A lot of news at the moment concerning matters pertinent to this blog, with Christian Porter announcing yesterday he will not contest the election, Greg Hunt universally expected to follow suit with today’s last parliamentary sitting day of the year, and voter identification legislation scuttled after a deal between government and opposition.
• Annabel Hennessy of The West Australian reports a nominee has already come forward for Liberal preselection in Christian Porter’s loseable northern Perth seat of Pearce: Miquela Riley, a former naval officer and current PwC Australia manager who performed a thankless task as the party’s candidate for Fremantle at the March state election. Other potential nominees identified are Libby Lyons, former director of the Australian Government’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency, and Alyssa Hayden, who held the state seat of Darling Range from 2018 until her defeat in March and was earlier in the Legislative Council from 2009 to 2017.
• The most widely named successor to Greg Hunt as Liberal candidate for the Victorian seat of Flinders is Zoe McKenzie, an NBN Co director and former chief-of-staff to Abbott-Turnbull government Trade Minister Andrew Robb. The Age reports other potential starters are Mark Brudenell, chief-of-staff at Latitude Financial and former adviser to Malcolm Turnbull as both Communications Minister and Prime Minister, and Simon Breheny, former Institute of Public Affairs policy director.
• A deal between government and opposition has resulted in the abandonment of plans to introduce voter identification at the coming election. In exchange, Labor has agreed to support a bill that will halve the expenditure threshold at which third parties will have to file disclosure returns, over the objections of critics who argue the associated red tape will discourage charities from political campaigning. It appeared unlikely the voter identification bill would have gained the required votes in the Senate, with Jacqui Lambie having announced yesterday she would vote against it.
• Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats are pursuing a High Court action against recently enacted legislation that will prevent parties other than the main ones having words like Liberal and Labor in their name. Absent a favourable outcome, this will presumably result in formal challenges against the Liberal Democrats and the New Liberals, the latter of whom have withdrawn their application to change their name simply to TNL.
I have no problem with the Greens existing, unlike some posters here. They are a niche product with a 10% market share and that’s not going to change by much. My main beef with the Greens is that they seem to be in fierce competition with Labor for what they apparently regard a a fixed Centre-left vote. They make little effort to grow the pie.
For example, one thing that the Greens should do is campaign strongly in blue-ribbon Liberal seats. While they would not pick up these seats, they will pick up additional votes for the Senate. They would pick up votes that Labor has little hope of gaining. If the Greens can snaffle a Senate spot from the Liberals that’s got to be an improvement for the good guys.
In some Liberal seats the Greens get a higher percentage of votes than Labor .
Indeed the Greens have won Liberal and National seats in state elections.
steve777 – don’t you think Labor would do better agreeing on electoral reform with the Greens?
Nail down your left flank and move to the Centre to outflank the Liberals? It could be a winning formula – all it would cost Labor a few inner city seats which will be gone within the decade anyway?
Quoll says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 7:19 pm
The Greens policy on emissions targets is the only one rooted in science
This may or may not be the case. But who really gives a rats? The Greens politics are rooted in one thing and one thing only: sustaining the reactionaries in power.
“I don’t think I know” is very different from “I don’t, think I know”.
“Make no mistake, Labor and the Coalition are the ones being selfish. They’re more than happy for the planet’s future to be put in jeopardy just so they can prop up the dying fossil fuel industry and keep a few wealthy donors happy.”
_____
Its not because Labor that is being selfish. In fact its not even that the Liberals are by nature selfish (which they obviously are): its the voters dude. The voters.
The simple fact is that the progressive plurality lost 1,500,000 votes overnight in 2011, and while you guys have managed to creep back to your 10% base – and Labor has pulled 48-49% of the 2PP vote at the past two elections YOU provide exactly no pathway to grow the fabled ‘Labor-Greens’ alliance you THINK you’ll pull off with ‘the balance of power’ into an actual 50% of seats plus 1 (or better) scenario.
Maybe a large slice of those lost voters are ‘selfish’ but do you really think they are coming to YOU on bended knee? To you really think your pontifications will cut it in Logan, or Penrith, or Broadmeadows, or Aspley, or Caboolture? Because if someone – anyone – on the progressive side of politics can’t WIN in the seats that encompass those types of suburbs, let alone regional centres like the Hunter, Illawarra, Gladstone, Rockhampton or Geelong or Townsville then brother, you have nothing. 100% of virtue being applied to actual governing exactly 0% of the time.
