Both the major parties are as useless and politically dated as their campaigns were. Even though Labor were on to a good thing with the broadband network, they were too focussed on political opportunism to see that what they were promising should have been framed as a foundation stone for a future-friendly version of Australia. Instead, they just figured that if they said “NBN” enough times, people would want it.
My feeling has changed, from thinking that other than Bob Katter – who seems like a cousin of Bjelke-Petersen – the Independents are not only clearly capable and intelligent, but also likely to support a Labor minority government. My expectation now is that they are using the media to make Tony Abbott sweat bullets, so that when they do finally get on board with the Tories, it will be in return for some hefty promises.
There are two things that would easily have not seen the Progressives in this hole. They could have definitely got up over Abbott in a double dissolution on climate change ten months ago, which would have been aided by the fact that they still had party discipline and public trust. Secondly, of all the recommendations that they could have cherrypicked from the Henry Tax Review – however morally and socially and environmentally justifiable a mining profits tax might be – they picked the biggest, laziest, dumbest option because it seemed easy and aligned neatly with old, narrowminded agendae.
Too bad they didn’t stop for a second and think about all the things they had support to do, but didn’t. Or the fact that the only time they got anything tricky through the Senate was when Feel Ding peed his pants over the GFC. Or that with a window of less than 10 months to the election, they were going to pick a fight with one if Australia’s richest industries. I mean, really, how stupid does a political party need to be to make Clive “Delicious!” Palmer look like a man of the people, rather than a disgusting, arrogant bastard?
My bet is that if Abbott gets the nod from the Independents (because the Green on his own has no real power unless the Independents improbably split), then he will be campaigning toward the next election for the better part of a 2-year term, and that he will run for his second-term on major tax reform and the simplification of income tax brackets as recommended by Henry. Howard ran for his 2nd term on the GST. No reason to think Abbott’s going to stray from his mentor’s roadmap now.
Besides, no tax if you earn under $25,000 and only one bracket up to $180,000? That’s a no-brainer. Pity that none of the comrades had the nerve to try it, because they certainly campaigned with no-brains. Only thing now for Labor is to offer Oakeshott a senior position as close to the Agriculture portfolio as he wants, but Abbott can simply trump that by offering the same position with a towel-down and a backrub.
Mmmmmmm, backrubs.
And, David Leigh:
The Math of the Aftermath
Politics is a numbers game and the Hare Clark system of voting has been played, finally, for the under dog and not the major parties. Since its introduction, Labor and Liberal parties have played the preference votes in their favour, eliminating the smaller parties, leaving only the cohesive to adhere to the plan of corporate domination. Marxist, I here you say; not really, because the views of left wing politics are supposedly those of Labor, Green and many independents. Like the Hare Clark system, they are politically correct for the time and therefore acceptable in today’s society.
The math has been cleverly manipulated by the Green preference votes going to Labor. The Greens could not get enough votes to rule, without siding with a major party. Liberal is not an option for a left-wing party and there are not enough independents to side with and form government without the aid of a major party.
As somebody who stood outside a polling booth, on Election Day, I was able to observe the amount of hard-line Labor voters taking a Green how to vote card. After all, a Green vote will go to Labor in first preferences, whilst giving a clear message to Labor on issues such as climate change.
Labor, on the other hand, could not have collected enough votes and would have lost the election without the Greens preference votes and a sort of symbiotic relationship was formed. It shows the difference between Green and Labor voters is primarily environment and that is something we all share. There are many in the Labor party who care nothing for the environment and the Green preference is enough to force change. It means that not all Labor voters want destruction of the environment and those who want to save it have moved further left to make the point.
Interestingly, while the focus was on Liberal and Labor seats and how the Greens preferences would impact, a Muslim won a small seat in NSW. Carpet slippers and the softly-softly approach worked well in the UK and will likely do the same in Australia, eventually allowing the possible removal of the Westminster System altogether.
The circus is over, the numbers are being crunched and independents wooed, as the days, or even weeks, tick on under a caretaker prime minister. Democracy, albeit a watered down version, has been demonstrated in a complex mathematical equation that would have made Einstein proud. The meek have inherited Terra Australis, the greater number being divided by the smaller and the ongoing pressures of supply, always to remain in the back of the faceless mathematician’s minds.
History was made this time around. The first hung parliament for 70 years, the first Green lower house member ever and the Green vote appears to be the highest ever recorded. In the math of the aftermath it goes to show that the common denominator is the smallest but most powerful number.
Tim Soutphommasane in The Guardian: Labor’s wasted opportunities …
There are few certainties left in Australian politics. Two months ago, the Labor party moved to terminate its leader, Kevin Rudd – the first time a prime minister had been toppled by his own party before facing re-election. On Saturday, it was the turn of voters to overturn one of the general laws of electoral behaviour. It has been a long time since it last happened – namely, with the Scullin Labor government in 1931 – but a government has failed to secure a second term in its own right.
The result is disastrous for Labor. To be sure, a hung parliament means that Prime Minister Julia Gillard may yet form a minority government with the support of independent and Green MPs. But it is just as plausible that Liberal-conservative leader Tony Abbott may broker a minority government of his own. It may take several days, even a week, before either transpires. All this is unfamiliar territory, governed by nebulous convention. Australia hasn’t had a minority government since 1940.
Labor should never have faced this prospect. Under Rudd’s leadership, a Labor government had steered the Australian economy through the global financial crisis. Australia was the only OECD economy that didn’t experience a recession; unemployment peaked at 5%. It is remarkable that an Australian electorate would repudiate a government in such circumstances. Those who haven’t been following events in Canberra in recent months are entitled to be puzzled.
It was always a risk for Gillard to call an election last month after barely four weeks as PM. But after signalling from the outset that she would be seeking a mandate from the people before year’s end, Gillard gave herself little room to manoeuvre.
This created two problems for Labor. In the first place, Labor relinquished the advantages of incumbency. Gillard fought this campaign not as the PM but as an applicant for the office. Second, there was no time for the wounds inflicted by the June putsch to heal. Damaging leaks about Gillard’s opposition to an increase in pensions and to a paid parental leave scheme, which many believe were made by an embittered Rudd (or an agent of Rudd’s), undermined Labor’s campaign. For almost two weeks, Labor had to defend itself against the charge that a party that can’t govern itself can’t govern a nation.
Abbott, an enfant terrible of Australian rightwing conservatism, ran a disciplined campaign. He has dispelled doubts about his capacity to be prime minister. It has been a remarkable transformation, built on a series of shrewd strategic moves. Since deposing Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal leader, Abbott successfully cast Labor’s emissions trading scheme as “a great big new tax”, triggering a fall in popular support for climate change mitigation. His hardline stance on asylum seekers and attacks on rising government debt were linchpins of a relentlessly negative campaign effort.
