I know there are a lot of people out there, some of them here, who would welcome a scenario where it's impossible for a govt to run the country because of an unworkable Senate. They live under some utopian delusion that in this way they can bring about a peoples' revolution.
Hence we have this farce of the Senate ballots and cross preference deals among unknown groups of dubious origin.
It would be in the interests of the Coalition and Labor to preference each other in future and let the contest be decided between them.
Shut the idiots out for good.

bogarde73 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 11:32am:

I know there are a lot of people out there, some of them here, who would welcome a scenario where it's impossible for a govt to run the country because of an unworkable Senate. They live under some utopian delusion that in this way they can bring about a peoples' revolution. Hence we have this farce of the Senate ballots and cross preference deals among unknown groups of dubious origin. It would be in the interests of the Coalition and Labor to preference each other in future and let the contest be decided between them. Shut the idiots out for good.

Yes I don't disagree with this, as long as Pauline Hanson doesn't get a seat in the Senate. That would be like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If she wins against Arthur Sinodinos it will be a sad reflection of the Australian Senate preference system.

bogarde73 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 11:32am:

I know there are a lot of people out there, some of them here, who would welcome a scenario where it's impossible for a govt to run the country because of an unworkable Senate. They live under some utopian delusion that in this way they can bring about a peoples' revolution. Hence we have this farce of the Senate ballots and cross preference deals among unknown groups of dubious origin. It would be in the interests of the Coalition and Labor to preference each other in future and let the contest be decided between them. Shut the idiots out for good.

Most govts in our history have not had a senate majority and yet managed to make it work quite fine.  It means you have to compromise and negotiate which is fine as long as the Greens are not involved.  Unlike the Democrats and other parties/indies that have held the balance of power in the past, the Green don't compromise or negotiate and usually just oppose everything.

A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents.

Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption.

The Greens don't oppose everything, if you wanted a law passed that promised to import 1 000 000 unemployed fake reffos to come here and retire on centrelink benefits for life they would sign on the dotted line in a second.

Innocent bystander wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 12:20pm:

The Greens don't oppose everything, if you wanted a law passed that promised to import 1 000 000 unemployed fake reffos to come here and retire on centrelink benefits for life they would sign on the dotted line in a second.

they voted no to 96% of bills.

that's close enough to everything.  most labor bills were passed with Liberal support.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 12:36pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:20pm: The Greens don't oppose everything, if you wanted a law passed that promised to import 1 000 000 unemployed fake reffos to come here and retire on centrelink benefits for life they would sign on the dotted line in a second. they voted no to 96% of bills. that's close enough to everything.  most labor bills were passed with Liberal support.

AND THE GREENS MAKE DEAL........DEALS DEALS DEALS..

IS THAT THE SORT OF GOVT WE NEED RIGHT NOW... >:(


you would have thought they learnt their lesson after jumping into bed with gillard...........

the people hate CARBON TAX...they dont want green DEALS.

Yes I don't disagree with this, as long as Pauline Hanson doesn't get a seat in the Senate.

Apparently, according to Anthony Green's analysis, she is likely to. Just imagine that, a thoughtful, erudite person like Sinodinis being shuffled aside by Pauline Hanson and all because of this farcical system we have.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 12:36pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:20pm: The Greens don't oppose everything, if you wanted a law passed that promised to import 1 000 000 unemployed fake reffos to come here and retire on centrelink benefits for life they would sign on the dotted line in a second. they voted no to 96% of bills. that's close enough to everything.  most labor bills were passed with Liberal support.

Liberals opposed all labor bill in the lower house then you are saying the liberal passed all labor bills in the senate.

You want to get your hand off it longy it will send you blind.

bogarde73 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 2:59pm:

Yes I don't disagree with this, as long as Pauline Hanson doesn't get a seat in the Senate. Apparently, according to Anthony Green's analysis, she is likely to. Just imagine that, a thoughtful, erudite person like Sinodinis being shuffled aside by Pauline Hanson and all because of this farcical system we have.

bogarde73

From memory wasn't he assigned as the 3rd option ?

The lower you are down the list the more likely you will miss out, can not blame Pauline for that.

I would like to remove the senate altogether like they did in QLD.

There should be 4 more senators making 80 senators all up then half of them should be independents.

All party senators elected at one elections and independents senators elected at the next election.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 12:04pm:

Most govts in our history have not had a senate majority and yet managed to make it work quite fine.  It means you have to compromise and negotiate which is fine as long as the Greens are not involved.  Unlike the Democrats and other parties/indies that have held the balance of power in the past, the Green don't compromise or negotiate and usually just oppose everything.

Hehe thats funny.  A liberal accusing others that they "don't compromise or negotiate and usually just oppose everything" 

The analysts are saying its very unlikely the coalition will win the senate and 6 Greens senators are not up for re election this time.  I dont think you will be able to abolish the carbon tax (TES) or the resources tax and hopefully by mid term Abbott will want to push the issue and we will see a double dissolution and then it will be a whole new ball game. 

