Power is within reach for Abbott
|
Welcome to interregnum politics, that joyful period when politicians have to process that voters don’t trust either side enough to govern, and they’ll actually have to cooperate. Expect a lightening of the national mood while negotiations and final counting stretches the result out. Business will mutter darkly about uncertainty, as though democracy is merely yet another inconvenient piece of red tape. But the lack of a government, and the spectacle of politicians being forced out of their traditional combative roles, will be appealing to voters. Remarkable transformations can take place in interregnum politics. Politicians whose attitude to political and parliamentary machinery is to exploit incumbency as ruthlessly as possible, suddenly discover the benefits of greater transparency and accountability. “We have an opportunity at this critical juncture to improve the standards of our parliament, our policies and our development of policy,” Julia Gillard said yesterday. Well, prime minister, you had ample opportunity to do that while you were actually in government. This election has been a splendid one for hypocrisy, and it just keeps on coming. Labor, at least, has been fast out of the blocks with trying to negotiate an agreement with the independents. Gillard has brought Wayne Swan in to drive negotiations — handy given Oakeshott has said he wants to get a better feel for how the economy is placed. The Coalition’s reaction so far has been some helpful contumely directed at the independents by the National Party and an opposition leader who appears piqued that he isn’t being gifted the prime ministership. Between Tony Abbott’s triumphalist speech late on Saturday night and his cranky micro-media conference yesterday, he appears to be expecting the independents to fall into line, a peculiar view given they have now been joined by WA’s Tony Crook, who has done parliament a valuable service in removing from it the burden of Wilson Tuckey. There’s even talk that new CLP member Natasha Griggs may not be compliant with Coalition wishes. Both sides might discover that being in minority government gives backbenchers all sorts of interesting ideas once they realise that every vote counts. And while, as three Country Party-style independents, you’d have to assume Windsor, Oakeshott and Katter will end up backing the Coalition, it’s worth noting just how toxic relations are between Tony Windsor and the Nationals. Windsor rose in parliament in 2004 and accused then deputy prime minister John Anderson and Nationals Senator Sandy Macdonald of attempting to bribe him out of parliament:
The claims enraged Anderson. A subsequent AFP investigation led nowhere. That apart, there’s good reason for the bad blood between the Nationals and Windsor and Oakeshott. Both hold former Nationals’ leaders seats, and both have successfully exploited the Nationals’ greatest weakness: the sense that they no longer represent regional Australia but are just the rural rump of the Liberal Party. Windsor’s primary vote went up yet again, although the poorer performance of the Labor candidate meant his 2PP margin has fallen slightly; this was Oakeshott’s first federal general election but he was a successful independent in NSW (with a strong relationship with Bob Carr), until he took Lyne from the departing Mark Vaile. Every successful election they contest is a reminder to the Nationals of what they used to be and are no longer. And now they are better placed than any National to make demands of a federal government. That’s why Warren Truss and Barnaby Joyce have trouble keeping their hostility in check. Still, that’s not a bar to the independents backing the Coalition. The most passionate hatreds are always within parties, not between them. It just needs Abbott to stop coming across like power should drop into his lap by right. |
|
|
|
86 Comments
Bernard for every reason you give the Indep’s will back the Coalition, you give another why they will not. Where are you on this? apart from being all over the place.
You mean ‘government ’ is within grasp, not power.
Well, perhaps it’s just that the ‘real Tony Abbott’ is back! I thought he’d either have a stroke or heart attack in his attempt to keep his “cranky” real personality out of public view? I don’t think it’s possible for a rude and nasty bastard to change in their 50’s? I watched that media conference yesterday, and it was very strange to say the least. The sound went suddenly as did the picture, and this was after a journalist had the audacity to make the comment, that Julia Gillard claimed that Labor had a majority of two party preferred votes.
People who think that Bob Katter might be embraced by the Nationals should watch last evening’s 7.30 Report? He virtually accused the Nationals of being responsible for a suicide every 4 days by dairy farmers after the treatment they deserved re the deregulation of the dairy industry. Both he and Tony Windsor referred to the insults of the Nationals - Truss and Joyce, and Tony Windsor is still waiting for the promised letter from Howard in return for his vote re the sale of Telstra? These aren’t situations that happened in the dim distant past, they’re relatively recent.
These 3 Independents are also most concerned about health policies for the country areas and broadband. If Abbott bullies them or is cocky, they might realise that this would just be a taste of things to come if they gave them their support on the basics. My understanding is, that they’d give the major party their support re Supply and not vote against the minority govt in a ‘no confidence’ vote - the rest of the time, they could vote on each policy on its merits.
I was most impressed with the 3 of them during each interview that I’ve seen or heard. This outcome could be a good thing for real democracy in this country, that means, more than just exercising our right to vote each 3 yrs or so - it means more involvement of the people; more accountability re both government and opposition, and the views of the ‘little people’ being taken into account. Bring it on, I say! Go The Greens also! The real winners in this election!
@ David
I agree. The headline and the last para are in sync, but the body of the article seems to suggest that Gillard is as close, if not closer, to power than Abbott.
Don’t expect a decision until the final vote is counted. The party that gets 73 or 74 seats will be the one given first dibs and there’s a high chance that could still be Labor.
But whichever way they go, the Independents will be in for a drubbing at the next election if history is anything to go by.
Do I detect some subtle irony in your headline here, Bernard? I picture Tony licking his fingers and slowly reaching for a nearby power point as he sees the prospect of his becoming Prime Minister slipping inextricably away
Even if the coalition do manage to cobble together 73 seats plus the support of the three “conservative” independents, they will still end up facing a 75/75 deadlock once they’d appointed one of those 76 to be Speaker.
Surely no one with an IQ higher than room temperature ar Reykjavik’s Ice Bar (-5C) would consider a government that requires the casting vote of it’s Speaker to get every single piece of legislation out of the lower house as “stable” - especially given that the Senate will obviously be controlled by a centre-left majority.
Labor on the other hand, given current projections, will claim a majority of 77 and with the support of said tory independents and Bandt, allowing them to appoint a Speaker and still maintain and 76- 75 majority on the floor of the house
That aside, why on earth would three country independents choose to support a coalition government they know full well they will rush to an early election seeking a firmer mandate and thus usurp said independents of their newly gained power.
