Australian Federal Election 2 July 2016

[Farmduck]

Well it's finally on. One thing we do know is that, being a double-dissolution election, most of the minor Senate parties will be wiped out. You can decide for yourself whether the death of minor parties in the Senate is more, or less democratic. Here are 2 standard arguments:

 

- Not everybody falls into the 2 broad categories represented by the 2 major parties, therefore these minor parties are a purer fine-tuning of democracy;

- Why should a Govt elected by 7 million people have its agenda frustrated by 1 or 2 Senators who may have been elected by 12,000 people?

 

I have no idea who will win. We have seen a lot of cracks in the allegedly "faction-free" Liberal Party in recent months and none of the people involved have come out smelling good. In NSW, the last State Labor Govt probably made them unelectable for up to 10 years and losing NSW will make a national victory difficult.

 

One good thing to come out of the election is that we'll probably never hear the name Clive Palmer again.

[Bleep1673]

Should have put an option up there saying "Don't Care, it's nothing to do with us"

[Farmduck]

No I don't need a poll to tell me that.

[Copa]

The Coaltion is made up of 4 different parties.

The political system in Australia does not permit one or two senators to block changes. A majority of senators is required. It's always been that way.

Well it's finally on. One thing we do know is that, being a double-dissolution election, most of the minor Senate parties will be wiped out. You can decide for yourself whether the death of minor parties in the Senate is more, or less democratic. Here are 2 standard arguments:

 

- Not everybody falls into the 2 broad categories represented by the 2 major parties, therefore these minor parties are a purer fine-tuning of democracy;

- Why should a Govt elected by 7 million people have its agenda frustrated by 1 or 2 Senators who may have been elected by 12,000 people?

 

I have no idea who will win. We have seen a lot of cracks in the allegedly "faction-free" Liberal Party in recent months and none of the people involved have come out smelling good. In NSW, the last State Labor Govt probably made them unelectable for up to 10 years and losing NSW will make a national victory difficult.

 

One good thing to come out of the election is that we'll probably never hear the name Clive Palmer again.

[Farmduck]

The Coaltion is made up of 4 different parties.

The political system in Australia does not permit one or two senators to block changes. A majority of senators is required. It's always been that way.

 

 

If you consider the Libs and Nats separate parties then the Coalition is 2 parties. I consider the Nats just a historical anachronism and simply the rural branch of the Libs.

 

I'm referring to situations where neither side has a clear majority in the Senate.

 

Since the introduction of proportional representation (PR) for Senate elections in 1949, the government of the day has only had control (a majority) in the Senate during 1951–1956, 1959–1962, 1975–1981 and 2005–2007. On each occasion the Liberal/National (Country) Party Coalition was in government. An ALP government has not controlled the Senate since 1944–1949, though the party did control the Senate during the period 1949–1951 while in opposition.

 

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/FedElect

[Copa]

The coalition is 4 parties. It's been that way for a while.

One or two senators can never block an agenda. It always requires a majority of senators to do so. The whole "a lone minor party senator is stopping an entire reform agenda" narrative is simply wrong and designed to appeal to those who know virtually nothing about how the system works. All senators get a vote and a majority can vote out proposals. It's always been that way.

If you consider the Libs and Nats separate parties then the Coalition is 2 parties. I consider the Nats just a historical anachronism and simply the rural branch of the Libs.

 

I'm referring to situations where neither side has a clear majority in the Senate.

 

Since the introduction of proportional representation (PR) for Senate elections in 1949, the government of the day has only had control (a majority) in the Senate during 1951–1956, 1959–1962, 1975–1981 and 2005–2007. On each occasion the Liberal/National (Country) Party Coalition was in government. An ALP government has not controlled the Senate since 1944–1949, though the party did control the Senate during the period 1949–1951 while in opposition.

 

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/FedElect

[Farmduck]

The coalition is 4 parties. It's been that way for a while.

One or two senators can never block an agenda. It always requires a majority of senators to do so. The whole "a lone minor party senator is stopping an entire reform agenda" narrative is simply wrong and designed to appeal to those who know virtually nothing about how the system works. All senators get a vote and a majority can vote out proposals. It's always been that way.

 

 

I assume you are counting the Country Liberal Party (NT) and the Liberal National Party (LNP) as separate parties within the Coalition. I don't think many people would see, in policy terms, these parties as distinct from the Libs and Nationals.

 

You are talking about how the system works in a purely arithmetical fashion. Yes 39 is always bigger than 37 but, the political reality is that minor parties like Motoring Enthusiasts or Family First have a level of power completely disproportionate to their electoral support. They are able to leverage their vote on major issues in return for concessions which aren't merited by their electoral representation.

 

If these minor parties can't derail Govt votes, then why are we having an election? and a double dissolution election at that?

[Farmduck]

Straight from the news wires of Bizarro World, Murdoch's Dailay Telegraph features a fron page and editorial extolling the virtues of Labor's Anthony Albanese.