People are disgusted with the major parties and one thing they could promise before but can't any longer is stability. And as this election proves, people are looking for alternatives and that will only get more intense as the major parties continue to fail to produce workable majorities. Interesting times ahead. Last election we heard a few voices in the background calling for direct democracy. This election there are 2 parties calling for it and their voices are more audible. I'm sure those of you who need a nanny to make the big decisions for them will fear such a change but you and your parties need to get out of the way for the future.      

bogarde73 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 11:32am:

I know there are a lot of people out there, some of them here, who would welcome a scenario where it's impossible for a govt to run the country because of an unworkable Senate. They live under some utopian delusion that in this way they can bring about a peoples' revolution. Hence we have this farce of the Senate ballots and cross preference deals among unknown groups of dubious origin. It would be in the interests of the Coalition and Labor to preference each other in future and let the contest be decided between them. Shut the idiots out for good.

Generally Agreed! I have had enough with these clowns who have these laughable defence, economical, foreign policies.

____ wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 12:10pm:

A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption.

Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say). 

For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore. 

Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.   

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 6:24pm:

____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.

Congratulations, IS, on one of the most sensible postings I have read in a while.

Welcome, and I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 6:24pm:

____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.

Try that here, and all that happens is that you cop abuse from both ends of the political spectrum.

They simply can't grasp that opposing one doesn't mean  supporting the other.

To them, it's black and white, there is no grey.

I do not 'support' either major party.

I do, and will, make my own decisions.

Not those of the Right or Left. And not those of the media.

And certainly not by anonymous abuse on an internet forum.

Peter Freedman wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:04pm:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 6:24pm: ____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.    Congratulations, IS, on one of the most sensible postings I have read in a while. Welcome, and I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.

Thank you Peter, I've read a few of your I've found inspiring myself. All the best 

Kat wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:16pm:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 6:24pm: ____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.    Try that here, and all that happens is that you cop abuse from both ends of the political spectrum. They simply can't grasp that opposing one doesn't mean  supporting the other. To them, it's black and white, there is no grey. I do not 'support' either major party. I do, and will, make my own decisions. Not those of the Right or Left. And not those of the media. And certainly not by anonymous abuse on an internet forum.

Direct democracy is not about us making ALL the decisions otherwise we'd all be required to vote 20 times a day.  it is about major decisions only.  nothing else is workable.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Kat wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 7:16pm: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 6:24pm: ____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.    Try that here, and all that happens is that you cop abuse from both ends of the political spectrum. They simply can't grasp that opposing one doesn't mean  supporting the other. To them, it's black and white, there is no grey. I do not 'support' either major party. I do, and will, make my own decisions. Not those of the Right or Left. And not those of the media. And certainly not by anonymous abuse on an internet forum. Direct democracy is not about us making ALL the decisions otherwise we'd all be required to vote 20 times a day.  it is about major decisions only.  nothing else is workable.

Who said anything about us making ALL the decisions. Not even the Current Parliament or Current Government makes All the decisions. We knew that, why did you need to repeat it in an adversarial way rather than a constructive co-operative way.  Your to used to party politics. You see that's another important difference between direct democracy and representative government.  Representative Govt is based on adversarial politics. That's why this forum oozes with such hatred. Direct democracy is calibrated differently where the emphasis is on finding the best solution.  Sure there will be people pushing barrows but DD gives a much better run for those of us who are no interested in barracking for heroes and more interested in participating to deliver the best results for the communities sake.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:40pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: Kat wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 7:16pm: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 6:24pm: ____ wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 12:10pm: A massive amount of legislation was past this term because of negotiation between Labor, Greens, and Independents. Get with the program Conservatives. Senate is the house of review ... not a rubber stamp for far right corruption. Most responsive government I have seen for a long time was this hung Parliament. If there was a box to tick hung parliament I would do it.  But of course Abbott and Rudd tell us "Hung parliaments don't work" (of course, what do you expect them to say).  For those of you who have some sympathy for the idea of direct democracy, take a good look at the people on this site who are clearly labor and liberal supporters. These are people who have forgotten how to think. They attack each other with venom for things their own party was doing last election and they were justifying at the time. "Oh but that was different" How many times you heard that? There's no objectivity left in them anymore and they can't promise a change we can believe in anymore.  Direct democracy is real democracy. It lets us make the decisions not them.  We don't need Uncle Tony and Uncle Kev (and the people behind closed doors who put them there). We're all grown up now. We can decide ourselves. We just have to start demanding it.    Try that here, and all that happens is that you cop abuse from both ends of the political spectrum. They simply can't grasp that opposing one doesn't mean  supporting the other. To them, it's black and white, there is no grey. I do not 'support' either major party. I do, and will, make my own decisions. Not those of the Right or Left. And not those of the media. And certainly not by anonymous abuse on an internet forum. Direct democracy is not about us making ALL the decisions otherwise we'd all be required to vote 20 times a day.  it is about major decisions only.  nothing else is workable. Who said anything about us making ALL the decisions. Not even the Current Parliament or Current Government makes All the decisions. We knew that, why did you need to repeat it in an adversarial way rather than a constructive co-operative way.  Your to used to party politics. You see that's another important difference between direct democracy and representative government.  Representative Govt is based on adversarial politics. That's why this forum oozes with such hatred. Direct democracy is calibrated differently where the emphasis is on finding the best solution.  Sure there will be people pushing barrows but DD gives a much better run for those of us who are no interested in barracking for heroes and more interested in participating to deliver the best results for the communities sake.

it is also predicated on a populace who are politically engaged.  without that, DD becomes nothing more than a vehicle for minorities to rule over the majority.

