Please use this thread for any breaking news and general speculation that isn’t quite on topic for any other recent hung-parliament posts.
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo is an Australian group blog which discusses politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
» SUBSCRIBE to LP updates.
This is by-the-by, but every national parliament in the world with a Westminster system – Australia, NZ, Canada, UK and India – is now hung.
A fascinating fortnight… a new word ‘interregnum’ found, as used here and by Ms Trioli this morning.
And my, my, my – how churlish Hockey & Robb are sounding now. Imagine the shellacking that the 3 Amigos will get if they go the other way.
Do the three remaining independents really need all weekend to pick the lesser of two numbskulls here?
Off-topic, but there’s a remarkable piece just up on the ABC website from Mark Scott, showing some of the reassessment that’s taken place there over the last few weeks. Very interesting.
Interesting isnt it Sam? Global realignments afoot. In NZ its a ‘normal’ product of MMP, but you cant ignore the pattern in the rest.
@Emma if the ABC’s boss is still defending horse race journalism, he’s too close to the action.
This report by Hedley Thomas has made my blood boil!
The lies that Robert Murphy told cost Labour’s Jon Sullivan the seat of Longman and although there would still be a hung parliament, Labour would be a seat ahead and closer to actually achieving minority government.
“A dangerously honest Opposition Leader with – to use Annabel Crabb’s memorable phrase – a truth parrot squawking on his shoulder.”
“This was, after all, one of the great achievements of Tony Abbott in the campaign. The most mercurial of performers, disastrous in 2007, prone to erratic bursts, turning in such a disciplined performance. After a shaky start, he reminded me of a marathon runner, clocking five-minute miles, mile after mile. That consistency allowed people the opportunity to rethink him and what he might offer. Just as the lack of consistency from the Prime Minister, the articulated shift from the programmed to the real, caused people to rethink their view of her also.”
So says Mark Scott. Sounds a lot like David Flint, I reckon and explains why Aunty is the way she is. Do not renew his contract Julia, purleese.
@joe2 OTOH he at least is listening to Jay Rosen’s advice which might mitigate my previous criticism if they get it right.
@Emma, thanks for the link to the transcript of Mark Scott’s speech at the Writers’ Festival. Many very interesting thoughts there on what changed in the media coverage of this campaign and what is likely to change more in the future.
Absolutely fucking pathetic post-hoc rationalisation and wonderful illustration of how perverted and wrong Scott is if this is what he thinks the role of the media FFS should be – or even is/was on the campaign.
Fourth estate, mate. Check the dictionary, you might be surprised.
Emma, the main thing that’s remarkable about Scott’s article is that he takes a couple of thousand words to actually say very little. Of course he name checks all the obligatory new media elements, including Grog’s Gamut blog, but ends up coming to the conclusion that it was a great campaign and if there was any problem it was down to the politicians.
To me it’s indicative of the problem with the ABC. Superficial engagement with the issues that matter and an almost complete denial of the broadcaster’s role in the declining standards of journalism in this country.
Mark Scott is part of the problem, certainly not the solution.
In fact many of the comments following the article are far more pertinent than the article itselfg.
Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Malta (special case), Mauritius, Saint Lucia, Singapore (ok arguble as to how Westminster), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago
Seriously, that Scott piece. It’s like a doctor bragging about the quality of jellybeans they give to patients.
Pathetic.
To be clear that’s a list of Westminster countries whose national parliaments are not hung.
A shandy, the campaign breaker. Seriously. I know I’m going on about it but THAT STATEMENT IS SO WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS, HOW CAN HE NOT SEE WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT STATEMENT, AND HIS OWN CULPABILITY?????
Anyhow what I really wanted to say is how much it is annoying me that the Coalition are going on about the Labor-Green alliance and then claiming that the Coalition has more seats and a bigger primary vote (leaving aside the argument about 2PP).
It’s either one or the other. If you want to describe the ALP and Greens as an alliance, then the Coalition has at best the same number of seats (or one fewer if you don’t include the person who said he’s not part of the Coalition) and a much lower primary vote.
Re Mark Scott.