Labour can never pose a serious electoral threat to the independents in their own seats, whereas the Nationals have a vested interest in undermining them at every turn.
Aside from the obvious policy synergies, Labour would have no similar motivation to rush to an early election and thus every reason to work cooperatively with the independent’s to ensure stable government as they rebuild their brand in Queensland and New South Wales
From where I’m standing this looks like a no-brainer
Surely there is a need to discuss Hasluck in an article like this. If Labor wins Hasluck, as William Bowe seems to think they might, then the inevitable result is a Labor government backed by the Greens and at least one independent (the more I hear Oakeshott the more I’m inclined to believe he has Labor leanings).
On top of that the other four doubtfuls have been allocated to the Liberals 73 total (Bruce Billson’s Dunkley has just been added) and obviously if any of these fall Labor’s way then it is game over for the Liberals.
And while I”m very disinclined to take seriously anything Mark Arbib says, he has claimed that Labor’s pre-poll and postal campaign has been very well run.
@ Acidic Muse:
I hope that the politicians do not rely on you to do their addition.
75 + 75 + Speaker = 151. One too many.
76 + 75 + Speaker = 152. Worse still.
Quote from you: “From where I stand this is a no-brainer.” How pertinent.
Acidic, your arithmetic is faulty. The House has 150 members.
It’s been said here before by Crikey staff that their “editor” composes the headlines rather than the authors of the articles.
I say “editor” in quote marks because I see no evidence of any traditional editing of said articles going by the number of typos they often contain.
It’s hard to kknow. Although I disagree with many of Tony Windsor’s policies, he seems a man of honesty and integrity: I assume he will do what he thinks is best for his electorate and the country. We can really ask no more. I’m told by people who know him that Oakeshott is the same. And it seems that Katter might rise to the occassion. (He also seems honest, if nothing else.)
The big worry is ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’: as has happened in NSW, Vic and Qld when Independents get power. But at least it all works out democratically.
Leftwing rot.
You will include the conservatives in your lot, but pretend the coalition wouldn’t get the same numbers because ones a greenie.
These independents and greenies will do whatever is in their own best interests.
Why do the independents attack the Nats so much you wonder? Because the Nats are the natural enemy of these people in these electorates, Labors no risk to them. Having said that they have an equal amount of risk going either way and would most likely lean conservative to keep the punters happy in their seats.
^
The thing about hung parliaments is that a vote of no confidence has the real chance of bringing down a government when just one Independent votes with the Opposition. In other words, a seriously aggrieved Independent could go to the Opposition leader and say, “Bring it on, and I’ll bring ‘em down”.
So, the government has to do whatever it takes to keep the Indies onside for the duration of their term.
I’m not sure that your conclusion follows the likely facts, Bernard.
Abbott’s claims of entitlement reminds me of Eric Abetz in the wake of the recent Tasmanian election. And we all know how that turned out.
After all those similar “dark mutterings” about uncertainty in the wake of the mining tax, will “all business” now, similarly, be “contemplating taking their business off shore”?
But I did love Tony Windsor’s analysis of “Cousin’ Jethro” (Abbott’s first choice “Finance Minister”) - on last night’s “Corn on the KO’B” special - he’d make good “(Parliamentary) Speaker”.
It appears the truth hurts so much it renders one unable to think straight. It is inconceivable that Bandt could back an Abbott government.
Betting market is moving. This morning Centrebet had a Labor government at $2.20 - now $1.90.
@THETRUTHHURTS - As I suggested earlier, I think you should watch last night’s 7.30 Report! There’s no love lost for the Nats by the three Independents. In fact, both Joyce and Truss were insulting as recently as yesterday or the night before. Bob Katter was most strident in his reasons for leaving the Nats. I should correct my typo at this point. Of course I meant, “after the treatment they RECEIVED re the deregulation of the dairy industry.” There were also the promises made by Joyce re the sale of Telstra, and Tony Windsor is still waiting for the promised letter from Howard. An astute and non-gullible person would be loathe to accept any assurances by these liars once again? Pretty stupid I’d say! And Tony Windsor impresses me as a very experienced and smart man - certainly no gullible fool! None of them are! Their bs meter is functioning very well they said!
@SOCRATEASE - I think you’ll find, that if one or all Independents or the Greens member gives their support to either of the major party leaders, it will be in writing, together with the assurance, that they will support a no confidence vote in the govt’s favour. The only reason they’d break this would be due to corruption or some other serious breach - not just for the fun of it, otherwise the minority government would be out on the first sitting day. Wouldn’t work, doesn’t make sense. Frivolous no confidence votes would be suicide for the side that brought it on - the people wouldn’t be impressed with the cost and inconvenience of having to vote again so soon!
It can work - it works in many countries overseas, and it’s worked on a state level several times! Tasmania is an example of a minority govt at this time. Seems to be going OK so far! Of course, Abbott isn’t the most rational and mature person in the parliament! I don’t have much faith in his handling of either minority government or opposition. The Coalition still believe that they have a divine right to rule, regardless of the wishes of the electorate!
Who knows, we may see more accountability, less refusal re freedom of information, everyone will have to pay attention and be on their toes, and the House of Reps should function in a similar manner to the Senate. This means more discussions, input and embracing the peoples’ right to be involved in the whole process - I applaud that! A refreshing change! There should be more to democracy than just the right to vote every 3 yrs or so! They’ll have to explain what they’re doing and why! Wow! I look forward to that!
Ironbar Tuckey’s gone but who will rid us of the pestilential (Bronwyn) Bishop?
Bronwyn Bishop is already dead - what you are now seeing on your screen is an animatronic waxwork.
@David Sanderson…I now find anything Arbib says as only in ’ his ’ best interests. He will be forever tainted and so he should be. I have always found him as a weasel, a slitherer, a person of no trust and since the ousting of Rudd a bastard. I suppose his mother still loves him, as mothers do regardless, however she would be in a select small group.
I hope he gets his deserts, the back bench is too good for him, but I suppose this low life type must find a hole to slither into somewhere.
Its LABOR! Not labour thanks!
If Gillard gets back and I think she might just scrape in the first thing she should do is piss Rudd off OS asap Ambassador to the Vatican me thinks and he can ask his God every day for forgivness for his bastardry.