Gotta find a bridge to all those selfish people you condemn, otherwise you’re fucked sport.
I’m OK with 43%, from the political viewpoint. I don’t think saying “me too” to 35% would have left Labor with much credibility. 43% says that Labor can do better than the LNP, it’s aligned with what business thinks is reasonable and achievable, and it’s not so wildly higher than 35% that it looks extreme and unrealistic.
Roy Orbison @ #1045 Friday, December 3rd, 2021 – 8:07 pm
Because EVERYONE votes for the Democracy Sausage! 😀
If labor had adopted the Liberals’ 35% target by 2030, then people would rightly have said, why vote for Labor, I may as well continue to vote for the Liberals or an Independent Teal Liberal.
South Australia’s Covid-19 chiefs will on Saturday consider an emergency borders crackdown with NSW and Victoria over fears about Omicron as the state records its first mysterious local case in 19 months. The emergency directions committee meeting, chaired by SA Health chief executive Chris McGowan, will decide if borders with NSW, Victoria and the ACT should be tightened, and possibly closed, to prevent the highly infectious strain spreading in SA.
LVT steve777 – don’t you think Labor would do better agreeing on electoral reform with the Greens?
I believe that we should move to a system of proportional representation.
That’s not happening any time soon. Neither major party wants it. They are the beneficiaries after. It’s not a battle worth engaging at this time.
So we work with our current implementation of democracy, looking to get N seats in the House, where N > 75. Better still, N > 90 or N > 120. Something big enough that the hard right reactionaries are forced to accept that they have lost and have as little base as possible to come back from.
zoomster:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 8:26 pm
[‘Someone here a week or so ago tried to argue that Macron was saying, “I don’t think I know” — meaning, of course, that Macron didn’t have any idea whether Morrison was lying or not…’]
His/her position wasn’t I think a compelling argument. I like the meme that
Morrison lies through his teeth. I mean, as if Macron was not briefed that Morrison can’t be trusted to tend to his dying grandmother.
I saw a comment earlier about party factions. I know they definitely exist, after all it was in the paper. However, in all the time since I have joined the ALP in 1972, I have never had any idea as to whether my branch was left, centre, right, or calathumpian. Maybe I should have asked.
For some of that time I lived in some very remote places where there was no branch so was a Direct Member.
For what it’s worth (probably not much), I think that Labor’s 43% is neatly pitched between what the Coalition thinks they can get without making any effort and the BCA’s 50% target.
Quoll says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 7:19 pm
Labor’s refusal to turn up and talk up their policy just reinforcing the view that it’s about smothering any discussion instead of standing up for it
Labor must not indulge their enemies, the Greens. They simply must not do that. They have to stay as far away from Green-themes as possible. The Greens have reduced this policy area to a dead-end for Labor. Consequently it is a dead end for politics in general. The Greens have run their anti-Labor gimmicks once too often. Labor have to find other issues on which to campaign, knowing all the while that the Greens will use climate change to campaign for the re-election of the LNP.
Labor have at best a 1/6 chance of winning the coming election. The Greens will try to make sure that chance is 1/100.
Socrates says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 8:28 pm
….
My only real disappointment was no car emissions policy, which is 20% of our emissions. Labor needs to look at changing the tax treatments and emission regulations to motivate importers to bring in cheaper EVs.
EV’s got a mention.
Electric car discount
The ALP will develop a National Electric Vehicle
Strategy, including investment of $251 million for an
Electric Car Discount, removing inefficient taxes from
low-emissions vehicles.
The ALP will improve electric vehicle charging
Electric vehicle infrastructure by requiring Commonwealth-funded charging infrastructure road upgrades to incorporate charging infrastructure where appropriate and review the National Construction Code.
Real-world
The ALP proposes to commit $14 million over four emissions testing program years to establish a real-world emissions testing program in Australia.
Definitely better than trying to discourage their use. Definitely better than another Green senate stunt.
“Gotta find a bridge to all those selfish people you condemn, otherwise you’re fucked sport.”
