertia and parliamentary infighting, whichever way this breaks.

Hey Calliope, must be about due for the Todster and Smelly Terror to be back in town.

'..Well..', they'll say, '..we go away for a week and the whole operation falls apart..'

Yes Logique, I just placed a similar post #829 on the 2010 election.

Let Gillard have all the headaches for another 12 - 18 months untill it all falls apart.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

It won't be stable but it will be interesting, and so good for the regions and Melbourne, inner Melbourne where all the rich trendies live unfortunately.

gg

 

[pixel]

Looks like 18 to 36 months of government inertia and parliamentary infighting, whichever way this breaks.

Sounds like a good option, government inertia.
Just think what happened when they hatched the "Super Profits" tax! Wouldn't the Economy be much better off without that added instability?
And look how ideological interference - "Outcome-Based Education", my foot! - can stuff up entire generations of pupils!
Not to mention the daily bickering over privatisation/ socialisation of utilities, then bailing them out/ splitting them up/ paying consultants...

Maybe it's not such a bad outcome if company directors find out - like Twiggy Forrest and some like him already did - that it's up to them to set up training facilities that teach kids (of any skin colour) what it takes to become a good tradie. It may take some skull sweat to figure out a reasonable way to achieve that; unfortunately, it would take political wisdom of our elected "leaders" to stop meddling and confine themselves to a role of facilitator and supervisor that limits abuses of power by one or the other side.
Now: where can we find "wisdom" in the current bunch of "Honorable Members"?

 

[drsmith]

Me.

Especially after a few Coopers. Hic.

 

[pixel]

This is how the Taiwanese see our election.
Hilarious! (thanks woggie)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_rOMhCHK50&feature=player_embedded

 

[Bushman]

It won't be stable but it will be interesting, and so good for the regions and Melbourne, inner Melbourne where all the rich trendies live unfortunately.

gg

Finally we have real power - go the cafe au latte jet set!

 

[LesN]

At the last count it looks like 73 LNP (1 WA National), 72 Labor 4 independents and 1 green.
If the Coalition forms government, who becomes speaker (if no speaker is elected then there is precedent to hold another election). Labor has 72 votes- why would they sacrifice 1 vote for no gain. Their 72 votes blocks a coalition minority government of 72 votes with 1 coalition member as the speaker (who has no vote unless a tie exists). For the independents and the green why would they want to be speaker. They have the power to dictate what laws are passed.
For e.g the coalition tries to present their bill concerning reducing company tax to 1.5 %. 72 votes (coalition) for. 72 votes (labor want the profits tax) against. The real governing of Australia is given to the independents and the Green (a 5 vote government) who decide if Australia get a profits tax.
The Coalition (72 votes) becomes government in name only having no effective vote on the profit tax, border policy, climate change policy, broadband, all being opposed by Labor (with 72 votes).
My opinion is that we vote again, there can be no stable government under the existing election outcome.

 

[bellenuit]

At the last count it looks like 73 LNP (1 WA National), 72 Labor 4 independents and 1 green.
If the Coalition forms government, who becomes speaker (if no speaker is elected then there is precedent to hold another election). Labor has 72 votes- why would they sacrifice 1 vote for no gain. Their 72 votes blocks a coalition minority government of 72 votes with 1 coalition member as the speaker (who has no vote unless a tie exists). For the independents and the green why would they want to be speaker. They have the power to dictate what laws are passed.
For e.g the coalition tries to present their bill concerning reducing company tax to 1.5 %. 72 votes (coalition) for. 72 votes (labor want the profits tax) against. The real governing of Australia is given to the independents and the Green (a 5 vote government) who decide if Australia get a profits tax.
The Coalition (72 votes) becomes government in name only having no effective vote on the profit tax, border policy, climate change policy, broadband, all being opposed by Labor (with 72 votes).
My opinion is that we vote again, there can be no stable government under the existing election outcome.

I can't see the issue with who becomes speaker. Since the speaker can cast a vote when there is a tie, then his or her vote is not wasted. The only time the speaker cannot vote is when his or her vote is redundant in any case.

That being said, I am not quite sure what the status would be if there are some abstentions and the government is one down in a vote count. If the speaker is from the government side, does the speaker get allowed to vote making it a tie. Does legislation need a majority to be passed in the lower house?

If the answer to the above is that the speaker is not allowed to vote when the government is one vote short and legislation cannot be passed if it is a tie, then it is also irrelevant whether the speaker comes from the government, opposition or indies.

 

[wildkactus]

I can't see the issue with who becomes speaker. Since the speaker can cast a vote when there is a tie, then his or her vote is not wasted. The only time the speaker cannot vote is when his or her vote is redundant in any case.

look at it this way, if you appointed the speaker from the opposition then you are effectively reducing the number off votes the opposition has to reject your policies. just means you have one less vote to get, in an already tight race.

anyway I see going back to the poles within 18 months, as I cannot see either side keeping the indepentents on side for to long. They all come accross as having some sort of axe to grind.

 

[Purple XS2]

Now: where can we find "wisdom" in the current bunch of "Honorable Members"?

I'm not surprised by the southern commentariats complete failure to fathom the 3 wise independents: after all they are everything the average party politician isn't - intelligent, resolute and patient. Katter, being the grittiest and most patient of the 3, is most often satirised. He is in fact at least as intelligent as the other 2, and I'm quite relaxed and comfortable with these 3 holding the balance in the lower house.

As for the Greens, on the current numbers they simply don't have the leverage (even if we count Wilkie as a Green, which he isn't), so they're basically irrelevant at this stage, although that could change if there were even a single by-election.

My guess is there'll be a ALP government. These 3 aren't ex-nationals for nothing. For the first time in 40+ years we have political power in the hands of representatives from regional Australia. Meanwhile the Liberal Party has to overcome 40+ years of habitually ignoring regional Australia. Poor b*st*rds, maybe somebody should buy them a big map to put on the party room wall.

Makes it rather obvious how impotent the National Party has been all these years. Abbot would have to tranquilise every National in the coalition to keep the peace, were the 3 independents to side that way, and that wouldn't be a very comfortable arrangement for any concerned.

 

[Slipperz]

I don't think either party is going to be able to govern effectively in the current environment.

We might have to head back to the ballot box?