@DAVID - Arbib is a Senator! I share your assessment of him, and also Bitar? Several times when I saw Julia Gillard she was accompanied by Bitar - not a good look! They should both be turfed out. I listened to Rodney Cavalier on The World Today(should be online by now) and his summing up of the election was spot on in my view. He puts blame on those behind the scenes people too - away from reality etc! Rodney Cavalier points to the diminished role of the ALP branches, which used to keep the ‘suits’ in touch with the real people. When I was a member(left in ‘83 over Hawke’s ‘middle finger’ to members re another uranium mine - against ALP policy?) members were involved in policy making. The Women’s Annual Conference was a great place for arguing policy - members were made to feel important and part of the whole thing - Resolutions made at State conferences went on the National Agenda etc - nowdays, members are just important for the monies paid in membership fees, in fact, not all areas even have branch meetings? Too many Arbibs and Bitars, and not enough ‘ordinary’ peoples’ imput. This is in sharp contrast to The Greens for example, who value their members opinions and inputs. I think the major parties show contempt for the general community - except for our votes! Then they kick us aside until they need our votes again!
I feel very disappointed by the role Bronwyn Bishop plays. She could be a voice for women, not just older women, but show some insight into the lives of real women and their families. I don’t think she’s a good advocate for the mature aged people either. Too patronising and offensive. Many older citizens are robust, intelligent, capable people who have much to offer; in fact, their voluntary work is worth about $70 billion to the community, I believe. Aged care should have a more important role in govt thinking, but sadly, it’s almost an after thought! I’d compare it with the Netherlands - theirs is far superior, and govt run!
While I believe in the rights of older people, I think Bronwyn Bishop should retire and allow a more competent, energetic person to take her place. It’s not for money, as she’d be entitled to a (good?)pension for life by now - unlike too many single aged women!
Pure speculation, Bernard. If what they’ve said so far (especially last night’s 7.30 Report) is anywhere near their true position, I can see no reason either Windsor or Oakeshott would cosy up with the Coalition. Both want an ETS, both want NBN roll-out, both support a mining tax - all of which are either not on offer or in doubt from Abbott & co. The Mad Katter made noises about keeping the Indies as a bloc, but even if that falls apart that’s no guarantee he’d side with the Coalition.
@Liz45:
I did say “seriously aggrieved”, by which implies a lack of frivolity in a decision to vote with the opposition.
And letters or memos of understanding are rescindable. They are not blood contracts.
Great to see Barnaby Joyce demanding a deadline for a deal!
The more Joyce tells the three Ex Nat indies what to do, the less they will want to support the Coalition.
Go Barnaby!
If the ABC wanted to fix the result, they’d get Windsor, Oakeshott and Katter on the 7.30 Report, and ambush them with Joyce and Truss haranguing them.
Funny how the Libs and Nats carry on about ALP factionalism. The Coalition can’t even keep their elected members in their tent.
And what is a Coalition but factions that can’t even be in the same party?
Bernard, you are quite wrong to say “you’d have to assume Windsor, Oakeshott and Katter will end up backing the Coalition”.
As usual, Bob Katter is dismissed by the commentariat as an eccentric, antediluvian “agrarian socialist” whose interests are trivial and parochial - big mistake.
Kerry O’Brien referred to Katter’s seat of Kennedy as “usually conservative”, then had little patience for Katter’s correction, that in fact Kennedy has always been held by Labor, or a Katter! I’m a loyal Labor party member, but in the dim distant past I was once in the Nationals, inspired by my dealings with the first progressive Aboriginal Affairs minister in Qld cabinet - Bob Katter. Bob can be relied upon to represent his constituency effectively, without fear or favour, and as a remote rural resident of the neighbouring electorate of Leichhardt, we in the de-populated, economically declining, disregarded outback need more people like Bob Katter. Instead we are stuck again with a useless windbag!
What utter rubbish. Tony Windsor and Bob Katter are dead against an ETS, you Labor hacks really do like making up BS sometimes.
Katters not going to touch a mining tax with a 20 foot barge pole… this would be the end of his career, his electorate covers Mt Isa and QLD mining centre.
Now if Labor keep demanding a mining tax Katter will pull the plug leaving them 1 short.
@SOCRATEASE - No, they’re not “blood contracts” but it wouldn’t endear them to the electorate if they went back on their word.Elections are very expensive and the major parties would be damned stupid to send us back too soon. The voters of the Independents wouldn’t be impressed either!
I’m hoping that the Labor govt get a majority of seats - even one would be more decisive! Then the support of the Independents wouldn’t be so vital. The Greens elected person in Vic has already said he’d support the Gillard govt.
@THETRUTHHURTS - The mining companies asked the Rudd govt for a new tax? The three major ones have already agreed to it. If the rest of the country has to pay a reasonable tax, why shouldn’t they? They’ve been having a great time in recent years - huge profits on resources that also belong to me and you and??They don’t belong to BHP or Rio or Xstrata?
Looks like Denison might just go to the ALP now! I hope Hasluck does too! Then that would be more definite. Watch Abbott’s nasty side then????
@Liz
A counting error uncovered this afternoon has also thrown the Coalition win in the Victorian seat of Dunkley into doubt and the National who slew Ironbar Tuckey is publically courting Julia Gillard’s favor … we live in interesting times to be sure
Meanwhile a prominent North Shore proctologist warns a haemorrhoid pandemic is imminent across several blue ribbon Liberal electorates:) Donations of Preparation H may be sent directly to Tony Abbotts Warringah orriface
Centrebet has moved Labor to clear favourite at $1.70.
Too much acid.
