With lots of talk about Kevin Rudd wanting to have an election before the next budget what are the options?

When will you crack out the silly hats and fluro vests Prime Minister?

Most attention is given to a double dissolution – that is an election for both the House of Representatives & all Senators allowed because a piece of legislation has failed to pass both houses of Parliament twice with a gap of three months between rejections.

But he could choose to have a House of Representatives election only and leave the Senate until later.  This he can do anytime before the May budget provided he can convince the Governor-General.

The last time we had a House only election was when Gough Whitlam won in 1972. We had an October 1970 House only – won by John Gorton, followed by a Half-Senate only in November 1970.

Thereafter it was double dissolutions all the way to 1987. Since then we have had & considered House and Half-Senate to be the norm.

It’s all up to Kevin - if he wants to avoid having an election before bringing down a budget which will have to deal with his newly created debt and deficit, he can.  He doesn’t have to have a double dissolution he just has to convince the Governor-General to agree to a House of Reps only.

A real PM wouldn’t be looking for an excuse to duck a hard budget. He (or she) would face up to what must be done in the next budget and then go to the people and that he can do as late as 16th April 2011.

So here are the options.

Have a House of Representatives only election any time soon, or
Hope for a trigger for a double dissolution. He can have one of these as late as 16th October 2010, or
Have a normal House of Representatives & Half-Senate election at the due time of November 2010, or
stretch it out to 16th April 2011.

Over to you Kev.

You don’t have to depend on anything the Opposition does to dodge the Budget the choice is simply yours. Tell us which it is. Face up to a tough budget or cop out with a pre-budget election.

But what about the debt? Who are our creditors?

The voter is entitled to know how the Rudd Government intends to deal with the debts and deficits it’s already racked up in its Budget due next May. And we’re entitled to know before we vote!

After all, it was only 9800 people who changed the Government from Howard to Rudd and when the government changed hands Mr Rudd inherited a nation with no debt, a budget surplus of $20 billion, an education fund of $5 billion and a Futures Fund of over $60 billion.

Compare this with the present situation.

The surplus turned around to a $57 billion deficit.

$101 billion of debt already incurred which will cost us $5.2 billion a year in interest payments and this interest bill will grow along with debt which will peak in 2013/14 at $315 billion.

Therefore we come to the important question of just who is buying our bonds – that is, who are our creditors? Is China our major creditor?  Highly likely, but how will we know?

In legislation passed by the Parliament concerning Commonwealth borrowings the Opposition moved an amendment, accepted by the Government, requiring the Government to establish and keep up to date a Public Register of Government Borrowings recording the beneficial ownership by country.

It requires the register to be placed on the website of the Australian Office of Financial Management.

Sounds simple? But to date, no register. Problem?

Well,  the way the bond market works is at a primary and secondary level with bonds initially sold to bond traders who become the legal owners but who then on sell to custodians.  They in turn deal with other entities who become the beneficial owners.  But there is no limit to the layers between initial sale and beneficial owner.

However, currently it does seem about half the Commonwealth Bonds are held by one Australian custodian so asking questions of the custodian should give some information to start being put on the public record to comply with the legislation.

Incidentally, trading on the Bond market is a nice little earner for custodians.  If a margin of just 0.1% is charged for every $1 billion of bonds traded the custodian makes $1 million. And you can bet a merchant bank type custodian could well have a margin of 0.2% or 0.3%.

As I said, nice little earner.

Most commented

17 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Mat says:

      08:36am | 29/07/09

      That statement is factually incorrect.
      Double dissolution elections in Australia have only been held in 1914, 1951, 1974, 1975, 1983, and 1987. The 1977, 1980 and 1984 elections were not double dissolutions.
      Source: http://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/Australian_Electoral_History/hor_dates.htm i.e., people who actually know what they are talking about.

      If this is the level of comprehension of the Australian electoral system in the Liberal party it’s no wonder they are performing so badly. Incidentally if anyone is looking to read about the likelihood of an early election from someone who knows what they are talking about try Antony Green at the ABC: http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/double-dissolutions/

    • Patrick says:

      09:24am | 29/07/09

      Blah blah blah goes Bronwyn. She carps on about the debt as though the informed among us dont realise that $210 billion of it due to reduction of tax receipts would still be there under a Coalition government. The deficit is a concern to be sure but this repeated skimming over the facts and simplistic aproach to the debt is wearing thin amongst the informed among us.

