chaserforum.net

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

All content is the responsibility of individual users. If concerned by any message, report it. Abuse not tolerated and will lead to banning. By using this site you agree to its rules.

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Thought one election was bad?  (Read 1565 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Adi

  • Resident Giraffe
  • Fascist
  • Evil Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
Thought one election was bad?
« on: November 18, 2007, 08:19:00 PM »

Let's imagine for one moment that Labor wins the election, as is seeming increasingly likely.

One of Labor's main pledges going into this election has been to scrap the Coalition's Industrial Relations laws, including WorkChoices, most crucially AWAs.

In order for their new legislation to pass, it must be passed by the Senate. The newly elected Senate will not come into effect until 1st July next year, so until then the Coalition will still have an outright majority. Presumably they will not pass any IR reforms.

The most likely scenario for the new Senate, post July 2008, is that the Greens, Family First and an SA independent will hold the balance of power, with Labor & the Coalition each unable to gain an outright majority.

This could pose a significant problem for Labor. Rudd and Gillard have repeatedly said that the IR legislation they intend to introduce will not be altered, no matter what. The Greens have put their foot down and said that they won't pass the current Labor plan because it doesn't go far enough.

In that case, there will be three possibilities.

1) Labor relents, and makes their reforms more far-reaching, so that the Greens will pass them. Labor has made it clear they do not want to do this, and given their current position on the political spectrum, such reforms would be far too socialist for them.

2) The Greens relent, and pass the Labor reforms in their current state. The Greens have made it equally clear that they will not do this. If they did, it would put them, in the eyes of their supporters, on par with Meg Lees selling out to the government over the GST. The minor parties are usually absolutely adamant that they'll stick to their principles, so this would be a highly unpopular cave-in and could well spell disaster for the Greens, just as they're on the verge on being Australia's legitimate third party.

3) No-one relents. The reforms are taken to parliament twice, they cannot be passed in their current state, and a double dissolution must be called, possibly in less than a year after this election.

A double dissolution (an election where the whole senate is up for re-election, not just half as normal) after a close election could easily go either way. What's more, because the quota in each state is halved, due to double the number of seats being up for grabs, minor parties have a much better chance of getting seats in the Senate. So even more (and even more extreme) minor parties and independents could win upper house seats. There's still no guarantee that the legislation would be passed.


So, would the Greens sell out? Would Labor finally shift slightly back to the left and agree to make their changes more extreme? Could we be facing another election? If we did go back to polls, would the result be different?
Logged
Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.

Thaluikhain

  • All too visible
  • *
  • Posts: 20339
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2007, 09:29:33 PM »

Assuming the Greens get the balance of power.

One side will back down, if it came to that.
Logged

Adi

  • Resident Giraffe
  • Fascist
  • Evil Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2007, 10:42:10 PM »

At this stage it's pretty safe to assume that the Greens will indeed have the balance of power. The only way they won't is if there's a serious landslide and Labor gets a majority in the Senate. It's rare enough for that to happen for the Coalition, and even less likely for the ALP. They'd have to pick up the other ACT seat and another one, and it's hard to see where that might happen.

As far as I can see, it's much more likely that Labor will back down. Yet another broken election promise... why do people believe a word they say?
Logged
Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.

Thaluikhain

  • All too visible
  • *
  • Posts: 20339
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2007, 10:45:40 PM »

Do you really need me to answer that?
Logged

rebmA

  • Tragic
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Stay tuned for a witty comment.....
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2007, 08:50:50 AM »



As far as I can see, it's much more likely that Labor will back down. Yet another broken election promise... why do people believe a word they say?

I hope you're not suggesting that we believe Howard, the man who unequivocally stated that the GST would never be Liberal party policy. Remember the Tampa?
Logged
'Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it isn't true." - www.thebladder.com

Mez

  • Resident Hippy
  • Spamwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 15822
  • unrepentant hippy
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2007, 11:03:19 AM »

 :lol: :lol:  I read a book about the Tampa incident.  What a fucking crock.  I wouldn't trust John Howard as far as I could spit a rat!