Sack him.
patrickg, it might make you feel better if you read the comments, most of which are not buying any of his self-serving crap.
Ok Martin, how about OECD/ developed countries with a Westminster system – all hung!
(definitely excluding quasi-authoritarian Singapore, special case Malta, and with India as a possible exception to rule)
“The scrutiny, the performance under pressure, the way questions are answered and avoided, unexpected events are dealt with, managing the tiredness, the frustration, the disappointments – this is part of the political crucible our leaders must endure. Attention must be paid to this.”
Most people don’t understand public policy. Readers of this blog are the exception, not the rule. In any case, little policy was on offer in this election and there is no guarantee that promised policy will be enacted.
So, “character” is both an accessible and a legitimate criterion for judging and choosing between politicians. I agree with Mark Scott that Abbott showed more “character” – and Gillard less – than most people expected. It was also a failure of “character” – not policy – that did Rudd in.
So, in my view, revealing character is a valid function (but, of course, not the only function) of the media.
That’s what it’s all about folks – ‘reinforcing brands’. The journalists have become brands. It really is all about them!
I couldn’t disagree with this sentiment more, especially when what defines something as nebulous as “character” is entirely set by partisan media, political and lobbying personalities and built on a foundation of more often than not outdated stereotypes.
One only has to see the attention focussed on Gillard’s romantic life, parental status, and dress sense to see how such a focus – in addition to being retrograde and frankly misogynist – is detrimental to both the national dialogue and polity.
Interesting comments in The Age report today:
“The trio want legislation to stop an early poll, which would mean another election could only be called if the independents supported it.”
Re: Abbott + character etc
I think what suprised a lot of people was that over the election campaign he was able to keep his mouth under control for so longand perform like a trained parrot simply repeating the same words (message) over and over.
I think you are all being a bit hard on Scott, actually (never thought I would say that). If they listen to Rosen, and are reading blogs, and realise that there is an audience for proper background and policy detail, I’d say that’s a major advance. The people I know at the ABC are trying very hard to turn the Titanic and need all the help they can get, in the face of declining funding and outright hostility from both sides of politics. Of course Scott has to be funny and personable and not frighten the horses. That doesn’t mean that he isn’t thinking new thoughts. Some of it is crap, of course. He works for the meeja, doesn’t he?
But Emma, he’s participating in exactly the same subterfuge her derides from the politicians.
“A notable failure was actually a great success because I say so!”
“The things that are bad are actually good!”
“But even though they are good, we’re gonna change them! But I’m not telling you how, why, or when!”
This person in the comments on the piece really nails it, imho:
Seriously, that piece so incensed me. The idea of that pompous fool gloating about what has to be an absolute nadir of journalism and its practice in this country makes me want to weep hot, salty man-tears of rage.
It’s one thing to ignore a gross and serious problem affecting our national discourse – not just in politics but in reality. It’s entirely another to _brag_ about it; to act like it’s a frigging triumph we had three days of headlines about Mark Latham’s groin-grabbing fantasies.
To crow about this sickening, patronising, depressing trend as a _way forward_, as an expansion to a sadly depleted and once-respected field of skilled experts, rather than organ-grinding monkeys with an ear for sound-bite, grooming each other for lice then flicking them onto to us like it’s a 12 course meal we should be grateful to receive.
Christ.
Baudrillard grows more prescient every day, I swear.
Scott is just engaging in standard management speak where you pretend to engage with problems or issues by mouthing platitudes in a vain attempt to convince people that you are serious about these problems, whereas in reality you are the cause of them.
It’s no wonder that the ABC is in the dire state that it is when you have a charlatan like him in charge.
It seems the Coalition has just about given up on what they call ‘negotiating’ and are just planning to try and scare the 3 indies like they tried to scare they electorate into backing them.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-election/coalition-puts-pressure-on-rural-independents-20100903-14shs.html?autostart=1
Ah the Coalition, master tacticians.
I agree with Patrickg.
And I wish to add that the vast majority of the reports by the media including statements, prepared or unprepared, by the politicians were an insult to our intelligence. It only proved what absolute low regard they have for us, and continue to have.
