Election 2010 August 21

[coyote25]

I'd like to know who in their perverted mind wants a bigoted dinosaur like Wilson Tuckey serving in parliament? :evil:

Actually some Libs will be happy to see him go as long as the replacement votes with them.

Media must hate losing Wilson, who will they throw a mic to each morning when they need a great right wing quote?


Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

 

[Sprucegoose]

I am going to petititon fto ban winter elections....

Hawke started all this if I recall!!!!!

 

[oz_mark]

Anyway I am greatful the ALP lead us through uncertain economic conditions - whilst some or alot of sceptical folks will say its easy to spend money because one was able to (due to the last Coalition govt having a surplus) - ALP's economic policy and stimulii during the GFC was Specific, Measured, Accurate, Responsible and Targeted ... that's why I call it SMART.

While I disagree that it was all of those things, my suspicion is that no matter what they say, a liberal government would have gone down a similar path. Remember, the government was acting on the advice of treasury, and not on their own policy. I would have expected a coalition government to have implemented some sort of stimulus as well.

 

[Sprucegoose]

While I disagree that it was all of those things, my suspicion is that no matter what they say, a liberal government would have gone down a similar path. Remember, the government was acting on the advice of treasury, and not on their own policy. I would have expected a coalition government to have implemented some sort of stimulus as well.

It wouldn't have been as wasteful stimulus. Spending that much on the punters was ridiculous. We should have got a lot more bang for our buck. How much infrastructure could we have got for that figure? Granted it was an immediate response.

The treasury is not up for reelection.

SPRUCE

 

[oz_mark]

It wouldn't have been as wasteful stimulus. Spending that much on the punters was ridiculous. We should have got a lot more bang for our buck. How much infrastructure could we have got for that figure? Granted it was an immediate response.

The treasury is not up for reelection.

Agree about the treasury - it would have been the same treasury giving the same advice. Exactly how the coalition would have implemented it and how hard they would have gone is anyones guess - but they would have done something.

The tragedy of the insulation fiasco - is that it would have been a good 'green' policy, but rushing it in under the guise of the stimulus was its downfall.

 

[Moody]

Well the official result is out, and after an aberration the last time it is now clear that Aussies are as dumb as a box of hammers.

With a hung parliament guaranteed, a minority government with up to 5 independents, and the Greens with the balance of power in the Senate .... well ... let's just say that inspiring leadership and hard decisions will be a rarity until someone pulls the trigger on the whole debacle.

Now this is when we need a drunken monarchist as GG to sort out the mess!

 

[Mal]

With a hung parliament guaranteed, a minority government with up to 5 independents, and the Greens with the balance of power in the Senate .... well ... let's just say that inspiring leadership and hard decisions will be a rarity until someone pulls the trigger on the whole debacle.

The stock market will be hammered tomorrow. So will the Australian dollar. If the Govt is set up that way, then there will be little confidence in the Australia from overseas investors.

Get ready for the $A to drop, share markets to drop and you won't see them recover too quickly.

 

[Mal]

Hahaha. Poor Anna Blight. The latest rumours are that she will face a leadership spill in QLD.

I'm very happy that my vote hasn't yet been counted (It's a declaration vote). So I know my local member will have one vote *against* him. It's pretty close in my electorate.

 

[markis10]

The latest counting with the AEC shows the libs extending the leads in three marginal seats, interesting how many Howard government politicians are coming back!

 

[JohnK]

Get ready for the $A to drop, share markets to drop and you won't see them recover too quickly.

I really should go out and buy some US$ as quickly as possible (but I think I shall help someone get rid of their excess Euro again ) but hopefully this mess will be sorted in a few weeks.

Glad I bought those airfares last week.

 

[kpc]

The stock market will be hammered tomorrow. So will the Australian dollar. If the Govt is set up that way, then there will be little confidence in the Australia from overseas investors.

Get ready for the $A to drop, share markets to drop and you won't see them recover too quickly.

...and which ever govt forms a minority govt with the independents will not have the mandate (and will be blocked anyway!) to make any big changes....so I tip and expect that the next election will not be too far away ~ 2years or so

 

[serfty]

The new senate does not convene until Jul 1 next year; until then the existing Senate structure presides ...

 

[markis10]

The new senate does not convene until Jul 1 next year; until then the existing Senate structure presides ...

