Whether kingmaker Rob JOakeshott ever intends to go through with his threat to consider switching sides if Gillard is knifed Rudd-style will be neither here nor there.
The reason being, if Gillard stays, so do her policy vacuum, her childish and ludicrous obsession with "the leader of the opposition" and not much else, her backflip on every election promise, and her pandering to the solitary Greens MHR. Her popularity and perceived competence will rival her ascended counterparts, Keneally of NSW and Bligh of QLD - both scheduled for an election thumping (to understate things) in the coming 15 months.
If they ignore the spineless and vengeful "independent" members for Lyne and New England (seriously, guys, how many decades will it take you to get over your grudges with the Nationals?!) and do knife Gillard and her dud leadership, then predictably, and rightfully so, the electorate will demand an election and Labor's head on a platter.
Whichever way the self-serving pendulum swings, Her Majesty's loyal Opposition can just sit back and watch it self destruct, while formulating its own policies in time to take to the people - and in the interim do what the opposition is supposed to do: I.e. Oppose the incompetence of the government.
One need only listen to or watch Julia Gillard's performance in the last 2 question times of 2010 to see that she has absolutely lost the plot. We are embarrassed that someone so deceptive and hollow, and someone without substance, retort or recourse save the cheapest of insults and low blows, could be called our Prime Minister.
If the electorate were ever that gullible under Rudd, we shaped up pretty darn fast. We don't see the Australian people falling for the spin again. Ask the chief of spinners, John Brumby of Victoria. He reportedly employed the largest number of spin doctors out of all politicians in the country... And he was, to everyone except the people's surprise, resoundingly dumped - and thus never elected Premier by the people of Victoria.
Gillard said prior to the last election that it would be a referendum on her as leader, and then refused to accept the result. Next time (which will be very very soon) we will make sure we send the message loud and clear!
For the Cause...
Drew Scott, Esq.
Federal President
www.YAF.com.au
Non partisan not-for-profit foundation promoting fiscally responsible & socially conservative values among Australians via educational & political processes.
03 December 2010
28 November 2010
ANGER - STAGE 2
Brumby Refuses to Concede Defeat in a last-ditched effort probably to enjoy the title of Premier (albeit caretaker) for a few more days, and use of the State driver I'm guessing. Maybe... Can't think of why else, actually. A few more days of press coverage, Oakeshott style?
Perhaps he is being inspired by the Democrats, who locate hundreds of formerly "missing" postal votes during every recount - and all of them are Democrat votes. Amazing!
John Brumby. Ummmm....
Perhaps he is being inspired by the Democrats, who locate hundreds of formerly "missing" postal votes during every recount - and all of them are Democrat votes. Amazing!
John Brumby. Ummmm....
DENIAL - STAGE 1 OF THE GRIEVING PROCESS
AFTER Brumby's Labor Government took, to use Obama's words, a shellacking at the polls yesterday, it is amazing how John Brumby, caretaker Premier until most likely sometime this evening, not only refused to concede (fair enough, too many seats haven't been called yet), but almost categorically stated that the result would be a tie. In order for that to happen, Labor would have to secure all 6 too-close-to-call seats, plus Bentleigh, to at best equal the Coalition's 44 already secured of the 88 Legislative Assembly seats.
Such an astronomical achievement is by no means impossible - after all, look at what Tony Abbott, and now Ted Baillieu, have achieved in the last 2 elections - but apart from being unlikely, does not diminish from the point, which is the message that the voters sent the Labor Party yesterday.
Either Brumby, like Julia Gillard and Barack Obama, didn't get the memo when they lost a swag of seats in almost record swings agains them; or, they just arrogantly refuse to acknowledge the electorate's utter and complete rejection of their performances and/or policies. We must remember that Brumby was always seen as never having a chance when he was leader of the then Labor opposition, before being succeeded by Steve Bracks. Since his unexpected ascension to the Labor throne (he was third in line at the time so who would have guessed), he has not faced the voters as the incumbent - until yesterday.
To be fair & balanced (inside joke), Brumby didn't inherit the greatest legacy from Steve Bracks. And let's face it, with Justin Madden by your side... enough said. Yet I can't imagine Abbott coming close to using a similar tone when making his speech on 21 August, even after having at least drawn with Labor 72-72, or 73-72 if you include the WA Nationals cross-bencher.
Tonight, if Bentleigh goes the Coalition's way as the VEC is expecting (thus the reason they chose that seat to fast track pre-poll vote counting), then we would hope John Brumby's concession speech would be more in touch with reality.
