On to-night's Q &A the panellists have been
- Malcolm Turnbull - former Liberal leader
- Craig Emerson - Minister for Small Business
- Graham Richardson - Labor identity
- Sarah Hanson-Young - Greens Senator
- Jessica Brown - policy analyst for the Centre for Independent Studies
Now Graham Richardson is not infallible. He does occasionally get things wrong. But, for the most part, Graham knows what he is talking about when he is speaking of politics. To-night, it has been interesting to see him tie up in knots Sarah Hanson-Young. Sarah is usually in fine form. I have heard her speak in person. Was she not well to-night? She looked really pale.
Graham Richardson and Craig Emerson brought out the absolutism of The Greens and how uncompromising the current crop of Greens can be when compared with times past. For me, some good friends are Greens and I have helped them out at election time. I have cast quite a few protest votes The Greens way with my No. 1 vote.
To-night, Sarah Hanson-Young lost me good and proper when Richardson challenged her with whether Green preferences would put Tony Abbott in The Lodge. She hedged, she dodged but the question was put simply and directly to her again and again. She kept saying that how people cast their preference votes was the individual's business. In the end Richardson said to her "Well, then - The Greens will not be directing preferences.". Sarah Hanson-Young denied that The Greens would not direct preferences. Slam dunk to Richardson!
Sarah - in case you haven't learned a valuable political lesson to-night, then I want to point it out most strongly to you. Being on the same program as Graham Richardson will always be dangerous territory for the inexperienced. In the world of The Greens you might come across as a clever, bright Senator. In the Graham Richardson world of are you or aren't you; is it or isn't it - you lost good and proper. And you lost a vote that I thought was going to The Greens this year.
And Sarah, I live in a very marginal ALP electorate and even was part of an action outside this Labor Member's office recently organised by Environment Victoria and The Wilderness Society. Shucks, Sarah. You just gave him my vote. I don't want Abbott in The Lodge.
Related reading:
Further reading:
I have no idea who you are, but I completely agree with your opinion - Sarag Hanson-Young absolutely killed what crediblity she had in her handling of her criticism of the government and its ETS. Being completely absolutist showed her and the Greens up as being unwilling to compromise, unable to operate in a 'real world' where deals have to be made and losing the woods from the trees in preferring no action to some action when it comes to helping the environment. Something is better than nothing and nothing is what the Greens will get if they maintain their idealistic views.
ReplyDeleteIf that's really true, you've demonstrated a tragic lack of understanding of the preferential voting system.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you do some reading before you re-elect this dud government.
Anonymous has been busy this morning holding two conflicting opinions.
ReplyDeleteThis is a reply to my alleged lack of understanding of the preferential voting system. I understand it well - I have experienced it in operation; I have a university degree in govt.
Thing is, the preferential system is a rort on the Australian body politic. I lived in Queensland under the dictatorship of the National Party (with whom Drew Hutton of The Greens has done - and may be still doing - preference deals).
The National Party under Joh Bjelke Peterson was a serial rorter of the preferential voting system. We saw Fred Nile having a go at something similar but much more massive in the recent by-election in the seat of Bradfield in Sydney.
Proportional Representation is a bit more - but not totally - honest. I think PR tends to work OK in the Senate but I think the Senate system only works in conjunction with the committee system which was established by Labor Senator Lionel Murphy. Any failure to give the committee system a fair go as Howard did in his last term of govt makes the Senate look useless and redundant and purposeless.
I do not want to see PR in lower house elections in this country. Around the world there are some famous cases of political instability sourced to PR - Italy and PNG, I believe, are two outstanding cases.
I believe in first past the post voting - in spite of people saying that someone can get up on a minority vote with the majority against him/her if the ballot is more than a two horse race.
I think Peter Beattie had the situation well covered in Queensland with Optional Preferential Voting. For more info go to this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optional_Preferential_Voting
I like to be grown up about my voting as far as possible. The preferential system is a sign of political immaturity. Parties like The Greens are not mature enough (after all these years) to get up on a majority vote. Old-timers, like the DLP, loved preferential vote because it was the only way to enhance their factional and sectarian views and have them influence a government.