Re: Jane #7. Maybe it was a setup, but it was John Sullivan’s lack of political skills that allowed it to blow up the way it did. Imagine if instead of his rather thoughtless reply he had asked for more details so he could help?
The truth is John Sullivan was an accident waiting to happen.
Paul @ 28 – if the 3 rural independents do support the coalition will you then recognise the valid stance of the coalition?
If the 3 amigos do go with the ALP then they can probably kiss their seats good by at the next election. In that case why on earth does the Coalition have to roll over for a tummy scratch from them? The people who voted for the coalition don’t expect them to be the 3 amigos biatches.
There is no objective evidence to suggest that the independents would lose their seats if they sided with the ALP, in fact quite the opposite, particularly if they achieved something for their electorates.
You are assuming that most people vote like you, out of habit or dogma.
And as Katter keeps reminding everyone stupid enough not to understand, his seat was once held by Labor.
Liz Cunningham won the state seat of Gladstone, a formerly very safe Labor seat, at the 1995 election. After the Mundingburra by election in 1996, she sided with the coalition to allow them to form a minority government.
The people of Gladstone vote ALP federally but are happy to support a conservative independent in state elections.
Hammer, meet nail!
PatrickG @ 23
Dress sense, romantic history and marital status are not about character. They are about entertainment.
Julia Gillard – one-time editor of Women’s Day – would know that.
@ 31
If they sit down and decide, after reviewing the data that they want to side with the Coalition then yes, I will respect that. That’s democracy. I may not like it but that’s life.
I’m rather bothered by the meme that everyone in those 3 electorates is desparate for a Coalition Govt though. If the people of Kennedy et al. had wanted a Coalition government they should have voted for L-NP candidates. They didn’t. They voted for independents who are not alligned to any particular side of politics and that’s what they’ll get.
And I refuse to accept that if they side with Labor and provide 3 years of stable government with good outcomes for RAR Australia that the voters in those areas will have a dummy spit because they REALLY wanted a Liberal MP but couldn’t have been bothered to vote one in.
Lefty E
Since you brought it up at PB
I’ll expand on my above point.
If you want to accuse the ALP and Greens of being alliance, then at this time the primary votes for this alliance go:
ALP/Greens: 5,995,585
Libs/LNP/Nats: 5,234,230
So the ALP/Greens alliance primary vote is a mere 14.5% higher than the coalitions. Constitutionally meaningless, but interesting nonetheless.
I am embarrassed to admit that I honestly hadn’t realised that fluffy little Annabel Crabb was the ABC’s “chief online political writer”. It had never occurred to me that the quality of her writing was high enough for such a position! No wonder ABC campaign reporting was so poor, if that was the standard being set.
I note too that La Crabb doesn’t get a mention in Scott’s list of great journos or wonderful scoops. Perhaps Scott can swap Tingle for Crabb; a win-win for us all.
Actually the CLP should go in on the Coalition side, so there figure gets boosted to 5,272,180
Indeed, Martin. Of course, its not a coalition – but as you say, they cant spin it both ways.
Actually why is The Australian rubbing our noses in the beat up about the poor disabled boy unable to see a specialist because his dad is unemployed, he has seen countless specialists and well he isn’t disabled just a chip off the old block, a no hoper ratbag like his old man. He damaged the credibility of people who are unemployed and parents caring for disabled children.
Also noted yesterday’s lack of election material in The Australian and all other News Corp newspapers when the COALition budget costings were shown to be lies.
The Sydney Morning Herald front page shows the corrupt political system in all its glory. The NSW Minister for Fair Trading accepted overseas trips from a property developer and at the bottom Twiggy Forrest dining with 2 independents.
Of course they can try but you would like to think that there would be enough of a critical faculty in the media to pick them up on this fairly obvious contradiction.
Today, Bob Katter has been quoted as saying: “If Julia or Tony thinks I’m going to keep sitting out there even if my two colleagues were going to go the other way, you know, I’m still in a very powerful position here. You try running a government with one vote up your sleeve.