Australia has a very disengaged electorate.  other than the few that hang out in places like this, very few care an iota between elections.  I don't want a system were the 4% that vote routinely override the wishes of the majority who don't want to.  Australia is nowhere near ready for such a system and I find it curious that most supporters of DD do so because they know it gives and energised minority more power than warranted.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:45pm:

it is also predicated on a populace who are politically engaged.  without that, DD becomes nothing more than a vehicle for minorities to rule over the majority. Australia has a very disengaged electorate.  other than the few that hang out in places like this, very few care an iota between elections.  I don't want a system were the 4% that vote routinely override the wishes of the majority who don't want to.  Australia is nowhere near ready for such a system and I find it curious that most supporters of DD do so because they know it gives and energised minority more power than warranted.

I agree that at the moment people are not politically engaged but that’s because of the current system.  People know that in reality their vote counts for nothing. Tick a few boxes on a sheet every 3 years after a campaign that devotes very little to proper policy discussion and more with adversarial maneuvering, negativity and name calling. No wonder we’re not engaged. They don’t want to engage us. And if you look at the way the current system waters down out vote what’s the point (as if being 1 vote in 12 million isn’t bad enough). During the election campaign many promises are made but there is no real obligation to honour any of them (we know that).  I vote for my current member who says he will fight for this or fight for that but when he gets into Parliament he’s told what to vote by the party, decided by unelected people behind closed doors.  I vote in a blue ribbon seat so if I vote for the non sitting member my vote effectively counts for nothing. If I vote for the sitting member it also feels like my vote counts for nothing.  And how many marginal seats are out there where you feel like you can make a difference. Very, very few in the scheme of thing. I really like Liberals Policy A but I don’t like policy X, Y and Z.  Well if I really like Policy A I have to also vote for policy X, Y and Z and then put up with the liberals telling everyone they have a mandate for policy Y. I don’t want my vote to go to either Labor or Liberal. But voting is mandatory and if I want to cast a valid vote (in federal elections), I must ultimately give my vote to either labor or liberal.

We are unengaged because the system gives us no meaningful way in which to participate. But in Direct democracy we actually make the decisions for ourselves. Sure I accept that it will take some time at first to get people involved but ultimately when people realize that they are actually participating in the decision making for the community you will get significant turn out (not as much as mandatory voting but enough people.). You might remember stories of politics in the USA in the mid 1800s when politicians would debate each other for hours before huge audiences who would sit and just listen for 6 , 8 hours at a time. At a time, I would suggest, when people felt that they were actually contributing something (not now unfortunately, we’re much wiser now).   

This figure you pulled out of the hat of 4% who will vote routinely, is just that; a figure you pulled out of a hat.  And to pretend that we are not ruled by a minority already is absurd.  Just before the Iraq war the world turned out in the biggest mass demonstration in human history. It made no difference, we went to war anyway. Someone else decided. The war in Afghanistan is never discussed and both parties agree we should be there. Bob Carr had a blog screaming that we should get out of Afghanistan and a day or 2 after he was appointed to Parliament and made foreign Minister he said he changed his mind.  From the 1990s onwards western democracies embarked on a mass sell off of Government instrumentalities with hardly any discussion and what was interesting was that it was done at about the same time in all these countires.  Also during this time western democracies began in unison to dismantle the regulatory systems that have protected us from corporate excess since the Great depression and the result was the GFC.  We have essentially one discussion in this country and the argument is generally focused on minutiae at the edges but the main direction we are heading is never under any discussion because its already decided and agreed to by the people who pull the strings of the 2 parties. When I was a kid they had a very similar situation in Soviet Russia. People used to laugh that they called themselves democratic because you had to vote for the communist party, even though there were a number of candidates arguing about minutiae at the edges.    

There is always someone who says “But we're not ready for this".  I suggest you either join in and influence how the DD is shaped or move aside because its coming whether you like it or not.

Kat wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 7:16pm:

Try that here, and all that happens is that you cop abuse from both ends of the political spectrum. They simply can't grasp that opposing one doesn't mean  supporting the other. To them, it's black and white, there is no grey. I do not 'support' either major party. I do, and will, make my own decisions. Not those of the Right or Left. And not those of the media. And certainly not by anonymous abuse on an internet forum.

I know what you mean Kat, I also find it very dispiriting. I think we just have to keep reminding ourselves that one day these people decided to identify themselves as labor or liberal and since then stopped thinking and dutifully followed their respective parties like one eyed football fans ever since. I think that's what ideology does to people. It makes them non thinkers. They just consult their mates for the party line and repeat it. When I see it like that (for what it is) I confess to feeling a little superior.  You should too.