I know it is tough to get change in a traditional two-party system - but trying to change it with rortable voting systems is not the way to go.
The Greens seem to get more embittered with the ALP than the Libs or the Nats and I find that peculiar. What The Greens don't seem to realise is that while they are predominantly a one issue party (I know they are trying, not very well, to broaden), their ideas are easily co-opted in a watered down fashion by the major parties.
The Greens have survived on the back of the Labor protest vote for a long time now. As Green preferences are seen to enhance conservative parties' opportunities, the ALP vote will wither away and The Greens will go the way of the Dems for much the same reasons.
The Libs and Labor have factions so that each can rightly claim to be a broad church. The Greens don't show such tendencies.
Wow Ms Eagle -you have a keen sense of political reality. I am also a Labor voter but one who has always favoured the greens in the senate but have significant doubts on this occaision. I am angry about their ETS stance. They wanted a Carbon Tax instead so they chose nothing and now we are looking down the barrel of having a Prime Minister who doesn't even believe in Climate change. I personally hold the greens responsible for placing us in that predicament. They need to grow up and learn the art of political compromise.
ReplyDeleteAll my empathy Anonymous #3. I have been driven nuts over the last four weeks not only by the silliest election campaign in living memory but my own internal angst.
ReplyDeleteSo here I am as I come down to the wire:
I live in the seat of Deakin (marginal for Labor). I like the cut of the local Labor member Mike Symon. And I am not mucking about at this election. Abbott has to be kept from even getting close to The Lodge and Kirribilli irrespective of whether he wishes to live there.
In the Reps Labor will get my #1 and Greens will get #2. I am mad at Labor over The Intervention; taxpayer funding for wealthy private schools while public schools suffer; and the refugee stuff. I am not only mad, I am extremely mad at stamping the feet and smoke out of the ears levels.
So (sadness to my friends in the Socialist Alliance) I will be going Green in the Senate - and filling out the whole darn ballot paper myself not just 1 above the line. Fat lot of good that will do me - but may be it will satisfy the angst within.
Next door is the seat of La Trobe which is marginal for the Liberals. I actually lived in that seat last time and was Booth Captain for the Your Rights At Work Campaign. Would dearly love to get rid of Jason Woods. My friend Jim Reiher is running for The Greens in La Trobe so I am handing out How to Votes for Jim at Upper Ferntree Gully School on the 3pm - 6pm shift. Networkers, say hello if you are coming that way.
The Balance of Power is a dicey thing - because it will only occur when the Libs/Nats and Labor are in disagreement and, as you can see from the above, there is a lot too much agreement. Something needs to be inserted into the mess we are in and the only thing I can think to do is to give the BoP to The Greens. The other reason I want to give it to The Greens is to give them the opportunity to grow up. Put the wood on them, hopefully, so that they are in the really hot, hot seat of decision-making. If they make a mess of the BoP blame me and those like me but we will see The Greens true colours and true ability. If they succeed in handling the BoP well, you and I might see something we like come into being.
I also have to wonder if this might be a time when we see history in the making. The Lib/Lab type of government arrangement was worked out a hundred years and more ago in a different world - and under different economic considerations.
Going on what has happened in the US and the UK, there appears - in the English-speaking world at least - to be a mood for something else, something more, something, different. Australia does not change easily. Our cousins across the ditch in NZ do it better than we. But could we see the winds of change beginning to blow at this election? If so, from what direction; how strongly; and what accommodations will interested parties make to such a wind.
Finally, I have for the best part of the last ten years considered myself to be part of that unregistered political party called Rusted on Labor that votes Green. The ALP takes us for granted. They know our vote will come back to them one route or another. Nothing in any policy speeches over the years have ever seemed to want to accommodate us. Years ago at the GST election, Beazley gave a speech at the ABC HQ in Ultimo in Sydney. He pronounced...They're coming home. They are all coming home. This reference was even to the DLP who were against the GST at the time. And we did. We came home. We defeated the GST. (As if it did us much good in the end!) But at this election, I don't think we will all be coming home. Some of us will cross to The Greens and Socialist Alliance and may never come back!