The funny thing about the book (co-authored by David Marr) was that they went deeply into all the dirty tricks involved, but didn't bother mentioning that JHo's anti-boat-people stance actually worked.  Sure, it was dodgy and illegal and involved lots of lies by lots of people, but the Australian public seems to think that the ends justified the means.
Logged
I'm really prejudiced against bigots

SG

  • Resident Perverted Sleazebag
  • Having a difficult time with reality
  • ****
  • Posts: 10297
  • Can do.
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2007, 11:26:46 AM »

Let's imagine for one moment that Labor wins the election, as is seeming increasingly likely.

One of Labor's main pledges going into this election has been to scrap the Coalition's Industrial Relations laws, including WorkChoices, most crucially AWAs.

Not really, if you read teh detail KRudd is going to be even nastier to employees than WorkCHoices.

Common law contracts with potential full exposure to a huge range of remedies for things such as making a mistake.

Think about that for a minute.


This could pose a significant problem for Labor. Rudd and Gillard have repeatedly said that the IR legislation they intend to introduce will not be altered, no matter what. The Greens have put their foot down and said that they won't pass the current Labor plan because it doesn't go far enough.

Yep.  The Greens are what Labor used to be in terms of Stalinist employment methods.


3) No-one relents. The reforms are taken to parliament twice, they cannot be passed in their current state, and a double dissolution must be called, possibly in less than a year after this election.

May not must.  Double rejection gives a trigger but does not pull it, Rudd would have to do that.

And given the mood why wouldn't he?  Put everything on the table, get the trigger then call an early election.

Assuming the Aus people maintain their "give them time to show what they can do" rationale for dumping on the Libs during the period where they are better off than ever before KRudd gets back in with a majority in both houses and claims a mandate he can't claim at rpesent having put no real policies other than "Me Too" out there.

The get the fist sitting together (following a DD both houses sit as one to pass/reject legislation) and drive through every change he wants.

Sounds good to me (if I were a Kruddite).

There's still no guarantee that the legislation would be passed.

Given the single sitting it's extremely likely that it would be.

SG
Logged
Villa: I'm entitled to my opinion!
Avon: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.

Adi

  • Resident Giraffe
  • Fascist
  • Evil Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #7 on: November 19, 2007, 06:59:39 PM »

Not really, if you read teh detail KRudd is going to be even nastier to employees than WorkCHoices.
I made no comment on what Rudd might do instead, I simply said he's clearly stated that he wants to scrap WorkChoices.

Given the single sitting it's extremely likely that it would be.
Likely, but not definite. And it really depends on how big the majority in the lower house is. If it's close, as it probably will be, the single sitting could still be interesting.

I hope you're not suggesting that we believe Howard, the man who unequivocally stated that the GST would never be Liberal party policy. Remember the Tampa?
I'm not suggesting that any of the enlightened members of this forum and other clued-up voters believe him, but a shitload of people must. Who else would vote for him?

:lol: :lol:  I read a book about the Tampa incident.  What a fucking crock.  I wouldn't trust John Howard as far as I could spit a rat!

The funny thing about the book (co-authored by David Marr) was that they went deeply into all the dirty tricks involved, but didn't bother mentioning that JHo's anti-boat-people stance actually worked.  Sure, it was dodgy and illegal and involved lots of lies by lots of people, but the Australian public seems to think that the ends justified the means.
If you want a really good anti-Howard diatribe, read a few of Mungo McCallum's books. He's got one about the 2004 election, one about the children overboard incident/immigration policy and one very cynical tome giving instruction to a hopeful politician. Only go there if you're very anti-Coalition, and hate everyone in the party; and remember that he's very Labor-biased. But they're damn good books, for a Howard-hating lefty.
Logged
Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.

SG

  • Resident Perverted Sleazebag
  • Having a difficult time with reality
  • ****
  • Posts: 10297
  • Can do.
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #8 on: November 19, 2007, 09:58:39 PM »

If you want a really good anti-Howard diatribe, read a few of Mungo McCallum's books. He's got one about the 2004 election, one about the children overboard incident/immigration policy and one very cynical tome giving instruction to a hopeful politician. Only go there if you're very anti-Coalition, and hate everyone in the party; and remember that he's very Labor-biased. But they're damn good books, for a Howard-hating lefty.

