Parliamentary democracy in action ... Aussie style

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
61

Here’s one, the leadership speculation is an ongoing situation. Gillard is as popular as a turd in the punchbowl, Labor is a shambles internally and externally and has been for several years. Kevin Rudd is somehow popular with voters even though most in the party would rather drink the Koolaide than have him back as leader ( I think he’s a total twat and will never vote Labor if he’s leader) so the whole thing is messy.

The Opposition Leader, Abbott, has bugger all in the way of charisma and is derided by the left as being a right wing muppet, yet he’s powering ahead in the polls. Not because Aus has become more right wing but because Labor has spent more time infighting and stuffing up every new policy release than being constructive. FFS, even when they manage to fluke something good in the way of policy they totally fuck up the delivery and/or implementation.

62

So her not going even if it costs the party seats is different how?

63

Well, I like Gillard, and don’t have much time for all this angst about what a “terrible mess” the Labour government is making of everything, which as far as I can see mostly boils down to “they must be making a terrible hash of things because a bunch of talking heads keep telling us so.”

In case people hadn’t noticed, there’s still a GFC going on all over the world. Meanwhile, in Australia, since Gillard taking office in 2010 the unemployment rate has remained steady and the GDP is rising nicely. The mining tax appears to have not destroyed the mining industry - in fact now the talking point is that it’s a terrible idea because it’s not generating any revenue to speak of. In my book that means clearly it’s not hurting the mining industry any if it’s not talking any significant money to speak of, but that old talking point appears to have disappeared across the horizon.

I’m sure we are looking down the barrel of an Abbot government, because apparently 80% of Australia sees something terribly horribly wrong with Gillard that I don’t see. But in the absence of further evidence, I’m going to continue to assume that a lot of it is her sex and marital status.

64

I don’t have a problem with Gillard per se but the Labor party is a complete shambles and I’ll be damned if I give them my vote next time around. I don’t really give a flying fuck who is in charge as long as they can actually do the job without looking like a bunch of inept muppets. This is coming from someone who has voted Labor or Labour (NZ) since he was 18.

65

This, and particularly the ‘talking heads’ comment.

Watching the ‘business section’ of the early (tabloid) news recently, I was interested in the language used to describe fluctuations in the market. In particular, David Koch mentioned that the Aussie dollar plummeted against the US $. (Yeah, a whole couple of cents, but whatever)

Now I dunno about you, but when such loaded terms are used, I imagine it would scare the pants off’ve your average punter. Plummeted implies something really bad is happening! Joe Blow would hear that and it would reinforce his opinion that the Labour Party has fucked things up royally.

Yet even with my rudimentary knowledge of macroeconomics, I understand that a lower AUD is a GOOD thing in terms of our export trade.

It’s all in the delivery…and the media are feeding the Gillard/Labour hysteria much more rabidly than I ever remember happening in previous years. And I’m old enough to remember!

:stuck_out_tongue:

66

Oh boy, this imbroglio is evolving into a tragedy worthy of Will Shakespeare’s dramatic flair.

Rudd supporters move to force leadership vote

Heh, at this stage we could have one of three different prime ministers in the next 48 hours.

Gillard won’t go anything other than kicking & clawing, and all hale to her.
Kevin doesn’t want to stand unless they fawningly hand the crown to him, but he might be given a bloodstained one instead.

But the extra dimension now is that with key independents Oakshott and Windsor (who hold the balance of power in an agreement with Gillard) have announced their retirement. Nobody knows who will control a majority in the case of a LAB leadership change.

So if Rudd does stand and win then there is the real possibility that he won’t be able to demonstrate that he has the confidence of parliament and so the Governor General Quentin Bryce may hand the caretaker prime ministership to Tony Abbott on the condition he call an immediate election.

It’s also just the vaguest whiff of a remote possibility that even if Kevin won a tight ballot the G-G might recommission Gillard with the support of the LIBs and crossbenches. The LIBs might support Gillard over Rudd because they’ll win bigger versus Gillard and won’t cop any mud slinging on legitimacy the way Fraser in the aftermath of the 1975 dismissal.