Herald-Sun journo Andrew Bolt keeps saying that John Brumby "is better than that." He seems to say it quite a lot about Brumby, which makes me wonder what the "that" is, and whether it's a standard as difficult to beat as Brumby makes it out to be!
Such an astronomical achievement is by no means impossible - after all, look at what Tony Abbott, and now Ted Baillieu, have achieved in the last 2 elections - but apart from being unlikely, does not diminish from the point, which is the message that the voters sent the Labor Party yesterday.
Either Brumby, like Julia Gillard and Barack Obama, didn't get the memo when they lost a swag of seats in almost record swings agains them; or, they just arrogantly refuse to acknowledge the electorate's utter and complete rejection of their performances and/or policies. We must remember that Brumby was always seen as never having a chance when he was leader of the then Labor opposition, before being succeeded by Steve Bracks. Since his unexpected ascension to the Labor throne (he was third in line at the time so who would have guessed), he has not faced the voters as the incumbent - until yesterday.
To be fair & balanced (inside joke), Brumby didn't inherit the greatest legacy from Steve Bracks. And let's face it, with Justin Madden by your side... enough said. Yet I can't imagine Abbott coming close to using a similar tone when making his speech on 21 August, even after having at least drawn with Labor 72-72, or 73-72 if you include the WA Nationals cross-bencher.
Tonight, if Bentleigh goes the Coalition's way as the VEC is expecting (thus the reason they chose that seat to fast track pre-poll vote counting), then we would hope John Brumby's concession speech would be more in touch with reality.
Herald-Sun journo Andrew Bolt keeps saying that John Brumby "is better than that." He seems to say it quite a lot about Brumby, which makes me wonder what the "that" is, and whether it's a standard as difficult to beat as Brumby makes it out to be!
23 September 2010
LABOR ANTI-CROSS RULE TO BE TESTED
This is one of those times where everyone, all of a sudden, thinks s/he's an expert on Constitutional Law. We're talking, of course, about the Constitutional drama that is the pairing of the vote of the Speaker of the House of Reps.
While there is valid discussion about sections 40 and 50 of the Constitution of Australia Act 1900 of the Imperial Parliament, what is deafeningly silent from much of the commentary is this very simple question: given that renegade Lynne 'independent' Rob Oakeshott must lose a deliberative vote, and must retain a casting vote, as speaker (just as any speaker must), why withdraw from the Speakership because of an inability to pair?
Follow this logic with us:
1. Oakeshott is part of the Labor/Greens rainbow government (as slim and as temporary that minority government may be).
2. As such, in accordance with the Australian conventions of our Westminster-based system, the nomination of Rob Oakeshott by the government would fall in line with the Speaker of the House of Reps being from the governing side.
3. His appointment (or anyone else's from the Rainbow Club) would then leave a 75-74 confidence and supply minority governance in favour of the Rainbows.
4. If Rudd or Gillard is overseas, or a member is sick or absent for some reason, or an MP decides to abstain (Obama style), then one can imagine that the vote would be tied at 74-74.
5. In such a case as this, the Speaker (Oakeshott), would get the casting vote. Oakeshott would more likely than not cast his vote in favour of the Rainbow by virtue of the Speaker's Constitutional powers, and carry the vote over the line for the Rainbow Alliance.
6. Even better for Oakeshott, apart from the pay rise, is that he gets to be the most important vote, most likely on several occasions! His 16 minutes and 50 seconds of fame will be dramatically extended. It's a win-win situation. One his ego may have rashly overlooked!
Of course, there are several other combinations that could play out, given that the lights in between Green and Red (namely Windsor and Wilkie) claim they have only committed to supply and confidence votes in support of the Traffic Light Coalition under limited circumstances. However, because the Labor party has a strict rule that crossing the floor results in disendorsement from the party (or usually would - questionable now under slim majority circumstances), it means that even with a 1 seat majority after the speaker is chosen, it would effectively take 2 votes to defeat a traffic light Bill in the House of Reps!