Dear David…I’ve given up on the bookies, but like your optimism
@ACIDIC MUSE - Great! And I’m glad Tuckey has gone. I sent him an email once criticising him for the public comments he made, in and out of the House re those many people who’ve died or will die from asbestos related diseases. (this was prior to the death of that lovely and couragous man, Bernie Banton). He’d said that retire age workers shouldn’t be compensated. My mate has asbestosis! Who knows what the future holds for him? I received a response that I thought was from his secretary which sounded as though she agreed with me? Thinking that rather strange I thought there was something ‘familiar’ about it. Her reply turned out to be a positive comment I’d made on Enough Rope re Major Michael Mori on David Hicks, which could be accessed via Google? It sent a message, almost threatening in my view ….’we know all about you, and we’re keeping tabs on you’ etc. In my opinion he’s been a thug and a bully inside and outside parliament. I’m glad that he’s gone! Good riddance I say! Even the reason why he has the nickname of “ironbar” is repugnant to me! Pity he hadn’t gone long before! Not an ounce of compassion runs in his veins when workers are killed in such an agonising way. Bernie Banton died in excruciating agony - a preventable death?
I believe that the elected National doesn’t have much love for the Coalition at all. Makes me wonder why he didn’t stand as an Independent!
@LIZ45…well said Liz (much applause).
LEND ME YOUR EARS: Don’t forget the reason why Tony Abbott is so sure of himself. It isn’t Abbott’s doing. It is God’s doing. That’s how bloody stupid people are about religion.
And, if he fails to haul the Libs over the line, it won’t be due to any deficiencies in his character. No, no, no. It will be God’s doing. The same thing with the two Steves.
The Fielding Steve is going through his every action between him and his god wondering where he managed to cause offence, and the Conroy Steve-I don’t think he was involved in this election-is busy pondering how could the Libs possibly have come back into contention, and on the same wave length as god?
When the real question he should be asking is “HTF did Labor manage to screw up a whole friggin’ general election?” To which god would reply the same way as anyone else with half a brain would do. “You took the electorate to be amateurish, malleable, and half-witted. And, surprise, surprise, they didn’t like it.”
Fair article Bernard, but I agree with Stilgherrian that it will be the NBN that will play the major role in who forms Government.
Robb said today that there is no way the Coalition will back down on their plan to scrap the NBN, and as we all know, most of their promises during the campaign rely on the funds allocated to optic fibre rollout.
BTW I learnt the meaning of two new words today; interregnum and contumely.
Thanks Bernard!
The funny thing about the betting is that the bookies are starting to offer the same sort of odds they were offering BEFORE the election - Labor now $1.60.
Groundhog day blah, blah.
When Tony Abbott became the leader of the Liberal Party there was much speculation about whether or not he was un-electable.
How strange that no-one is yet asking whether or not Tony Abbott himself could be the reason many voters swung away from the ALP but did not swing to the Liberal Party.
@DAVID - Thanks David. I’m reading Matt Peacock’s book at the moment, ‘Killer Company’ about James Hardie. I thought I was well versed in the disgraceful role played by this company, govts and sadly even the union movement, but I’ve been stunned and shocked by its contents. It is incomprehensible that so many workers have been allowed to die needlessly and in such terrible pain - all preventable, and it hasn’t peaked yet??
I digress- sorry folks!
@VENISE - Hi Venise, you are right of course! I’ve thought for some time, that politicians words re the electorate is bs. They hate us - tolerate us because they need us. I have to exclude people like The Greens though! Whether state or federal, I respect their capacity for work, and their integrity and fearlessness when it comes to speaking out against the pocketing of donations etc. Here in NSW, it’s The Greens who’ve exposed much of the facts about both the major parties!
I was quite amused by the permanent smile on Bob Brown’s face on Saturday night and yesterday. As I commented somewhere else, if yesterday was his last day on the planet, it would.ve taken 3 undertakers to remove that smile(not that I want his demise???). It’s not often that you see such genuine pleasure - when your hard toil is finally rewarded. That’s how he is when you meet him too - that was my experience anyway on a few occasions. Good on him!
Now that I’ve seen so much of Arbib’s and Bitar’s faces I kind of wish they remained as faceless men. Arbib has pulled out of Q and A tonight. Is he faceless or gutless? Maybe he has his modified WRX on Carsales.com and needs to stay home in case any buyers ring…it’s fully sick bro!
I also think Crikey was rather harsh with their headline “88 % of voters shun the Greens”
^
Zimmerman: your crass racism is showing.
They also predicted a 7 seat majority for Labor.
I put $150 buckeroo’s down on a Lib win @ $3.93 a day before the election, and it’s so close to payout time I can almost taste it.
Either way, gaining government in these circumstances is a poisoned chalice. If Abbott secures the support of sufficient independents for supply bills and to ward off ‘no confidence’ motions, he’s going to have to offer them something substantial. How is he going to do this yet keep his commitment to deliver a budget surplus twice as big as Labor by 2013? How’s he going to ‘pay back the debt’? How’s he going to ‘stop the waste’? He’s going to have to line up the porkbarrel projects in a long row to keep the independent MPs on side. And that’s even before he’s got a single piece of legislation through a (very!) hostile Senate. It doesn’t seem workable to me. I don’t know if Gillard would fare much better, but it certainly seems the promises on the ALP menu align more closely with the public statements being made by the independents at the moment (and with the make up of the Senate). Although it’s probably worth noting at this point that the Senate is pretty much unchanged until 1 July 2011.
Either way, it’ll be interesting to see whether voters in the independents’ electorates can set aside their ideologies at the next election and vote on the basis of the goodies they’ve been delivered, rather than the party to whom their MPs promised supply and ‘no confidence’ support.
after watching Tony Crook on the 7:30 Report, I wonder how he envisions a WA style ‘royalties for regions’ without some kind of MRRT (federal royalties tax). I understand how it can work at a state level where the state govt collects the royalties, but can anyone suggest how it could be done federally?
If the ALP get more of the two party preferred vote then and it finishes 73/73 for ALP and Coalition then I see Abbott having no mandate to form government. If the Greens come out and publicly support Labor then it will be virtually be impossible for Abbott to maintain a stable government post July 1 after the the Senate changes.
If the Coalition do form government with the 3 independents then it should be under the provision that an election for the lower house is called soon after the July 1 2011 change over of the senate.
The Independents will insist that they will only negotiate with leaders who have the authority to enter into binding agreements.
Has it occurred to anyone that now is the ideal time for Malcolm Turnbull to step forward and offer himself as a balanced, reasonable negotiator and a man of his word?
How long would the Liberal Party remain loyal to Abbott if it were to cost them the opportunity of getting back into Government?
