Labor lingers on…

After weeks of negotiations it was confirmed today that Julia Gillard will remain as Prime Minister of Australia leading a minority government with a majority of 1. The embattled incumbent Prime Minister fought tooth and nail in the days and weeks following the election to ensure that her Liberal/Coalition rival Tony Abbott did not succeed in ousting her and the ruling Labor party from office in the wake of one of the closest election results in Australian history. I have always had a healthy interest in international affairs and as such kept a close eye on developments down under and with each day that passed I became more convinced that my preffered candidate, Tony Abbott – dubbed “the mad monk”, would succeed in forming a minority government.

The wrangling and negotiating in the wake of the result became known as Australias latest “soap opera” and there was high drama right to the finish line. The question of who would become Prime Minister leading a minority government all rested on just 3 independent MPs; Bob Katter, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott. To add to the suspense Katter announced shortly after lunchtime that he would be backing Liberal leader Tony Abbott meaning Abbott and the Coalition needed the backing of just one more of the 2 remaining independents in order to form a minority government. However the remaining two of the one time “three amigos” came out in a joint press conference just an hour later and confirmed they would be backing a Gillard led government. Ghastly Gillard had done it.

I am disappointed with this result but at the same time I am in no doubt that there is only one real winner in this election; Tony Abbott and the Coalition. Under his leadership the Liberals have gone from rank outsiders to within a hair’s breadth of securing enough seats to form government and whilst Gillard may be in government she has a huge job to do to prove shes in power. The Coalition won more first preferance votes, more second preference and more seats than their Labor counterparts but were denied the opportunity to form a government by their wretched electoral system; AV – the same system the Liberals here in Britain have been yearning for.

As the great Dan Hannan so eloquently points out the timing of this announcement couldn’t be more apt because as the House of Commons debates changing the UK’s strong and stable FPTP electoral system to AV, Australia is waking up to a government that actually lost the election in terms of seats and first & second preference votes. Instead of winning the popular public mandate they have been propped up and propelled back in to office not by the majority of the Australian people but by the good will and grace of 2 independents. Thats the real “fairness” of the AV system and I for one do not want to see that kind of “democracy” imposed on us.


4 thoughts on “Labor lingers on…

  1. Sou you’re just going to ignore the two-party preferred result? We should wait for that before passing judgement. Also could you explain what is so wrong with independents siding with the smaller of the two parties?

  2. I take great issue with the notion of “second preference” because based on my experiences in Britain most people don’t have a second preference. Im Tory I want a Tory government. Tom Guise is Labour he wants a Labour government. Rob Hunter is Liberal he wants a Liberal government. I’d wager not one of us has a second preference, only a first. If iI were forcesd to pick a second preference I suppose it would be Labour but therein lies the problem, I don’t want it and I’m not enthusiastic about the prospect of a Labour government at all but then again if Im forced to pick a second preference it would have to be New Labour.

    The system is flawed because far from being more representative it forces people to pick a second preference that people don’t really want and thus complicates the end result. It is far better to have a one member one vote first past the post system. We each have a choice and our vote goes to a national tally. Its fair and representative despite its detractors fantasies and it produces strong and stable government (as a general rule)

    I do believe it is wrong that independents should be afforded such power to determine who governs the entire nation just because the skewed system produces, in my eyes, an illegitimate result. The “three amigos” had to the power to determine the fate of the entire nation despite the coalition winning the first choice popular vote. In my eyes THAT is the real result.

  3. In all fairness, they may use AV, but this is the first hung parliament since 1940, and they have had AV for a lot longer than that.

    So if Australia (AV) can go longer than the UK (FPTP) without having a hung Parliament, surely that strengthens the case for having AV rather than weakening it?

    Don’t forget as well, that under FPTP we don’t have a strong stable Government, we have a coalition that could collapse at any moment.

  4. So perhaps BUCF can explain why the conservatives were prepared to make a deal with the Lib Dems on the city council while only being the second largest party?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s