BUT... and it's a BIG but... while the 2 votes needed to defeat a traffic light Bill may not regularly or often come from Wilkie or Windsor (only because we don't think they have the spine to do so), the door is now left wide open for the faceless men of Labor to cross the floor, with no fear of reprimand or disendorsement. PM (Puppet Minister) Gillard can't afford to penalise anyone for crossing the floor, effectively leaving the House of Reps down to 74-74-1. A serious question would then be put to Her Excellency (and I use that term loosely), the Governess-General Quentin Bryce, mother-in-law to the favourite for next PM, Bill Shorten, to do her actual job, and impartially invite the leader of the opposition to form Government (the GG's partiality and conflict of interest will be discussed in another post). Knowing the self-promoting and self-serving priorities of the faceless men, the Greens, and the Independents, Gillard is now even less than a puppet. She is a lame duck, held at ransom by any one person in "her" party at any time. That, fellow Australians, is the more pertinant issue to the appointment of Speaker. The pairing rights have less to do with Parliamentary reform, and everything to do with making sure the traffic lights stay on, and the red light camera keeps on fining us!
Given that convention is one of the most powerful sources of Constitutional Law (for example, in Australia, the office of Prime Minister does not exist in the Constitution of Australia Act), the Honourable Tony Abbott was more than wise in deciding today not to support an agreement that relies on a contravention of the spirit of our Constitution (an important factor when we lawyers interpret any Act of Parliament, not just constitutions). If it hasn't already, the Rainbow Alliance will lose its credibility and confidence, not just from the Australian public (whether it had ever achieved that is another question), but from its own "allies."
At that time, the Opposition - the true Coalition - will be ready to govern in the best interests of Australia - if the representative of Her Majesty ERII the Queen of Australia, the GG, does her Constitutionally allocated job. That, however, is yet to be seen.
For the Cause...
Drew Scott, Esq. is Federal President and Founder of the Young Australia's Foundation, an Attorney & Counsellor at law of the Appellate Court in New York, USA and a candidate for admission to the Supreme Court of Victoria, and the Federal Courts of the Commonwealth of Australia.
While there is valid discussion about sections 40 and 50 of the Constitution of Australia Act 1900 of the Imperial Parliament, what is deafeningly silent from much of the commentary is this very simple question: given that renegade Lynne 'independent' Rob Oakeshott must lose a deliberative vote, and must retain a casting vote, as speaker (just as any speaker must), why withdraw from the Speakership because of an inability to pair?
Follow this logic with us:
1. Oakeshott is part of the Labor/Greens rainbow government (as slim and as temporary that minority government may be).
2. As such, in accordance with the Australian conventions of our Westminster-based system, the nomination of Rob Oakeshott by the government would fall in line with the Speaker of the House of Reps being from the governing side.
3. His appointment (or anyone else's from the Rainbow Club) would then leave a 75-74 confidence and supply minority governance in favour of the Rainbows.
4. If Rudd or Gillard is overseas, or a member is sick or absent for some reason, or an MP decides to abstain (Obama style), then one can imagine that the vote would be tied at 74-74.
5. In such a case as this, the Speaker (Oakeshott), would get the casting vote. Oakeshott would more likely than not cast his vote in favour of the Rainbow by virtue of the Speaker's Constitutional powers, and carry the vote over the line for the Rainbow Alliance.
6. Even better for Oakeshott, apart from the pay rise, is that he gets to be the most important vote, most likely on several occasions! His 16 minutes and 50 seconds of fame will be dramatically extended. It's a win-win situation. One his ego may have rashly overlooked!
Of course, there are several other combinations that could play out, given that the lights in between Green and Red (namely Windsor and Wilkie) claim they have only committed to supply and confidence votes in support of the Traffic Light Coalition under limited circumstances. However, because the Labor party has a strict rule that crossing the floor results in disendorsement from the party (or usually would - questionable now under slim majority circumstances), it means that even with a 1 seat majority after the speaker is chosen, it would effectively take 2 votes to defeat a traffic light Bill in the House of Reps!
BUT... and it's a BIG but... while the 2 votes needed to defeat a traffic light Bill may not regularly or often come from Wilkie or Windsor (only because we don't think they have the spine to do so), the door is now left wide open for the faceless men of Labor to cross the floor, with no fear of reprimand or disendorsement. PM (Puppet Minister) Gillard can't afford to penalise anyone for crossing the floor, effectively leaving the House of Reps down to 74-74-1. A serious question would then be put to Her Excellency (and I use that term loosely), the Governess-General Quentin Bryce, mother-in-law to the favourite for next PM, Bill Shorten, to do her actual job, and impartially invite the leader of the opposition to form Government (the GG's partiality and conflict of interest will be discussed in another post). Knowing the self-promoting and self-serving priorities of the faceless men, the Greens, and the Independents, Gillard is now even less than a puppet. She is a lame duck, held at ransom by any one person in "her" party at any time. That, fellow Australians, is the more pertinant issue to the appointment of Speaker. The pairing rights have less to do with Parliamentary reform, and everything to do with making sure the traffic lights stay on, and the red light camera keeps on fining us!