(… and just to make it all the more byzantine, one of the key Labor power brokers and most likely leader after the election is Bill Shorten, who is the G-G’s son-in-law)

67

Again?

68

Constitutional crisis looms as Parliament enters uncharted waters.

The more likely scenarios from here are:

1. Rudd takes the leadership and survives a no confidence motion on the floor of Parliament.

He would need the support of five of the seven crossbenchers. Tony Windsor has indicated Mr Rudd would not get his vote, while Rob Oakeshott and Peter Slipper have said they would decide if the situation arose. Kevin Rudd can count on the support of Bob Katter, Craig Thomson and Adam Bandt. In this scenario, Mr Rudd would be able to determine the date of the election and would not necessarily have to run to the polls. (this also assumes no LAB rats on him in the vote, which can’t be assumed.)

2. Rudd takes the Labor leadership but loses a no-confidence motion.

A “constructive vote” would mean a vote of confidence in Mr Abbott would follow a vote of no-confidence in Mr Rudd. In this scenario, the Governor-General would almost certainly have to appoint Mr Abbott as caretaker Prime Minister until an election can be held.

3. Rudd takes over after Parliament has risen on Thursday.

He could avoid all questions of confidence by proroguing Parliament and requesting that Ms Bryce call an election. Under the constitution, Labor would have a maximum 63 days to go to the polls - meaning an election in mid to late August.

4. Rudd takes over after Parliament has risen but does not call an immediate election.

Under this scenario, Ms Bryce would be compelled to sound out the crossbenchers as to whether they support the new Prime Minister. If there is any uncertainty she could recall Parliament to test his support through a vote on the floor.

5. Bill Shorten emerges as a “circuit breaker” leader

As the mother-in-law of Mr Shorten, the Governor-General would be cornered by a perceived conflict of interest. Ms Twomey said: "The Governor-General would have the trust of the people but the perception of a conflict of interest would be too great. She would probably have to leave the country and appoint Marie Bashir as the governor of the largest state [NSW] to do her job.

6. No spill, Julia Gillard remains Prime Minister and a September 14 election.

Julia Gillard survives the spill and the September 14 election proceeds.
And the hottest item on tonight’s TV will be … State of Origin League (NSW v Queensland)

69

#6 just dropped off the table. Gillard just called a spill to be held in (if I’m looking at the right clock) two and a half hours.

70

Sorry, I guess #6 could still happen. I didn’t read after “no spill.”

71

I said she wouldn’t need to be brutally deposed (if she needed to be deposed) when?

72

Rudd 55 defeats Gillard 47

73

Kevin Rudd won the ballot, so the next hurdle that he faces is a confidence motion in Parliament tomorrow – unless he advises the GG before then to call an election in early August.

74

What I learned from this thread is that I cannot wrap my head around how Australia gets a PM. Sounds complicated

75

He only gets to advise the GG if he’s PM. If Julia is less than 100% unequivocal and he can’t provide solid assurance then his magority needs to be proven in the House.

76

It’s the same process as that constitutionally provided in the U.K. and in Canada. The only difference is that Australians bring things out in the open a bit more. The Queen, or Governor-General, appoints a PM who controls a majority in the lower house of the Parliament – but how the PM gets that majority can be a little messy.

77

Yes, I expect that Her Excellency Quentin Bryce will have a couple of interesting conversations with Julia and Kevin tomorrow morning.

78

Well, Krudd’s back. If that’s what it takes to keep Abbott out, then so be it. Please, please, please… anyone but Abbott.

79

Doesn’t that make the GG more powerful than the PM?

80

AHA! A very salient question. Introducing Governor-General Sir John Kerr and the constitutional crisis of 1975. 1975 Australian constitutional crisis - Wikipedia

And yes, ultimately the G-G represents the Queen and is above the Prime Minister. Nevertheless he has to do what Parliament tells him. The only time his authority becomes important is when the Prime Minister cannot assure the G-G that he has a majority in Parliament. At that point the G-G must enquire as to an alternative leader of a majority and failing that, dissolves Parliament for a fresh election.