***
I was quite clearly condemning Labor and the Coalition for putting their own interests ahead of all the very people you are talking about. Don’t twist my words to suit your own agenda.
Labor isn’t part of this “progressive plurality” of yours. They are not representing the wishes and desires of the progressive left, nor are they doing what is right by the planet. They’re putting the environment and future generations at massive risk all for their own benefit and for that of their donor mates. It’s disgusting to be honest.
Granny Anny
I was mildly surprised once to be told that the problems I was having with a local branch was because I was from the Right and they were Left.
I hadn’t known either of those before.
He said it; he didn’t write it. You only have listen to know exactly what he means. It’s in the pause, and the change in tone, and emphasis.
https://youtu.be/X6cXT1ruJ-c
Steve777 says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 8:29 pm
….
For example, one thing that the Greens should do is campaign strongly in blue-ribbon Liberal seats. While they would not pick up these seats, they will pick up additional votes for the Senate. They would pick up votes that Labor has little hope of gaining. If the Greens can snaffle a Senate spot from the Liberals that’s got to be an improvement for the good guys.
The real funny thing, the Teals are now campaigning in Liberal seats on what was supposed to be the Greens core policy issues and the Greens run the risk of the Teals eating their lunch.
Itza
Yep. All I can think of – assuming the poster wasn’t being deliberately misleading – was that they’d read a deliberately edited account of the exchange, rather than hearing it.
Personally, I’d put a full stop between the two phrases.
Great to see a diehard Lib calling anyone pathological. They won’t like that in church this Sunday.
Bludger Bloos
“ Labor must not indulge their enemies, the Greens”
—————-
Presumably, as distinct from their allies, the Liberals?
Is monomania treatable?
zoomster @ #1071 Friday, December 3rd, 2021 – 9:00 pm
Hope you’re well. Massive hail storm just went through here.
“I was quite clearly condemning Labor and the Coalition for putting their own interests ahead of all the very people you are talking about. Don’t twist my words to suit your own agenda.”
I’m clearly not twisting your words: merely pointing out the salient facts: presently you are repugnant to a huge slice of people that someone – anyone – on the progressive side of the fence has to bring back into the tent: the fact that you are oblivious to that salient fact demonstrates that you – and your party – are simply not up to it. You sit as a cancer on the corporeal flesh of the Labor movement. An unasked for and undeserved malignant melanoma.
Itza
Very. Haven’t had weather dramas recently, they seem to miss us.
Had a birthday for the puppies recently, lots of photos from very happy owners.
Expecting one last litter around December!
“Labor isn’t part of this “progressive plurality” of yours.”
Is your brain broke: your hero Bandt’s whole stated MO is to ‘force’ Labor into an alliance via holding the balance of power. What the fuck are you smoking? Of course, taking Bandt at his word (and we should all do THAT shouldn’t we dear virtuous Firefly) that means HE – and the other Greens brains trusts identify Labor as part of the progressive plurality – just an errant part, that needs to be ‘corrected’ and ‘guided’ by political blackmail: because in any working democracy, a ‘pure ‘10%’ is greater than an impure ‘33-40%’. Am I right?
So much rage against the decline of the mass party in Australia. Too bad. Laborites should consider themselves lucky we have a 2 party preferred voting system and not a fpp.
Bludging Bloos:
[‘Labor have at best a 1/6 chance of winning the coming election.’]
Dear Bludging Bloos, you’re circa 65, 66, you accordingly have a duty to rally the troops. You’re remiss to said end – chipper up old dear.
Roy Morgan in the field in the Parramatta electorate. Questions on the economy as well as political matters.
Oh shit.
https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/updates/items/2021-12-03-one-death-recorded-in-the-nt
Though maybe the silver lining will be that it encourages faster take up of vaccines by the indigenous communities.
“presently you are repugnant to a huge slice of people that someone – anyone – on the progressive side of the fence has to bring back into the tent: the fact that you are oblivious to that”
***
The fact that you are oblivious to the reality that this sick joke of climate backtrack from Labor is totally repugnant to the progressive left and anyone who genuinely gives a damn about the planet quite clearly demonstrates that you are not on the progressive side of the fence.