Love Mungo.

For the name alone.

And as Gough once described him "the lunatic son of the political aristocracy" Mungo has interesting insights and makes good reading.

SG
Logged
Villa: I'm entitled to my opinion!
Avon: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.

Adi

  • Resident Giraffe
  • Fascist
  • Evil Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #9 on: November 19, 2007, 11:29:05 PM »

:lol: :lol:  I read a book about the Tampa incident.  What a fucking crock.  I wouldn't trust John Howard as far as I could spit a rat!

The funny thing about the book (co-authored by David Marr) was that they went deeply into all the dirty tricks involved, but didn't bother mentioning that JHo's anti-boat-people stance actually worked.  Sure, it was dodgy and illegal and involved lots of lies by lots of people, but the Australian public seems to think that the ends justified the means.
Is that 'Dark Victory' by David Marr & Marian Wilkinson? It's in my uni library, I might have to add it to the holiday reading list.
Logged
Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.

neo

  • Groupie
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Sex Symbol
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #10 on: November 19, 2007, 11:33:29 PM »

What's everyone's grief with AWAs anyway? Why would anyone want to be on the same collective agreement as other workers who are possibly worse and deserve less?

I got a gym membership off my work cause I asked for it :)
Logged

Shaneoyo

  • Groupie
  • **
  • Posts: 83
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #11 on: November 20, 2007, 11:40:59 AM »

What's everyone's grief with AWAs anyway? Why would anyone want to be on the same collective agreement as other workers who are possibly worse and deserve less?

I got a gym membership off my work cause I asked for it :)

They are made out to be a lot more unfair and evil than they actually are.  Most people end up in relatively the same position after being switched onto an AWA if they stand up for themselves in the bargaining process.  I can see Kevin backing down and breaking his promise, I trust the greens more.  :-P
Logged

Mez

  • Resident Hippy
  • Spamwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 15822
  • unrepentant hippy
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #12 on: November 20, 2007, 11:50:24 AM »

Is that 'Dark Victory' by David Marr & Marian Wilkinson? It's in my uni library, I might have to add it to the holiday reading list.

That's the one!  It's well researched but, as I said, they didn't bother to mention that the tactics actually worked.
Logged
I'm really prejudiced against bigots

neo

  • Groupie
  • **
  • Posts: 78
  • Sex Symbol
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2007, 12:40:02 PM »

They are made out to be a lot more unfair and evil than they actually are.  Most people end up in relatively the same position after being switched onto an AWA if they stand up for themselves in the bargaining process.  I can see Kevin backing down and breaking his promise, I trust the greens more.  :-P
Exactly, if you don't like the conditions of your new contract, then ask for them to be changed, and if the boss doesn't want to, well, there are plenty of other workplaces that will be happy to. WTF is with these ads with people moaning how they lost their penalty rates etc - ASK FOR SOMETHING ELSE TO COMPENSATE FOR IT DUMBASS, noone's forcing you to sign a contract. Some people just lack common sense and need some rabid union rep to negotiate for them.
Logged

Adi

  • Resident Giraffe
  • Fascist
  • Evil Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
Re: Thought one election was bad?
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2007, 03:18:42 PM »

Exactly, if you don't like the conditions of your new contract, then ask for them to be changed, and if the boss doesn't want to, well, there are plenty of other workplaces that will be happy to. WTF is with these ads with people moaning how they lost their penalty rates etc - ASK FOR SOMETHING ELSE TO COMPENSATE FOR IT DUMBASS, noone's forcing you to sign a contract. Some people just lack common sense and need some rabid union rep to negotiate for them.
It's a big problem for young people, who are being paid ridiculous exploitative rates as it is, and don't have the knowledge or the experience to negotiate with bosses, who will say they'll be turfed out if they don't sign. Sure, they're negotiable, but it's very easy to take advantage of the young or the vulnerable with them.
Logged
Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.
Pages: [1] 2