I know I’m coming into this discussion late but can I just say that I couldn’t have wished for a better result than a hung parliament. Neither party deserved to win power outright, and at least now they are having to listen to some segments of the community that have been ignored for a long time. I include the greens and the rural people of Australia in this. I know I have “bashed” the greens a bit, but they do need a voice. Maybe between him and the 3 farmer Joes there will be a balance.
Sausage maker: The reason we are in this situation is because the Australian people have decreed that none of the parties have a mandate. I find this and the discussion of legitimacy ridiculous. Legitimacy is having the full 76 seats and fronting up to the GG and saying they have the numbers. It really is as simple as that.
Look, this is the bottom line. Both have the leadership within reach. What it is going to take is some tough negotiation and a willingness of the independents to work with one particular party (if they vote as a block as they have indicated that they would prefer to do). Each of those independents come across as wanting the best for the country while representing their constituencies and addressing the issues they face, as best they can.
But having said that, these guys will smell bs and pandering a mile away and they won’t be conned. The only people that can answer this issue have indicated that they will not make a decision until the count is complete and they have discussed with each other how best to move forward. Everything else is just speculation.
Unity / Stability / Spin / Outcome
Right-wing NSW Labor powerbroker Mark Arbib has decided to skip a television appearance as party members look to apportion blame for Saturday’s poor election result.
Senator Arbib, who helped organise the numbers against Kevin Rudd in favour of Julia Gillard in June, was due to appear on ABC TV’s Q&A program on Monday night.
But just hours before the show goes to air his spokeswoman told AAP the federal senator wouldn’t be appearing as scheduled.
What conditions would be required to call a vote of no-confidence?
Say, if Tony was PM and more than 3 boats landed in the first couple of months (or whatever stupid arbitrary “target” he set for himself)?
Sorry, Kristian, election promises are all non-core.
Arbib didn’t front. Why are we not surprised?
Arbib has always been a poor performer on Q&A. He’s a great example of party apparatchiks being gifted Senate seats without the ability to debate any issue coherently.
He’s my idea of truly unrepresentative swill.
Julia Gillard was right to pull Arbib off QandA - neither he nor Kevin Rudd should be given a platform to precipitate another deluge of media driven drivel over “assassinations and faceless men” until after a stable new government is put in place.
Paul Barrys’ piece on Media Watch tonight was a clear indictment of how complicit the media became in preventing serious debate and engendering cynicism during the campaign by their endless focus on meaningless trivia and personality politics instead of policy. Right now time is better devoted to exploring how a stable government can be formed out of an electoral debacle that has left neither major party with a majority nor clear mandate
Socratease,
I’m with you 100% on this one.
Winner number 1: Informal
Winner number 2: Greens
Winner number 3: Libs
There’s a difference between first and third. We must listen to the message of the (voiceless) Informals.
Wonder when the police will arrive at Bob Katters home and charge him with unsecured Firearms (3 ) in his house ??????????????????????????????? They were hanging on the wall , on display in a wooden rifle rack . Let’s see how the QLD Police handle this one ??
Going back to check , but one looked like a semi -auto military gun, it was a quick glance only.
HarryBelbarry:
Katter wears a ten gallon hat to prove beyond doubt that he’s a cowboy. Shucks, everybody knows that cowboys can have guns regardless of sheriffs ‘n’ stuff.
I can’t see Bob Katter being stupid enough to have illegal weapons, much less have them on display. I would say they would be permanently inoperable or replicas which are currently legal to have on display. Although soon anything that looks like a gun will need to be registered in Queensland if Governor.. I mean premier Bligh gets her way.
Labor loses 17 seats, gets thrashed on the primary vote, barely got 50% of the TPP but are claiming they “got a mandate”.
Oh Please Labor Hacks.. stop it… just stop it.. you are making my sides hurt with laughter!
The only mandate I heard was that Julia Gillard is finished.
@ The truthhurts:
As above:
Winner number 1: Informal
Winner number 2: Greens
Winner number 3: Libs.
I am definitely no “Labor hack” but I can count.
Let’s just wait a while, shall we? 76 is a number that no party or leader can muster at present.
These are interesting times, especially for one losing side, who are somewhat disappointed that their lack of policy has not harvested the 4% or so which, by default, flowed past them and to the Informal count.
No winner yet, only losers.
@ John Bennetts
There are winners,
1. Democracy, I thought we were stuck choosing between McDonald’s and Hungry Jack’s
2. Rural Australia, Finally there are people that are going to be forced to give a rats arse about the people that grow their food
3. The Greens, Self explanatory
Who gives a shit about the losers, Party politics is exactly what it wrong with our country. Too much concern with being re-elected and not enough about good policy. I hope the party faithful (whatever party) wake up to themselves and keep this sort of thing going. It’s like a bloodless coup.
Hi Guys, I just found this little snippet on the QandA website questions for tonights show.
“I have a friend who works as an editor for The Australian. He says that his paper actively went for Kevin Rudd over the past 12 months, and the head editor celebrated his demise as if they themselves had been responsible for his scalp”.Maggie
If someone has the credentials to follow this up, I would love to know if it is true or not. If it is, I will begin fighting today, publicly, for support for reporting guidelines to be enacted, during an election campaign.
@THETRUTHHURTS - How about this fact? Both Labor and Coalition got less than about 40% of primary vote and yet to date have say, 72 seats each. The Greens got almost 12% of the vote and only managed to get 1 seat in the whole country? Tell me how that represents the will of the people? The current system of voting favours the major parties to a huge extent, but almost denies the smaller parties a look in. Don’t the approx. 12% of voters deserve to be represented?
If you want to have a laugh about Labor saying that they have a mandate, address the unfairness of the voting system. There should be optional proportional representation!
It should also be kept in mind, that the Libs are part of a coalition - in many seats there are two candidates of the same party standing. Labor doesn’t have this privilege - they have to work harder via the ballot box to gain seats.
Julia Gillard has one main advantage - she is still PM! The only way she ceases to be PM is if the GG withdraws her Commission. The manner of governing during an election campaign is convention only, which means, that under the Constitution, the GG takes advice from the PM. It’s not automatic that Abbott could go to the GG over the top of Gillard for example. It’s the decision of the GG whether Labor could govern in a stable manner. If the PM can assure the GG of the passage of supply bills and that there’d be no vote of no confidence on frivolous reasons, one must assume that the GG would re-commission her as PM of this new govt.