“So what I’m saying is that I’m going to be still out there and very, very potent indeed,”
Oh, now we understand, Bob Katter, you want to be famous; to be great. Continue with such statements and your number of fans will be enormous – everyone will be under nine.
re: The Sullivan/Longman matter
It seems to me here that the key problem was not the question, despite it truning out to be a lie, but Sullivan’s response, which was ill-advised.
The standard script would have been to assume the questioner was legit, and to express his solidarity. e.g.
I happen to think our health system is very good but it’s not perfect. Nobody in this room is keener than I am to see to it that parents facing the challenges of raising a child with a disability get the support they need, so if you have, as you suggest, been lost in the process, I’d be very interested, after this meeting finishes, in getting the details so that we can get your son the help he needs and ensure that others in your position are identified and looked after.
The problem for Sullivan in taking this course was the trolling framing by the event MC — who, before Sullivan could answer, inserted herself into the moment, reciting the 2-year wait claim and added — would a politician have had to wait that long if their son needed treatment?
Sullivan was clearly put off balance by this and fumbled to work out which question he should answer, the MC’s “when did you stop beating your wife?” attack or the person in the audience, over the braying sneers of the mob.
One suspects the adrenaline kicked in and overruled better judgement, and so he took the bait with his “what parent would wait two years to get treatment?” response. Gone. Media 1-0.
Really, his best response was counter-attack with diversion. e.g.
Where are you going with this [insert name]? Do you actually have any evidence to show that politicians are getting privileged access to public services for the disabled?
Puts her on the spot and gets the crowd to momentarily forget the guy’s question. If she doesn’t come up with an example, he says:
Well that’s just disgusting. A man comes here wanting answers to his problem, what do you do? You ignore his problem and use that for a round of ignorant personal grandstanding. I think you owe that man and this room an apology for wasting their time. Are you up to it?
I’m betting the journo wouldn’t have looked too sharp after that, and as soon as she had offered her mealy-mouthed backpedal I’d have continued …
Now,if you don’t mind, I’ll attempt to address myself to the person who actually wanted to hear from me …
[then, as above]
That way he is in charge of the question rather than her or the mob …
It’s unusual to find politicians who can think on their feet though …
FB Thanks for filling in the details. I had always thought the candidate had made an ill advised comment that had been chopped into a neat damaging sound bite
The Spart is correct.
I assume he was referring to bad character when he refers to Abbott.
Maisie @30, certainly Sullivan’s response was stupid, however, Murphy’s use of his son for his grubby political ends is worse, imo.
My prediction.
The three amigos back Labor. MSM and News Corp rationalize that they each put their personal grudges ahead of the national interest.
Campaign for a new election resumes, louder and stronger than before.
Election won’t be held for some time as Labor will be waiting and praying for the libs to implode. They will also be waiting for the wreckage of the NSW state Gov to clear.
Tony will last a year until he suffers policy defeats on a few major issues and a credible challenger emerges. MSM narrative then turns against him in favour of turnbull hockey et al. The passing of an ets/carbon scheme neutralizes Turnbulls negatives.
Next election is some combination of hockey/turnbull v gillard swan
They will also be waiting for the wreckage of the NSW state Gov to clear.
This is critical. The voters of NSW must be allowed their moment of catharsis.
billie @41, that’s the other aspect of this fruitcake’s pantomime. People with genuinely disabled kids have enough trouble getting support, without this idiot’s opportunistic, mischievous publicity stunt.
However, Sullivan should have just said give me your details and I’ll get answers for you. Problem solved. Murphy couldn’t have gone on with the charade because by then the facts would have been uncovered.
I think it’s a bit rough to conclude that the whole episode was a deliberate charade. The parents could well and truly believe that their son has a disability, even though the specialists disagree. People can be sincerely wrong. I’m also not thrilled by the comment characterising the father as “a loser” simply for being unemployed, and extrapolating that as an inheritance for a 6 year old kid.
That said, Sullivan made the mistake in his response, which was ill-advised and unprofessional.
Despite the beat-up, was this moment really the decider for Longman that it’s being made out to be? Wyatt Roy seemed to have a convincing lead in the polls well before that.