Stop trying to mislead people. Labor isn’t trying to win over any “progressive plurality” with this garbage – they’re trying to win over conservatives and doing the bidding of the rich elite all while fucking the planet’s future.
Labor should be totally and utterly ashamed of themselves.
Andrew_Earlwood @ Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:12 pm
The difference between idealism and paternalism can be very slight at times.
Firefox says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:14 pm
Labor should be totally and utterly ashamed of themselves.
______________
I’ll reserve judgement until I see what they do in government. But it’s not a good start.
Personally, I’d put a full stop between the two phrases.
It was absolutely clear from the video what Macron said and what he meant. He unambiguously called the Prime Minister a liar.
The Greens would do well to get rid of this guy with his idiotic messaging..
Firefox @ Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:14 pm
You are flogging a dead horse. The Greens have sequestered the environmental vote and removed the environment from mainstream politics. The result is that Australia now bringing up the rear of the global environmental effort. Political failure.
You simply don’t understand our democracy Firefox: that and/or you simply don’t care about actual outcomes. Only appearing to so do.
And yes, Labor isnt trying to win over ‘the progressive plurality’: Labor is trying to find a pathway so that sufficient folk are willing to make common cause with the progressive plurality so as to win government and … govern … that necessity ‘step one’ transcends all. The fact that you rail against that level of pragmatism says it all. No. Fucking. Idea. No real concern over achieving any forward steps, ‘my way or the highway’, 100% of the time, even though 90% of the voting population are clearly telling you: GGFed!
It was originally reported by David Crowe, who was there:
‘I don’t think. I know.’
sprocket_ says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:20 pm
The Greens would do well to get rid of this guy with his idiotic messaging..
____________________
He’s trying to max his party’s chances in Labor held seats. That’s politics man.
sprocket_ @ Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:20 pm
Why make my point, when the leader of The Greens can make it better!
Bandt is I’m sure a nice guy but he has all the charisma of a librarian.
Henry says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:22 pm
Bandt is I’m sure a nice guy but he has all the charisma of a librarian.
____________
I’ve known a few incredibly horny librarians. Still waters run deep my friend.
“Is your brain broke: your hero Bandt’s whole stated MO is to ‘force’ Labor into an alliance via holding the balance of power.”
***
Yes, so we can fix this god awful mess and actually do something to address the climate emergency. The entire point being that Labor is way too far to the right and cannot be trusted to do the right thing by themselves – they’ve confirmed as much today. The Greens are absolutely required in the balance of power if Australia is to take serious action to address the climate emergency.
“He’s trying to max his party’s chances in Labor held seats. That’s politics man.”
Hammer meet nail, nath.
And the environmental outcome in that gambit?
Tumbleweeds. I reckon he actually knows that too.
“I’ve known a few incredibly horny librarians. Still waters run deep my friend.”
I’m sure Bandt fucks like a rabbit. Still a nunt.
Andrew_Earlwood says:
Friday, December 3, 2021 at 9:24 pm
“He’s trying to max his party’s chances in Labor held seats. That’s politics man.”
Hammer meet nail, nath.
And the environmental outcome in that gambit?
Tumbleweeds. I reckon he actually knows that too.
_________________
The environmental outcome would be the same if Bandt came out and said it was fantastic. If Labor wins, they have the opportunity to meet their meager target or get more ambitious. Either way, that’s pretty much up to Labor.
It’s Labor’s mission to take outer suburban seats while at the same time defending those under attack by the Greens. Same thing with the Liberals now with Higgins and Kooyong starting to crumble. More seats to come on both sides probably.
nath
Too bad. Laborites should consider themselves lucky we have a 2 party preferred voting system and not a fpp.
————
I very strongly think we should have an accurate proportional system of election to the lower house.
FPP is an appalling undemocratic system .
The UK Tories have won a handsome majority with 35% of the vote and on this minority basis transformed.
It is interesting that the two anti-modern countries UK and USA have undemocratic single member FPP electoral systems.
“Labor [is way too far to the right] and cannot be trusted”
The Greens.
Compare:
“Labor [is too close to the Greens] and cannot be trusted”
Scott Morrison.
“The Greens would do well to get rid of this guy with his idiotic messaging..”
***
Bandt is telling the truth.
It’s Labor that is the problem, not the Greens.