Incidently, did anyone see Abbott when he arrived in Canberra? He no longer needs to be friendly to the waiting media, so he ‘skulked’ away with a sullen look on his face - didn’t even give them as much as a nod! Didn’t take long for the real TA to come out! The strain of being someone else for the past 5 weeks is over. I suspect that the nasty Tony is back!
@HELEN - How strange that no-one is yet asking whether or not Tony Abbott himself could be the reason many voters swung away from the ALP but did not swing to the Liberal Party. You’re right Helen! If that is so, then my faith in the people has been restored!
The Libs can’t take much credit for the result. They only got less than 2% of the swing over all, most of Labor’s anti vote went to The Greens. In a couple of states, such as Tasmania (5%) there was a swing TO the govt. The number of seats the Libs gained were a result of the system of voting - The Greens should’ve got more than 1!
Only a complete cretin would say this election was anything but a complete repudiation of both major parties cynical campaign strategies. Nonetheless one of them will end up forming a minority Government
Rob Oakeshot was seriously impressive on Lateline tonight .. hopefully both parties will pay heed to the “politics of compromise” message he and Windsor are expousing and stop trying to pretend they have a mandate
Sacha:
Fair enough.
Dear Space Kidette
Gough had a majority in the House of Reps in 1975. Part of stable government is being able to pass legislation through the Senate. Come July 1st 2011 I don’t see how that is possible for a possible Abbott government.
@ LIZ45 - Yes, I did see the return of TA to Canberra tonight. Contrary to Bernard’s article, his demeanour would suggest that things aren’t going too well for the Coalition!
I would like to ask if anyone heard the ABC PM interview with our premier, Mike Rann, this evening? Julia would do well to listen to what he had to say. The first Rann government (2002?) was a minority goverment, and he successfully incorporated a former Liberal (speaker) and two Conservative Independents (ministers) into that Labor Government, which worked very well for the next four years. In fact, at the next election, the two Independents remained as ministers in his cabinet, even though the Labor party won in a landslide - because they were so good in their respective portfolios. I think the speaker retired at the second election. So the message is that consensus politics can work extremely well, and sustainably, if you know how to do it.
@Acidic Muse:
I agree.
Really what we should have is a modified PR system, which would still have local members while giving out most of the places in the HoR on quota.
You could have a system which allocated the bulk of the seats according to quota and the “leftovers” to local IRVs as we do now.
Thus, every party that reaches 6% gets allocated a (rounded down) proportion of the 150 seats in the HoR, with the seats allocated in each seat, in order, to the leading under quota party. Once these are all allocated, you allocate to the party or individual winner on effective preferences.
In practice this would probably mean that 90% of the parliament would be quota-based allocation and the other 10% as it is now — IRV.
About 15 seats would simply be, as now, the consensus pick within the seat. The other 135 would reflect the consensus at national level, so that everyone who felt they had lost out locally would still have helped their preferred party to achieve standing federally, so everyone’s vote really would count.
I’ve always liked Bob Katter but considered him a larrakin not to be taken seriously.
Having now heard his views on what’s happening to rural and non metropolitan Australia is a wake up call to me and should be to many others.
These free trade agreements were not negotiated by our governments and have nothing to do with free trade. We are destroying and have destroyed so many of our industries by removing protections, thinking that there is a level playing field when there isn’t.
As for de-regulation and competition ‘reform’ of everything, where has this made anything better or cheaper? Not electricity, water, milk, telecommunications. I think most punters belatedly recognise this, hence the ire at Bligh’s asset selloff.
40+ years ago the political pendulum was swung in favour of the the rural sector but that’s no longer the case and our farmers and rural industries and people are suffering badly.
Their situations have become out of sight and out of mind even though such a short time ago we held telethons and benefits to help when the sheep had to be destroyed and so many farming communities were destitute and suicide/depression were and are such serious issues.
The same banks that rip off most of us give no favours to the farmers and it defies logic that we pay top price for goods such as milk whilst the farmers see a pittance for their labours.
Small wonder that their votes have heavily swung from the Nationals to independents. What hope exists when a fool like Barnaby is your party’s champion.
If we can give shitloads of money to foreign car manufacturers then programs like the NBN, superclinics, remote student assistance etc are not just useful ideas but vital to the survival and regeneration of our rural communities.
I’d like to see the productivity commission focus on the bush as a priority and develop the strategies that can turn around the negatives and restore prosperity and growth to this sector.
@TheTruthHurts
“Labor loses 17 seats, gets thrashed on the primary vote, barely got 50% of the TPP but are claiming they “got a mandate”.
Oh Please Labor Hacks.. stop it… just stop it.. you are making my sides hurt with laughter!
The only mandate I heard was that Julia Gillard is finished.”
Truth - you are absolutely right, the Labor blinkered people and David from ALP Spin Central need to absorb this.
The more I hear Oakeshott and Windsor the better off we are to have a hung parliament.
No more legislation being bought to parliament, debate guillotined, and its voted on. Thats a disgrace.
No more question time, where a question is asked, and the politician spents 10 minutes attacking the other side and not answering it (Dorathy Dix) and no avoiding the question when the opposition asks a question.
No more bullshirt committee meetings.
No more overt government waste.
BLOODY BRILLIANT OUTCOME FOR AUSTRALIA whoever gets 76 seats.
Any minute now we’re going to get a post which advocates we need a benevolent dictatorship by a former sports hero
@ Baal
Oakeshott just discussed the possibility of Liberals defecting to Labor or vice , versa .
Wonder if the betting agencies will start a market on that.
Or a wager on the first MP to get sick on a sitting day and leave the minority govt with no majority. The Whips will be doing 5 minute roll calls.
It will be more secure than prison. All MP, get flu shot and vitimin C each day. Doctor on standby and O2 and sick bay bed in the parliament!!!
MACK THE KNIFE -
That’s true, a lot of our “free trade” agreements are actually preferential trade agreements with certain countries. These have the appearance of free trade - dropping tariffs between member countries, etc - but there is nothing free about them, and Australian farmers are not getting competitive prices for their produce. This 2007 paper by Ross Garnaut explains the situation.