 

[Farmduck]

Barry Cassidy openly admitting something many people have known for years:  80% of voters in OZ elections are largely irrelevant

 

The OZ electorate has large blocks of nailed-on voters for the 2 major parties and consequently, most electoral results could be predicted 10 years in advance. In places like Mt Druitt, anything less than a 70% vote for Labor is considered a backlash, for instance.

 

So, once again, the major parties cobble together a weird mix of on-the-run policy ideas that will give them some advantage in the 30 seats (out of 150) that are genuinely up for grabs. These seats tend to be in the outer mortgage belts of major cities or in rural areas where the latest redistributions now include fringe urban areas in these seats.

[Shadow]

I thought Ausralia was a fantasy land ruled by a witch where it's always winter but never Christmas.

[Farmduck]

I thought Ausralia was a fantasy land ruled by a witch where it's always winter but never Christmas.

No, we have Christmas.

[Farmduck]

Federal Labor is trailing in key marginal seats it needs to claim Government, according to new opinion polls.

Galaxy polls of 14 Coalition-held marginal seats show Labor ahead in just two polls and locked at 50-50 in another two.

The electorates Labor would claim are in Queensland, with none of the seats polled in New South Wales or Victoria predicted to fall its way.

Labor needs to gain 19 seats to form majority government.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-25/labor-trailing-in-key-marginal-seats-galaxy-polls-show/7543246

 

The one thing we can be sure of is that Australians won't vote to leave the EU.

[Stan Doffarf]

No, we have Christmas.

Do you still have it in July? I quite liked that idea.

[Farmduck]

I voted today. It was pretty busy at the Mt Druitt electoratorium. I guess we're all going O/S tomorrow. I wish I hadn't voted so fast. I was up to 4 on the Senate paper before I realised the Secular Party was running. They've trimmed the Senate candidates down to a more manageable 130 for NSW.

[Copa]

Do you still have it in July? I quite liked that idea.

Sure do. There is always some type of Xmas in July event around town.

[Farmduck]

Sure do. There is always some type of Xmas in July event around town.

Yes I walked around the streets last night just to check out all the decorations.

[Copa]

Yes I walked around the streets last night just to check out all the decorations.

 

If you're near the ACT join in: http://www.weekendnotes.com/christmas-in-july-market-day/

[Farmduck]

Today's the BIG DAY. Don't forget: VOTE EARLY AND VOTE OFTEN

 

One question I saw today: Does the Queen have to vote?

 

The answer: I don't know. She may not be a citizen. You have to be a citizen to be an MP but she didn't run for Queen - let's face it, no way she would have beaten Dame Edna.

 

As a point of Constitutional Law, she couldn't be fined for not voting. Also, what electorate should she vote in? (Obviously Wentworth if she was a Sydneysider) I guess she owns Government House in Yarralumla so maybe she should vote in Canberra.

[Farmduck]

The election goes to Golden Point. The current score is:

 

Coalition: 65

Labor: 67

Other: 5

Still in play: 13

 

Given that "Other" includes 2 Independents, 1 Bob Katter and 1 Xenophon and 1 Greens, it's very close.

 

The Senate is only about 50% counted but given the vote quota system that applies, it's pretty settled already. Looks like the Coalition won't have an outright majority but will be able to rely on most of the "independents."

[Farmduck]

My electorate of Chifley went according to script - especially when you consider it's named after a train driver who went on to become PM. With distribution of preferences, Labor got 69.9%. Hell, let's just say 70%

[Saint Toppy]

My electorate of Chifley went according to script - especially when you consider it's named after a train driver who went on to become PM. With distribution of preferences, Labor got 69.9%. Hell, let's just say 70%

Haven't you read the EU Referendum threads - having a majority doesn't actually mean that they've won. You have to keep having new elections until the minority of voters get their way, otherwise you'll just end up with a daily dummy spitting contest  

[Farmduck]

Funnily enough, there has already been some talk of another election since neither side will probably get a clear majority in the Reps.

[Maximus Decimus]

Haven't you read the EU Referendum threads - having a majority doesn't actually mean that they've won. You have to keep having new elections until the minority of voters get their way, otherwise you'll just end up with a daily dummy spitting contest

Yeh if he goes back to the original thread, he'll see that Nigel Farage was the first to suggest that there'd need to be another referendum.

[Maximus Decimus]

I've heard a wee bit on my twitter feed about One Nation. Who would they be the equivalent of, BNP or UKIP?

[Farmduck]

One Nation. led by Pauline Hanson, had a big resurgence this year. I think it's a lesson to the Conservatives that, when you pump up the fear campaign, it doesn't win you votes. It just sends those people even further out to One Nation.

 

In Queensland One Nation got more Senate votes than the Greens but that tells you more about Queenslanders than anything else. They got 9% of the vote in Qld but less than 4% in all the other States. People see Pauline Hanson as proof of what entrenched racists we are but I'm more impressed by the 96% who didn't vote for her.

 

Apart from feeling disgruntled and racist, One Nation members often have little else in common. There's no real agenda beyond, "No immigrants, no Muslims."