Thats not quite correct, the states senate positions take place Jul 1 but the four senators who represent the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory are elected concurrently with members of the House of Representatives and the duration of their terms of office coincide with those for that House (a maximum of three years).


Had the Greens got a senate seat in the ACT/NT the upper house would have changed this year in terms of power.

 

[serfty]

... Had the Greens got a senate seat in the ACT/NT the upper house would have changed this year in terms of power.

4 "party" Senators have been re-elected so makes no difference.

The Conservative candidate scraped one "quota" in on primaries - ~125 votes less and they would not have. Even if it had been 125 less it sill would have still made no difference as they would have easily retained the seat on preferences.

 

[markis10]

4 "party" Senators have been re-elected so makes no difference.

The Conservative candidate scraped one "quota" in on primaries - ~125 votes less and they would not have. Even if it had been 125 less it sill would have still made no difference as they would have easily retained the seat on preferences.

My point was had the Greens won in ACT at the expense of the LIBS as it looked likely, the two independents would have lost their power they currently have, effectively bringing forward the senate changes in terms of power immediately.

 

[oz_mark]

The stock market will be hammered tomorrow. So will the Australian dollar. If the Govt is set up that way, then there will be little confidence in the Australia from overseas investors.

Get ready for the $A to drop, share markets to drop and you won't see them recover too quickly.

I don't see why. Knee jerk reactions aside, there wasn't a lot of difference between the two offerings, as neither were in a position to splash lots of cash around. On a lot of things, the parties agree with each other any way. So, there will be the knee-jerk, then global fundamentals will take precedence again (and who knows where the US is heading)

 

[medhead]

I don't see why. Knee jerk reactions aside, there wasn't a lot of difference between the two offerings, as neither were in a position to splash lots of cash around. On a lot of things, the parties agree with each other any way. So, there will be the knee-jerk, then global fundamentals will take precedence again (and who knows where the US is heading)

Mainly because neither party is going to be able to fully implement their policies. It adds uncertainty.

Re: the earlier comments on treasury advice; it is clear that the PS modified their advice to suits the wishes of the Howard government. Hence I would disagree the the LIBS if in power would get the same advice. Not to mention that the executive of government departments get changed with each change of government.

 

[oz_mark]

Many because neither party is going to be able to fully implement their policies. It adds uncertainty.

To some companies (e.g. Telstra due to NBN), yes, but we are hardly the own country in the world where parties can't form a government without a coalition of some sort.
It may actually be good to keep some of the more radical policy changes in check. If the government wants to get something done, it needs to sell those benefits. Rubber stamp government is not always a good thing.

Re: the earlier comments on treasury advice; it is clear that the PS modified their advice to suits the wishes of the Howard government. Hence I would disagree the the LIBS if in power would get the same advice. Not to mention that the executive of government departments get changed with each change of government

I think the basic 'go early - go hard' advice would have been there. Specifics may have altered.

 

[medhead]

To some companies (e.g. Telstra due to NBN), yes, but we are hardly the own country in the world where parties can't form a government without a coalition of some sort.
It may actually be good to keep some of the more radical policy changes in check. If the government wants to get something done, it needs to sell those benefits. Rubber stamp government is not always a good thing.

But in this case both sides would need to depend on the greens who have the most extreme policies and the hardist line on achieving their policies. Basically no decisions are going to happen or the greens are going to get some of their stuff up.

But I agree some compromise government would be good.

I think the basic 'go early - go hard' advice would have been there. Specifics may have altered.

Yeah most likely but if treasury knew the government didn't want to hear that message I think the message would have been different. Basically the PS was politicised by Howard, we had news stories to support that conclusion. And I think to a lessor extent by Rudd, based on my feelings after some limited dealings I experienced. So maybe treasury knew Rudd would be accepting of go early- go hard?

 

[serfty]

My point was had the Greens won in ACT at the expense of the LIBS as it looked likely, the two independents would have lost their power they currently have, effectively bringing forward the senate changes in terms of power immediately.

Note that I used the word "Structure" and this post was after it became obvious that things would not be changing.

As far as it having "looked likely" before the election that LIBS would lose that seat; that has never really been the case in this election. The NT/ACT quotas are ⅓ the total, which is about the base primary vote for the coalition.