Friday 27 August 2010

Emperor Abbott has an option of his own: dumb-thumb down for mayhem and malarkey!


I give you a scenario, Networkers.  Tony Abbott is the emperor - clad in white toga, wreath of olive leaves and all.  There he is sitting above the arena.  The mob are all around.  The gladiators are doing what it is that gladiators need to do down in the arena.  

Abbott the emperor has to make a decision - 
thumb up, thumb down.

I am beginning to suspect that Abbot will give a dumb-thumb down decision.  
  • I don't think the Liberals want an inclusive, warm and fuzzy model of government.  
  • I don't think the Liberals are into information sharing.  
  • I certainly don't think the Liberals want consensus government.
You see there is another little-covered option in the hung parliament situation.  This is the option of game wrecker, mayhem maker.  

At this stage, I hold the view that Abbott and his Liberals are certainly leaning to - if not actually have chosen - the option of wreckage.  This means that unless the Liberals have a clear shot at government - and we know that if they get that now, then it will only be held until 1 July 2011 - they will make all the trouble that is needed to get Australians back to the polls.  

In  short, it is likely that Abbot & Co have chosen destabilization even at this stage.  If this is the case, then it could equal Gough Whitlam's concept of "crash through or crash" in zest, hubris, and bloody-mindedness.

3 comments:

  1. Better to have him outside, being cranky, than having him in power.
    I think Andrew Robb has made a serious mistake in not submitting the budget to Treasury. It looks bad.
    Denis

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ok, It seems I am a little confused and highly undereducated on this subject.

    Is it simply the numbers that the Libs will hold in the Upper house, i.e. more seats than Labour that causes this potential for mayhem, or something about the environment of a hung parliament itself?

    Kind Regards
    Belinda

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Hung Parliament is really a 'hung' House of Representatives. Govt is formed by whomever controls HoR & there is no clear answer at the moment. The situation is different in the Senate. It operates with elections at the same time as HoR but Senators not taking up their seats until the 1/7 after election, there are two prospects in view for the Senate.

    The current one - Senator Fielding (who only received one point something per cent of the primary vote at last election & almost certainly will not succeed @ this one) is promising to stall any/all Lab legislation. Sens Xenophon & Fielding have ability to exercise some power @ moment & neither Lib nor Lab has shown much inclination in current term to treat with Greens.

    After 1 July the picture changes. Fielding will goes. Xenophon remains (in the middle of his 6 year term). I'm unaware of other independents who could get up in the Senate & Greens have been successful & will hold Balance of Power there. Bob Brown points out, BoP only comes into play in Senate if Liberals and Labour don't agree on an issue. We have seen under Rudd Govt there are still quite a few things they do agree on.

    While focus is on settling House of Reps situation, the Senate situation has to be considered though it is in shadow at this stage.

    This is why I think Libs may have no taste for Govt now - unless they can go back to the polls and have a more significant win. Little evidence Libs want much negotiation with the country independents. But one way or another after July 1 they'll have to find a way to communicate meaningfully with Greens.

    In the meantime, I suggest they will stir up trouble & they seem to be doing that.

    Article by Grattan to-day seems to me about right for this stage of proceedings but it doesn't make things look good for the Libs. http://www.theage.com.au/federal-election/abbott-blinks-first-in-game-of-bluff-20100827-13w1a.html

    The other thing to have a look at is a piece by Anthony Green. http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2010/08/hung-parliament-where-to-from-here.html#more

    I wasn't born when @ last hung parliament in 1940/41 but if one studied Oz history of WWII period one can't escape learning about it. It brought John Curtin - who Australia reveres re handling of Oz's part in the war - to the PMship. I was only one generation removed from that event - but now we are many generations removed &, given the five minute memories that abound in this media driven age, memories need to be seriously revived and refreshed.

    People are so Americanised by media that - IMHO - they sometimes see Oz as the USA writ small. We are not. We have distinctive histories & traditions - which surely is to be expected. As Green points out, our constitutional arrangements are very different. To be sure there are influences. The writers of our Constitution took into account the US situation. Took some things from it, and modified some and left others alone.Oz constitution has been accused more of commercial horse-trading than high-mindedness. I think that is a bit on the crass side but certainly the elements that reflect the former were needed to get us from self-interested colonies (& we haven't travelled far from that mind-set) to nationhood.

    I just hope wisdom can be a feature of this result. I think Tony Windsor has some. Doubt Katter has much. Oakeshott has ideals but insufficient experience. Appears, @ times, to border on the naive. But even naivete can have its place if it has the opportunity to influence. We live in interesting times - let's hope & pray we are equal to them.

    ReplyDelete

This blog does not take Anonymous comments. Experience shows that comments cluttered with "Anonymous" are boring and people don't know whether "Anonymous" is one person or many. This is not a decision about freedom of speech. It is a decision about boring or unwillingness to be known by even a pseudonym.

Total Pageviews