Free trade should mean simply declaring ourselves open for business, with no tariffs and no restriction on whom we deal with. What we lose to other countries’ tariffs, we would more than gain back by getting the best prices available on the global markets for our produce.
ASTRO, SASCHA -
It seems the independents are going to play this smart. Acting completely neutral between the parties. (Unlike that Greens fool Bandt, who signed up to support Labor so fast that it’s unlikely he bargained anything out of them at all.)
From today’s Australian:
I take that to mean, instead of giving the major parties any guidance on how cheaply they can be bought, the independents will be doing something a bit like a tendering process or a blind auction: waiting for the parties come forward with their best offers, and then negotiating with the party that really show’s it’s serious about getting its act together.
What is “Q&A/Star-chamber” about? “Ratings” - Arbib was supposed to be there to embarrass Labor again, like a monkey (sure there are similarities, but really)?
Look at the make-up of panels - check the numbers, tally up the number of “Labor”, or anyone “impartial”, against the number of conservative apologists or sympathisers. Last night Albrechtsen on again - when does any “Limited News” “competition” get such a run? “Just because they “make” the news”?
Arbib would have been “panel member number 6” - not unheard of but, their usual “format’ is 5 - and considering they get through what (in a show that purports to be what it is, runs for about 55 minutes, or less), “15” or so questions? All those “message board questions” - how many get asked - and “an extra body”, to answer, as well as “hang up”?
And the way it treats some issues (“imagine John Elliott, if he drank”?), isn’t this show just another tabloid puff piece, that could be just as at home on “FUX (News)”, or the pages of “Limited News”?
@ Free Country
You are correct, Bandt is a young naive fool. Even experienced Bob Brown needed to correct him.
Bandt will spend the next three years playing with the PABX system, the members dining room, having green tea parties and all that.
@Liz45 “The Greens got almost 12% of the vote and only managed to get 1 seat in the whole country? Tell me how that represents the will of the people?”
Many of “the people” are clever enough to realise that under the current system they generally get to have two votes in the HOR: one ‘protest vote’ for the Greens (or random minor party loony of whatever persuasion), and one ‘real’ vote, being their second preference.
Obviously it doesn’t work that way for the Senate.
It is arguable that if there was 1st past the post in HOR, Greens vote would be lower.
I’m not saying that’s necessarily a good or bad thing, just that claims about the level of Green votes need to be analysed carefully.
@SPACE KIDETTE - “I have a friend who works as an editor for The Australian. He says that his paper actively went for Kevin Rudd over the past 12 months, and the head editor celebrated his demise as if they themselves had been responsible for his scalp”.Maggie
My mate and I have been saying this for at least 12 months, probably more. It was blatant and most of msm was similar. If we could now go back over that time and read every headline and article, plus the so-called ‘guest’ writers etc, it was a determined effort to undermine. The part that makes me angry also, is that the Rudd govt should’ve come out and responded in a definite and positive manner - that’s what Bitar and Arbib could’ve done also. I’ve not liked the ‘look’ of either of them - first impressions etc. Perhaps not a fair way to judge or assess people, but in over 65 yrs my first instincts have been pretty spot on. They never impressed me as having passion, commitment or positive direction - driven by ambition and lust for power shows, I think? I’d like to see them both gone, and anyone else who didn’t have the motivation for the good of government, country etc!
I’m also sceptical about the so-called leaks? Who participates in Caucus; are public servants in attendance; who keeps the Minutes etc. Could ‘outsiders’ overhear telephone conversations, read emails etc. We all remember the Gretchen affair, what if the ‘leaks’ were of a similar nature from a similar source? I also thought that Rudd would rue the day that he said all public servants would remain. while I’m certainly not in favour of people losing their jobs, and continuity is important, but people loyal for 12 yrs or more to one political party may not be so loyal to the next? Imposters in their view perhaps?
I also recall the ‘leak’ to The Australian after Andrew Wilke resigned. Downer tried to pin it on him but it backfired? I know who I think leaked that information, and it was certainly from Foreign Affairs dept????
@CML - Yes, I heard the interview with Mike Rann, and was most impressed with the maturity and common sense manner in which the hung parliament was handled in that state. (I listen to ABC radio all day, until the 7pm ABC news) It was a credit to all concerned, that both Ministers were elected the next time - that was 8 yrs they were a positive contribution to stable govt. Are those in the National Parliament mature enough? I personally don’t think Abbott is. His attitude to the media upon arrival in Canberra yesterday didn’t exhibit any semblance of the maturity required to conduct nation building outcomes for this country. The good thing is, that there were probably media people there who’d been with him for most of the campaign - he just snubbed the lot of them! He’s a rude, spoilt, over indulged nasty little brat! The real Tony is back?
@ASTRO - I agree with you about a hung parliament being a good thing. It may be just the wake up call the major parties need to LEARN? As I said before, I don’t think Abbott is mature enough!These overgrown catholic school boys believe that they have the divine right to rule - anything less is an aberration in their view? Abbott, Joyce, Andrews, Minchin, Hockey, Robb etc???Steven Conroy doesn’t impress me either, but I think many of the others in Labor’s camp are sensible etc. Time will tell.
Adam Bandt told his electorate during the campaign that he’d support ALP policies - I think he even listed the main ones - such as the NBN! I don’t think he’s a “naive young fool” I think he was being honest? Isn’t that what we’re supposed to be applauding as a result of a hung parliament? I don’t want him ‘schooled’ in pollies no speak - otherwise, we’re just breeding future ambition over substance people? No thanks! I find him refreshing - and he’s young! I’m hopeful!
As for pollies being held hostage in the parliament? I feel sorry for Tania Plibersek; she may be the first woman to give birth in Parliament House? October I think? Rest up now Tania?
@MACK THE KNIFE - I agree about listening to the Independents and learning about the problems of rural Australia. I listened to a lot of the so-called free trade with the US discussions(Senate etc) and I didn’t see many positives for this country. I wasn’t wrong, but I’m appalled to learn of the realities re rural people. There was a very strong and healthy dairy industry up and down the Illawarra each coast, and much of it has gone now - deregulation that Bob Katter spoke of = 1 suicide every 4 days? I had no idea of that, and feel ashamed of my ignorance. I know that the potato industry is being screwed by a large fast food industry(US) and the two main supermarkets! Shameful! Perhaps the next govt will have to take notice now! let’s hops so!