“Despite the beat-up, was this moment really the decider for Longman that it’s being made out to be? Wyatt Roy seemed to have a convincing lead in the polls well before that.”
I think you’re absolutely spot-on tig. It’s a bit ironic that the media-wrought insistence that Sullivan lost his seat solely because of one comment he made should find such currency in a thread of people baying about the perfidy of media-wrought narrative.
The Three amigos going with the three blind mice will be a sight to see. The three amigos have only to tell the three blind mice what they want and they will get it. I am going on what Mr. Robb said this morning about Hobart Hospital.
It’s far from clear that as badly as he handled it, that this incident was the difference between Sullivan winning and losing the campaign. It happened quite late in the piece, and a great many postals had been made by then.
He also lost by a fair margin
Scott, you’re destroying the ABC by trying to dumb it down to a level that only a child would find entertaining.
I seem to recall that American television series are written at the level of comprehension of a 12 year old.
Abbott’s campaign seemed aimed at a lower mental age than that:
No boats
No taxes
No debt
No waste
Do the right thing
‘Do the right thing’: yes, its a campaign promise.
‘Be nice to your Mum’ was rejected as too complicated for the public,
to grasp, containing five words, though the maximum letter count
of four letters in any single word was attractive.
Some pretty good analysis and debate on the matter at http://www.yopinion.com.au. It’s a risky scenario, but I think the hung parliament could do great things for government accountability. First thing to note would be the revelation of the $10bn hole in the Coalition’s budget. Hopefully we could see treasury scrutiny happen every election.
can sullivan’s response be interpreted as a rhetorical statement meaning “what parent could bear to wait 2 years?” It seems a bit of a stretch to me to interpret as an attack on the parent, but I’m far from aware of all the details.
Oakeshott and Windsor are just far too sensible and forward-thinking to consider backing the Mad Monk.
Katter and Crook, for God’s sake, give them a map that points out the location of Lasseter’s Reef and we won’t see them again.
CMMC: thank heavens for true blue Aussie cultural capital. That cracked me up!
Sam@1:
I don’t know what your definition of “hung” is, but the current National-lead Government enjoys confidence and supply with 69 out of 122 members. National can’t govern on it’s own, but that’s not actually unusual under MMP and the world hasn’t ended.
Tony Windsor on the TV news: “The easy thing for me would be to support the Coalition, but whether it would be the right thing to do, is what I must decide.”
Sounded to me, at least, like a man inclining not to take the “easy way out”.
What do youse reckon?
Crap – “The current National-led government in New Zealand”.
Ambigulous@61: Is it just me, or does every statement Tony Windsor makes tidily cancel out the previous one? If anything, it sounds to me like he’s already decided to go with the ALP but is laying the ground for a (slow news) Sunday headline that reads “sober and thoughtful moderate” rather than “I hate fucking Abbott and Joyce THIS MUCH, and Julia at least gave me a cup of tea.”
Haere mai, Craig
(please excuse spelling errors)
1. Yes, he tries to sound cautious.
2. I don’t think he’s ever f*cked Tony or Barnaby, and please don’t link to any Youtube clips proving otherwise.
3. I think Messrs Windsor, Oakeshott & Katter can see some value in working as a trio, at least for confidence motions and supply.
4. Perhaps they also see that a 77-73 result would provide a small ‘buffer’ for better chances of stability?
5. Hard to tell, but I think the “Coalition costings black hole” must have given pause for thought. Rob Oakeshott was very quick to say he’d trust Ken Henry. Also, in today’s “Australian” Mr Oakeshott also features:
“Mr Oakeshott said the three independents had followed a “sensible” process to request information from both Labor and the Coalition.
“We have done that and thank goodness we did that (because of) what has been revealed in the last two days.”
@Chookie,
” I honestly hadn’t realised that fluffy little Annabel Crabb was the ABC’s “chief online political writer”. ”
Critisise her abilities and journalistic standards by all means, but would you ever refer to a male journo as “little and fluffy”? If not, then do us all a favor and leave out the gendered insults, please.
If he were of Crabb’s ilk, I certainly would.
@65, Crabb looks fluffy, or to be more accurate, her hair does and she is little.
