Australian Federal Election: The day after

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
Post Reply

If I could vote in this election, I would vote for

Coalition
2
33%
Labor
1
17%
Greens
2
33%
Democrats
1
17%
Family First
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 6

User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

As expected, the Coalition is back, 89 seats to 57 on the ABC’s prediction (with 4 others). My observations (moreso for my personal record than anything else):

1. In my opinion, the Ruddstoration probably worked. Labor was thumped, but not as badly as months’ worth of opinion polls showed. Abbott came into office on a smaller win that John Howard in 1996. The feared wipe-out in Rugby League land (western Sydney and the suburbs of Brisbane) did not eventuate. That said, it is still the biggest win by any party since that year.

2. The vicious infighting in the government and the unity and discipline of the Coalition team were the obvious factors. Little more needs to be said on this point. The entire six years of Labour government have been a textbook example in how not to do politics.

3. Dissatisfaction with both major parties manifested itself in a minor party vote of 20%. As journalist and writer George Megalogenis observed on the ABC this morning, this will be the kookiest Senate in memory. We really need to look at reforming the Senate’s labrynthine voting system. I’m all for minor party representation, but the Senate ballot paper here in Victoria had something like 92 candidates. It was three feet long, unless you had 20/30 vision you needed a magnifying glass (supplied by the electoral commission) to find the candidate that you wanted to vote for, and it was an engineering exercise to stuff the bloody thing into the ballot-box (I got an ‘I voted’ sticker for my efforts). It looks like preference flows may have delivered the Sports Party a senate seat in Western Australia even though they only got two thousand primary votes (I had never heard of them previously) and the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts may have won a seat here in Victoria (ditto).

Image

(from the Herald Sun)

4. On the subject of minor parties, when eccentric Queensland billionaire Clive Palmer announced that he was forming his own political party most of us dismissed it as another one of his stunts (I thought the new Titanic was a better idea myself, and even it was pretty out-there). Over five percent of Australia’s voters, however, disagreed with me, and the Palmer United Party (or PUP) seems to have picked up two Senate seats. And its founder is very close to victory in the Queensland House of Representatives seat of Fairfax. This leads me to wonder – did anyone involved in this exercise actually think this through? In the midst of running one of Australia’s largest group of companies, is Palmer really going to be able to serve as an MP? PUP may have looked like a good place to park a protest vote, and Palmer had the money to launch a storm of advertising in the last week of the campaign, but has our democracy really reached the point where people simply want to cut out all of the middlemen in the political process and simply have single-issue celebrity-driven corporate parties represent them in Parliament? I suspect that PUP won’t last, but it bothered me that Palmer’s drive for bigger and better projects and his vast fortune could lead to a change in the composition of the Parliament. The Coalition is safe in the House, but PUP may hold the balance of power in the Senate. What demands will they make? Plus, as a Liberal Party supporter, I’m annoyed that he seems to have hoovered up the anti-Labor vote in Queensland. As much as I love my home state, the way that it keeps giving oxygen to political oddballs does annoy me sometimes. Or, as George Megalogenis put it, having sent us one narcissist in the form of Kevin Rudd and then helped to remove him, the good people of Queensland have decided to send us another.

5. Why do Australian politicians give such poor election night speeches? Are they just too tired and emotional to put it together? Rudd gave this wild, triumphant speech that made it sound like he'd won. Abbott kept in campaign mode, sinking the boot into the defeated government. Clichés abounded, but as usual moreso with Rudd, who can't keep off them.
User avatar
Impenitent
Throw me a rope.
Posts: 7260
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Deep in Oz

Post by Impenitent »

Lord_Morningstar wrote: I’m all for minor party representation, but the Senate ballot paper here in Victoria had something like 92 candidates.
97, to be exact. I always vote below the line. Yes, I'm a little mad.

Why do Australian politicians give such poor election night speeches? Are they just too tired and emotional to put it together? Rudd gave this wild, triumphant speech that made it sound like he'd won. Abbott kept in campaign mode, sinking the boot into the defeated government. Clichés abounded, but as usual moreso with Rudd, who can't keep off them.
Indeed! Worse speeches I've heard in a long time! There have been some excellent speeches in the past, actually. Howard's wasn't bad, back in the day, and I quite liked Keating's. They both managed to outline a greater vision and spoke coherently about the country pulling together while avoiding triumphalism (if you ignore Keating's opening line of it being "the sweetest victory of all").
Mornings wouldn't suck so badly if they came later in the day.
User avatar
samaranth
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 1:58 pm

Post by samaranth »

In NSW we had 110 candidates. I know this, because I, too, am an always-below-the-line voter.

I agree about the concession/victory speeches. And - given my previously expressed feelings about Rudd - 20 minutes of him was 20 minutes too much.

But I'm equally divided in my disgust. We now have a Coalition government that not only is seeking to (amongst many other things) severely cut the public service, but is also specifically aiming to cut the program I have worked tirelessly on for the past decade or so.

I am not a happy little vegemite at the moment. :(
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

I usually vote below the line, but as a line was forming outside the polling place I decided to simply vote ATL. I am going to actually go to the trouble to write to one of Victoria's Coalition senators and suggest that they should consider using their new mandate for voting reform (my preference is optional preferential voting in both houses, as is used in lower house elections in QLD and NSW).

Antony Green has a similar view (and I absolutely loved the cartoon!).
User avatar
Impenitent
Throw me a rope.
Posts: 7260
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Deep in Oz

Post by Impenitent »

That's my preference also (optional preferential in both houses). I'd much prefer not to have to juggle between the more ridiculous and/or abhorrent to decide who I'll put down last.

Dyson's cartoon is very funny! :D
Mornings wouldn't suck so badly if they came later in the day.
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

Education Minister Christopher Pyne insists that he called the Opposition Leader Bill Shorten a 'grub' in this exchange in Question Time. Unless there is some odd feature of the South Australian accent that makes 'grub' sounds like it ends with a 't' I suspect a different four-letter word was used (hence, a possible language warning for the video).

Australian parliamentary debates are famous for their...robustness...but Speakers will generally pull up members who use four-letter words of that nature. In this case, though, Pyne wasn't picked up and the exchange wasn't recorded in Hansard.

Fun fact - while the f-word has been recorded in Hansard, the Parliamentary record-takers still shy away from recording the c-word, leaving it out or substituting it for something else. Hence Gough Whitlam was recorded describing Prime Minister Billy McMahon as a "truculent runt who thinks he can get away with anything" when no-one present was in any doubt another word was used.
Passdagas the Brown
Posts: 3154
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:31 pm

Post by Passdagas the Brown »

I would vote Green in the US if:

1. They had a chance
2. They had an actual foreign policy platform

The problem with 3rd parties here is not just the difficulty up upsetting the 2-party apple cart, but their inability to articulate a broad and realistic governing strategy.
Post Reply