Update: I have replaced the image I had here previously, which was the iconic Obama "Yes We Can" with Gillard in it - because it could be taken to mean all sorts of things I wasn't actually saying.I meant it in good humour.
My commenter Sigil remarked on it, and I decided he had a point. I do take intelligent constructive criticism on board.
This afternoon the three remaining regional independents announced who they join with to form a minority government: Coaltion, Labor, Labor.
Labor wins.
Julia Gillard will remain prime minister.
The key issues which persuaded the affirmative two were the building of the broadband network - that being the country's biggest infrastructure project - and recognition of the issue of climate change.
Although this is a complex and extraordinary political situation in a system not familiar to many of you, I want to just point out what I took away from it, personally...
1/ During the 17 days of negotiation and deliberation, the country continued its business, tranquil and unfazed.
2/ No-one - except for one flaky Right-wing cretin who looks to have lost his senate seat - said "I will block anything you do". Everyone pledged to make things work.
3/ A conservative coalition lost the opportunity to form a government in part over failures of policy regarding climate change. It might have only been in the minds of a handful of men... but when it came to hard business of politics, it mattered. It actually affected the outcome. That's significant.
4/ The much needed parliamentary reform, which everyone agreed was necessary while in opposition then forgotten in government, was finally agreed to.
5/ Gillard was by far the superior negotiator.
6/ Between the leaders it was never personal. There was not one fleeting moment of spite. It was all about the best outcome for the country, as they variously see it. The Coalition were disappointed, but they were civil. There was no fist-pounding. No hysterics. They acted like grown-ups.
7/ I was greatly entertained, and the better team won.
An interesting result, and one that I would suggest is no where near as negative for the Liberal party as some might think.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I would suggest that both parties lost, and we won. Or perhaps we all won. We'd never see the type of reform you refer to in your 4th point without this type of stalemate - something we've not had in 70 odd years. All the major parties will benefit, and hopefully the Greens will mature as well now that the public spotlight will be much more focussed on them.
I got what I wanted out of this election result.
Of the two policies you note as being major factors, the national broadband network was easily the most prominent during the campaign. Of any policy Labour has ever presented, this is one I hope they get through. I just hope they can execute it without the level of waste they are normally associated with (or god help them, getting anyone killed).
I'm glad the Liberals 'lost'. They'll be in a much better position in three years (assuming it lasts that long) to present as a proper altenative government - there will likely be much more to contrast as Labor will almost undoubtably be forced back to the left by the Greens (and won't that make for some interesting discussion in the shadow of the independants) and perhaps they'll have the guts to present some policies based on their values I hope to attribute to them.
It's funny how our system works. If Labor 'won', then it was only in the Steven Bradbury sense: Labor lost the primary vote to the Liberals by about 700,000 votes, is currently losing the secondary preference vote to the Liberals, didn't win as many seats in the house of representatives as the Liberals and could only claim power by making a deal with the Greens for their preferences during the election and making a deal with two (or perhaps 3) ex-national party members. All of the independants (and even the Green) have been at pains to note that they are only agreeing to not block supply and won't support unwarranted no confidence motions (while retaining their own right to call their own, I might add). The last of the independants in his speech today even specifically noted that he was only following what he always did (by going with the incumbent governenment) and only by default did that mean Gillard. He then specifically noted that despite his support, the government had no mandate.
Hardly a resounding endorsement.
I disagree about your claim of Gillard being the better negotiator to a certain degree. Neither her or Abott were in any position to really negotiate during this period, and I would suggest that the independants had much more bargaining muscle over Labor than they did over the Liberals and decided to flex it. Gillard was hardly in a position to say no. They were never going to get the type of outcomes they wanted out of Abbott with the Nationals in the background.
All in all, I suspect the next three years are going to see Gillard live through those interesting times that the ancient Chinese proverb/curse refers to.
Oh, and while I'm posting. A couple of entries ago, you (rightfully) refered to the level of honesty (or lack there of) that the Liberals showed in relation to their failure to submit their costings for analysis...it's worth noting here (for the sake of balance, since you didn't) that in the previous election, the Labor party basically played the same trick by sneakily refusing to submit theirs until only a day or two prior to the election, quite knowingly aware that they were never going to be costed in time for the public to be able to make any sort of informed decision. If the Liberals were being dishonest, at least they were being up front about it.
"the Labor party basically played the same trick by sneakily refusing to submit theirs until only a day or two prior to the election"
ReplyDeleteBut they did submit them. The Coalition would never have done it at all if they didn't need to deal with the indies, and refused to so for a while even after election day.
And what did Treasury find? A black hole. They hadn't done their numbers properly.
When Wilkie presented his gambling issues, Labor came in immediately with people from Productivity and had the numbers to talk over. Abbott didn't talk to him for ten days about that. Hockey had not even seen the correspondence between Wilkie and Abbott by the time Wilkie went over to Labor.
They just don't do their homework, Sigil. And Hockey was going to be the Treasurer! (because Bishop is just too dim).
Abbott couldn't stomach the stimulus that kept our economy in the black, yet was prepared to throw a billion dollars at Wilkie without any costing at all.