Has there been some news that the Independents have backed Labour? I’ve just heard a rumour to that effect, but nothing else.
Hmmm. David Marr appears to me sort of fluffy. Is that ok? Bolt, lumpy. I’m quite happy to start a project of referring to male journos by their physical appearance. David Burchell: constipated and looks in desperate need of proctology. How’s that? Tony Jones: Rubinesque and over-coiffed. Kerry: fallow and exhausted.
Earlier this evening, ABCNews24 was running a banner that Tony Windsor was leaning towards Abbott, yet commercial news channels showed Windsor saying the 3 indeps were still undecided.
akn: don’t get me started
Bob Ellis – liquidly lissome
Paul Kelly – portentously portly
Guy Rundle – Rabelaisian
Shanners – waspish and vapid
Christopher Pearson – orotund
Milne – dwarf-like slithering toadfish
Tim Colebatch – Harry Potter
Laurie Oakes – the tiny acorn
60 Minutes – Now is the Hour, When We Must Say Goodbye
A Current Affair – who has an affair with a shrivelled dried fruit??
Regarding the dumbing down of the ABC Mark Scott has done such a good job of this that even he understands it enough to write an unconvincing novel on the subject.He is a moron of the highest calibre along with the majority of his journo hacks and the staff that is laughingly called editors.A blind man and his dog can see the holes in Scotts assertions of political even handedness,HOLES some might say as large as Abbott the wingnuts COSTINGS.
Ok for ten points, which contributor at The Drum looks most like Eric Roozendaal when he was at Macquarie?
Nothing at this point, Jane, and Silkworm’s point of ABC24 suggesting Windsor leaning towards Abbott is also just that. You have to grant this to the independents that they have kept their cards very close to their chests, and their public statements have been quite ambiguous – capable of reading whatever you want into them.
Maybe we’re all missing the point with where they’re at, as Michael Gordon has suggested in The Age today. They want to change the thinking away from the winner-takes-all in parliamentary division.
Katter makes the point that for most of our history, the country members have had the balance of power. He and to a lesser extent the others aim at restoring that, or at least dragging parliament back from ramming everything through via the whips and party discipline.
I’m only guessing, but I think the situation favours Gillard winning their support, even though it runs counter to their non-Labor instincts. She has recognized quicker than the Liberals that it is not an auction but a change in the way things are done.
They are after a better deal for regional Australia, with health, education and communications at the top of their lists. They want this parliament to run its full term because it will mean this new paradigm of power lasting at least that long. They wanted some commitment to integrity with the budget process – ie full costing of programs.
Labor offers all of that while the coalition programs enter a black hole.
It would be no contest on those grounds. Also an Abbott Government would have one eye on the Greens Senate balance coming in from July and would be determined to have an early election to ‘cash in’ on the incumbency factor before then. The last thing the independents want is to lose that balance bargaining chip that quickly.
The logic is pretty compelling, but who knows? The only other hint I can infer is the Liberals getting more into scare-mongering mode about the horrors of a leftist Labor-Greens alliance. Those tactics are usually a sign that the Liberal believe they’ve lost.
Rebekka, I meant her writing. In her SMH days she’d occasionally nail someone’s personality precisely (IMO) but that was as good as it ever got. It’s fluff and it’s littleness. We do need writers to find the lighter side of political life, but they shouldn’t be chief of anything but the funnies page. (If Crabb is indeed a shorty like me I can understand why you thought I was making comments on her physical appearance; she has long curly hair which I suppose could be fluffy after it’s washed! I’ve only seen her byline photo.)
But we should remember that a male journalist would never be asked to write in this style, nor be rewarded for it. I presume the powers-that-be at ABC Online thought that Crabb’s light style was what the punters wanted between dancing kittens.
Fluff works fine until we have the intrinsically interesting event of a hung parliament and lose our taste for it (see the comments under her most recent article). Not sure if Crabb cannot adapt or is not allowed to.
Don @ 73, my favourite comment was from Hockey: “It is inconceivable to me the country Independents would choose to go with what will be the most centre-left government in Australian history.”
Centre-left… now that’s a frightening prospect!