@KATE - I think out of all the systems, Optional Proportional/Preferential is fairest. If I don’t want a second choice I just vote for the candidate of choice - and seats are delegated on proportion of votes received, but I’m not sure of the nuts and bolts of sorting it all out. NSW has this option now! Of course, if enough people give their Greens candidate their first preference, they would be elected under the current system. It’s only when The Greens candidate is outpolled on the primary vote, that their preference is passed on to their 1st preference and so on. If that person is outnumbered, their preferences are distributed - it’s called exhaustive preferential! The result is that even on the primary votes, the third party doesn’t receive a ‘just’ number of seats.
12% of voters wanted a Greens person in Parliament - this isn’t reflected in the number of seats. 10% would be 15 seats for example? That’s why the Libs can’t boast along the seats acquired - they have two parties to help their vote, the ALP doesn’t? But when Julia Gillard suggested that it should be on a 2 party preferred basis(after preferences) the Libs and their supporters squeal? They have two parties???Divine right to rule attitude?This situation could be the making or breaking of our political system, and a mature and constructive process for the future. I just wish I felt more hopeful re the individuals concerned - I certainly don’t include any of the Independents in this category. I’m impressed by them, and I include Adam!
@Liz - you have missed my point. It does NOT follow that because 12% of voters selected Greens as their 1st pref, that “12% of voters wanted a Greens person in Parliament”.
Many voters would have voted Greens no 1 in the certain knowledge (except in Melb & poss Grayndler, Sydney etc) that the person they voted for would NOT get into Parliament.
Now, maybe they would still vote 1 Green if that vote were proportionally allocated … or maybe they wouldn’t.
Astro, for once I agree with you.
I like the idea of a Green in Melbourne, but not as much as I would like an ALP member in Melbourne. These were the only options.
@KATE - No I didn’t! I voted for The Greens - in both Houses! I wanted a Greens person in the HoR and a Greens majority in the Senate. If sufficient people had voted for The Greens in the HoR the Liberal member would’ve lost her seat? As we can’t go into the heads of the motivations behind a person’s individual choice, it’s speculative isn’t it? And anyway, when it comes to the system, it should be fair to all and show a true reflection of the peoples’ wishes. The fact remains, that across the country 12% of people voted for The Greens, but unlike the major parties, their wishes are not reflected by allocation of seats. I’m not interested in peoples’ motives, just in fairness!
The clear message has been, that many voters were/are pissed off big time with both of the major parties, and wanted someone or something different! Their votes for The Greens could just as easily been deliberate and positive? Both major parties are ‘discussing’ the outcome. I wonder if they’re really fair dinkum about looking at themselves? I’d like to think so, but on past history, I don’t have a lot of faith in their ability to show some maturity, beyond their own selfish ambitions?
Just for a minute ponder….where would we be now if The Greens even got 6 seats instead of only 1, let alone 10 or 12? It would no doubt still be a hung parliament, but at least The Greens would’ve had a more legitimate and realistic right to be taken seriously - like the Independents? Then we’d be looking at a European country, a few of which have 2, 3 or more parties to make up their governments? Interesting thought? Apparently they function quite well! Perhaps Australia is being forced to grow up, and politicians just might have to treat us as mature adults, instead of the patronising way we’re treated now - by the media also! They play us for fools!
Abbott can carry on all he likes, that the Independents should support a Coalition in the HoR, but thought also needs to go to who controls the Senate after July 1 next year. There’s possibly an argument for The Greens more likely to reach agreement, consensus or compromise with the ALP? The position of the Senate should be taken into account, otherwise next year(sometime after July) we could be going to the polls again?
If we do have to vote again in the next weeks, will there be the 5 weeks ‘preparation’? I think we’ve had enough of the bs - perhaps 2 weeks would be sufficient. Even then, the major parties would probably only ‘play to the gallery’ - again? Groan, groan!
KATE - You’ll get used to it.
SPACE KIDETTE:
Well said.
Re your post about the Australian …
It’s true, and well known, that the Australian openly sought the overthrow of Rudd. (The fact that this is news to you suggests you don’t read the Australian, which may in turn help explain why you are talking a lot of good sense.)
What’s less well known is that News Ltd, particularly political editor Dennis Shanahan, sought — with far more subtlety — the dumping of Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull in favour of Peter Costello, and in so doing, achieved two things:
(1) A historically high level of popularity for Kevin Rudd, when there was no newspaper gunning for him because News were busy gunning for Turnbull;
(2) The rise of Tony Abbott, when Costello announced his retirement (followed by Senator Minchin, who had first supported an ETS in order to dump Nelson, and then opposed an ETS in order to dump Turnbull) and Shanahan’s plan to install Costello went pear-shaped.
We won’t know (not yet, anyway) whether Turnbull could have achieved high ratings if News Ltd had supported him as it supports other Liberal leaders. But if he could have, then we could add a third achievement to Shanahan’s interference in Turnbull’s leadership:
(3) The Coalition’s failure to win the 2010 election.
However, this is all legitimate. There is no law, and no need for any law, preventing a newspaper stable from behaving that way. That’s what a free country and a competitive free press is for. It’s up to competitors and readers to notice any such behaviour, point it out, and if necessary to vote with the coins in their pocket and choose another newspaper at the stands.
Look! If Mr Rabbit had any vision for the future of Australia in the 21st Century, cared about all people both rich & poor he wouldn’t be constantly chanting his pray to his Money God!!!!!!!
Gee, isn’t religion wise.
Who was it said:
“What shall it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, yet loses his soul?”
Wasn’t that the son of the Christian God? Jesus.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Mr Rabbit a Christian of the Catholic Faith?
Don’t they worship Jesus?
What’s the matter, doesn’t Mr Rabbit understand his own religious preachings from Jesus?
And what about:
” A rich man has as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as a Camel passing through the eye of a needle.”
Ok, Mr Rabbit get yer Camels out. Or get some real vision for the 21st century for all and not just the rich.
Imagine what we as the people of our great nation could do with a leader who had amazing vision & not short sightedness.