The Singapore Forum

Hmmmm...that's exactly what the outgoing Labour government did in the last 12 months in power in the UK. Don't think they had any time to do anything after they didn't win the election but were holding on as caretaker, but that's because I'm pretty sure they'd done it all in the previous 12 months.

The new government just got rid of the things they didn't want so it didn't matter anyhow.

So, when's your election going to be over? Will it go to the courts like the US did? Or will it be nice and amicable like in the UK? Or will it drag on and on and on and on and create a new way of looking at hung parliaments?

It depends on which way the independants go. If they align with sufficient numbers towards one of the parties, then we have a minority government.

If they align differently and we end up with 75 seats each then it's either off to the polls again or the Queen decides who will be Prime Minister.

Labor can get a working majority if the independents and the greenie join them. But only if everyone comes to every debate and nobody dies or resigns. They would also have to appoint a Liberal speaker.

Three seats still to be decided I see. Two more for Tony and another independent predicted.

As long as they allow him to set up his crocodile hunting business, Katter will join anybody. If his ravings in the Cairns Post are anything to go by, no sane individual would want to be in the same house with him, never mind share government.

Thinking if Abbot can get 73 which is as much as he can - he may be able to form govt however its shakey at best. He would be reliant on a guy as mad as they get and yet after negotating with conservatives, he will then have to take it to the Senate where he has to negotiate with a very leftist looking party. Doesnt matter who wins - it can't be sustainable with such single issue focus from these 3 candidates. If however you could go without Katter - and have the 2 others and the green, Gillard may get something slightly more workable.

Don't think the next election will take 3 years though... one death, sickness could bring down govt. The Gillard Abbott battle isnt over though...

Looks to me that even if one of the parties does form a government, the most powerful person in the country is going to be Bob Brown. He may have one of those balancing power in the Fed P., and he certainly holds the balance of power in the senate.

Is it wise, do you think, to hold the Senate and Federal elections on the same day? One would think that an ambivalent result in the Federal election would be mirrored by the same thing in the Senate election, which essentially means that both houses are hung.

I laughed

http://doesaustraliahaveagovernmentyet.com/

This Websense category is filtered: Potentially Damaging Content. Sites in this category may pose a security threat to network resources or private information, and are blocked by your organization.

Having a government is one thing. Having a functional government may turn out to be the problem.

Morrolan wrote:
This Websense category is filtered: Potentially Damaging Content. Sites in this category may pose a security threat to network resources or private information, and are blocked by your organization.

Odd, it's a static black page with a big white "NO" on it.

It seems a fresh election within in a year is almost a certainty given the outrageous expectations of these 3 farmers. Even if the libs get 74 - (Tuckey's Nat replacement will sit outside the party room so you have 73 ), they will constantly have to rely on these 3. These people are fine when you have a 15 seat majority but when its up to them, you cannot reasonably govern. Yes minority government works but usually it consists of people who share some common views and a common vision - for this government to work, they need to get the input of protectionist farmers focused on a very skewed set of interests and then get it vetted by a very modern, open, tolerant party with no fixed agenda save saving the earth. That doesnt make for good government. Fact is that the centralist in the Libs and ALP have alot more in common with each other than they do with either farmers or gay lawyers freshly elected to parliament.

baloo wrote:
Morrolan wrote:

Odd, it's a static black page with a big white "NO" on it.

maybe that's what's threatening about it...

what on earth is outrageous about wanting both parties to subject their policies to treasury for costing? you'll note the word used by crappott regarding the convention about costings kept eyes only of the incoming primeminister is 'convention'. convention is not a thing set in concrete. the liberal party go on and on and on and on and on about their financial management ability - but when push comes to shove they can't provide the reasonable information that the public want - it is the public money and everyone seems to forget it, especially the pollies. if they can't trust the treasury then how do they propose to run with them after they get government - do they intend to sack the lot of them and waste tax payers money employing a whole new department. red herrings, big fat red herrings.

and I don't think anything wrong with some of the requests around private member bills, pollies should be allowed to represent their consituencies more, and it's a pretty big message out there that most of australia has cracked the shits with 2 party politics.

Morrolan wrote:
This Websense category is filtered, etc.

baloo wrote:Odd, it's a static black page with a big white "NO" on it.

Worked for me (but it was less exciting than I might have hoped for).

Tas wrote:what on earth is outrageous about wanting both parties to subject their policies to treasury for costing?

Funny thing is that TA reckoned that Treasury public servants were "ill-suited to costing Opposition policies because they did not have ''the same degree of insight'' as they did with government policy", yet the Treasurer, Ken Henry, was in the position for many years under a coalition Government.

Unlike the Howard Government, the Rudd Government didn't engage in wholesale sacking and replacement of Department heads when it came to power.

I recall hearing/reading that and thinking it sounded completely illogical, and a tad irrational.

Glenn Milne article basically says how I feel, but better obviously: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2994830.htm

Tas wrote:I recall hearing/reading that and thinking it sounded completely illogical, and a tad irrational.

proves Abbott is a right git.

i wonder how he thinks pissing off the only 3 people that can help him form a government is going to get the Libs in government.

Morrolan wrote:i wonder how he thinks pissing off the only 3 people that can help him form a government is going to get the Libs in government.

Easy. He obviously believes pissing them off is the lesser of the two evils when it comes to getting his campign promises costed by Treasury.

baloo wrote:
Morrolan wrote:i wonder how he thinks pissing off the only 3 people that can help him form a government is going to get the Libs in government.
Easy. He obviously believes pissing them off is the lesser of the two evils when it comes to getting his campign promises costed by Treasury.

and show the gaping holes to all around? probably.

anyway, the backflip is already there...

and Fielding, the Family First wanker who lost his Senate seat, is threatening to block supply in the Senate if the ALP form a minority government. Though he can only do it until May 31st next year.

There really should be some measures in place to stop independant loonies from allowing a government to operate.

thing is I quite like how the current 3 independed loonies in control are going about things. the SMH comments on that article were pretty funny, Fielding just makes himself sound nutz. they should have forced an 8th point though - Conrad to drop ridiculous filter proposal - it would make everyones life simpler

I reckon labor may have leapt on that opportunity

Can't wait to see the numbers on his paid maternity leave. Even agreeing with a maternity leave policy, I couldn't believe what TA proposed, it was nutz amount$. and stupid taxes to fund it. lost the plot on that one.

Do we have a goverment yet ?

The Public Service must be loving this time. Is there anything to do ?

baloo wrote:Do we have a goverment yet ?

The Public Service must be loving this time. Is there anything to do ?

Nope no government, public service out of control and on the loose...Burning, pillaging banning has-been comedians from leaving the country...

So Labor now has 74 with Wilkie, surely the end is now in sight.

The Singapore Forum

Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?

Re: Australia on track to a female PM?