Given that convention is one of the most powerful sources of Constitutional Law (for example, in Australia, the office of Prime Minister does not exist in the Constitution of Australia Act), the Honourable Tony Abbott was more than wise in deciding today not to support an agreement that relies on a contravention of the spirit of our Constitution (an important factor when we lawyers interpret any Act of Parliament, not just constitutions). If it hasn't already, the Rainbow Alliance will lose its credibility and confidence, not just from the Australian public (whether it had ever achieved that is another question), but from its own "allies."
At that time, the Opposition - the true Coalition - will be ready to govern in the best interests of Australia - if the representative of Her Majesty ERII the Queen of Australia, the GG, does her Constitutionally allocated job. That, however, is yet to be seen.
For the Cause...
Drew Scott, Esq. is Federal President and Founder of the Young Australia's Foundation, an Attorney & Counsellor at law of the Appellate Court in New York, USA and a candidate for admission to the Supreme Court of Victoria, and the Federal Courts of the Commonwealth of Australia.
16 September 2010
CONSERVATIVE PRIDE
WHILE THE pride movement's rainbow flag only has room for select colours, Aussie pride comes in all shapes and sizes, beliefs and opinions, values and persuasions. You don't have to be a clone to be tolerant, contrary to popular opinion.
Conservative Pride is about more than forcing your way of life onto others. It's about being allowed to express your political and religious views without attack, victimisation, bullying, derrogatory comments, insults (and that's just from friends!) that occur just because you are not a neo-Marxist, a communist, a solialist, a hypocrite, a hater, a post modern relativist, a secular humanist, you don't think government is better at running your own life than you are... OR, you do think all these things, but you are more than happy for others to have the opposite view!
For too long the majority has remained silent - if we took cues from the mainstream media, action on campuses, rallies in the streets, and the rhetoric of acadaemia and in workplaces across our Commonwealth, one would think that Australia were a neo-communist anti-Christian country obsessed with symbolism and political correctness at the expense of racist double standards against its own citizens and tax payers. Yet at the same time, this very people voted in the most fiscally responsible and revolutionarily reformist government, eleven and a half years on the trot! And now, the AEC estimates over seven hundred thousand (700,000) more people 18 years old and over, voted primarily for the coalition that represents the most fiscal responsible and social conservative views on the spectrum! You wouldn't think so by the sounds of things, would you?!
The week of the 11th of October 2010 marks the beginning of the end of the tyranny of the violent and intolerant racist minority - Exit, stage left! The scales are about to be tipped back into balance.
For the Cause...
Drew Scott, Esq. is the Federal President & Founder of Young Australia's Foundation.
Conservative Pride is about more than forcing your way of life onto others. It's about being allowed to express your political and religious views without attack, victimisation, bullying, derrogatory comments, insults (and that's just from friends!) that occur just because you are not a neo-Marxist, a communist, a solialist, a hypocrite, a hater, a post modern relativist, a secular humanist, you don't think government is better at running your own life than you are... OR, you do think all these things, but you are more than happy for others to have the opposite view!
For too long the majority has remained silent - if we took cues from the mainstream media, action on campuses, rallies in the streets, and the rhetoric of acadaemia and in workplaces across our Commonwealth, one would think that Australia were a neo-communist anti-Christian country obsessed with symbolism and political correctness at the expense of racist double standards against its own citizens and tax payers. Yet at the same time, this very people voted in the most fiscally responsible and revolutionarily reformist government, eleven and a half years on the trot! And now, the AEC estimates over seven hundred thousand (700,000) more people 18 years old and over, voted primarily for the coalition that represents the most fiscal responsible and social conservative views on the spectrum! You wouldn't think so by the sounds of things, would you?!
The week of the 11th of October 2010 marks the beginning of the end of the tyranny of the violent and intolerant racist minority - Exit, stage left! The scales are about to be tipped back into balance.
For the Cause...
Drew Scott, Esq. is the Federal President & Founder of Young Australia's Foundation.
15 September 2010
YAF ENTERS THE BLOGOSPHERE
Young Australia's Foundation™ has officially entered the blogosphere! Check here often for articles, editorials, and updates on the issues that matter to YOU!
Become a member at www.YAF.com.au and become part of the revolution!
For the Cause...™
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)