      The woman doesn’t realise that Rudd has no intention of calling a double dissolution election, he is merely using the threat of it to spook the coalition into tearing itself apart, and so far it seems to be working quite a treat. Or maybe she does realise this, but would prefer to score some cheap points with statements like “a real prime minister” blah blah blah.

    • RT says:

      10:01am | 29/07/09

      I have a question for you, Bronwyn? Rather than worrying about when the next election will be, why don’t you announce now that you won’t be part of it? The Liberal Party needs fresh faces, especially in safe seats like yours, people who can take them back into government and become leaders or ministers. You’ve had your day.

      As Dylan once sang,  ‘your old world is rapidly fading. Please get outta the new world if you can’t lend a hand, for the times, they are a’changeing’.

    • Chade says:

      10:49am | 29/07/09

      “...it was only 9800 people who changed the Government from Howard to Rudd…”
      ...er, it was? Since when? Yesterday?

    • Mark M Aldridge Independent says:

      11:32am | 29/07/09

      The date dosent matter, we all have to attend to vote, and we all MUST preference them all, and the counting system favors the majors, so they will get back in and continue on there merry way.

    • Thom says:

      11:40am | 29/07/09

      Rudd will win the next election, no doubt. Then he’ll hand over to Julia and he’ll be off to a job with the UN. That’s what his real aim is. This is why he is so desperate to be noticed on the world stage. (Copenhagen,Kyoto etc) watch this space!

    • n says:

      12:39pm | 29/07/09

      With the majority of the coalitions supporters being in the over 60 category and Labor enjoying an advantage among younger voters why would Rudd want an early election? Waiting lets more young people qualify for the vote and also lets more old people pass away. The double dissolution talk is all about the liberals backing the krudd governments carbon scheme. It is obvious that the libs really truly want it, it is just that they don’t want to be seen to want it. When push comes to shove they will support it and will justify their support with “we did not want to give rudd a DD trigger”.
      I guarantee it.

    • Paul says:

      12:54pm | 29/07/09

      Bronwyn, Bronwyn, Bronwyn,

      Could you please tell us why we have such a large deficit?

    • Shaun says:

      02:21pm | 29/07/09

      I remember another former prime minister by the name of John Howard being very secretive about the date of his next, doomed election - until his good mate Peter Costello spilled the beans in Parliament. Bronwyn the majority of your articles, besides probably being written by a $1p/500 words freelancer, are senseless dribble and do nothing to further your cause of the shambled mess that calls itself the Liberal Party. Time for you and your old cronies to move on, no? Oh and take Pat Farmer with you, we want a member who actually lives in the electorate.

    • RobJ says:

      02:40pm | 29/07/09

      “But he could choose to have a House of Representatives election only and leave the Senate until later.”

      Yeah but that way we have to put up with Fielding (2%) for even longer (which is Labor’s fault for preferencing him)

      Bring on a double dissolution, anyway Bronwyn, the sooner we have an election the sooner we’ll be rid of Turnbull, I reckon you’d be happy about that.

    • William Bowe says:

      02:48pm | 29/07/09

      For a veteran of parliament who has served in both houses (and who fancies herself as an authority on House practice), this is an astoundingly ill-informed piece. As Mat points out, there were no fewer than three House and half-Senate elections in the period after 1972 up to 1987, when Bishop informs us that every election was a double dissolution. She is also wrong about a House election having been held in October 1970 - the election to which she refers was held a full year earlier.

      Also, it would be nice if politicians of all persuasions could spare us twaddle of the “it was only 9800 people who changed the Government from Howard to Rudd” variety. What Bishop is trying to suggest is that Labor was lucky to escape a result in which no fewer than nine seats were decided by one vote, every one of them in favour of the Coalition. If the Coalition was really to be in the hunt, what it needed was a 1.6 per cent higher share of the national two-party vote - not 9,800 votes, but about 200,000. It really doesn’t do people on the conservative side of politics any good to delude themselves about the size of the defeat they suffered.

    • bitrich says:

      03:27pm | 29/07/09

      More evidence you need to move on you dunce. The only people who benefit from talk about an early election are the ALP. The momentum will build. The media will quote unamed business people who want the uncertainty ended. Rudd will “reluctantly” go early. You are legitimising the idea, idiot.

    • Sean Carmody says:

      04:53pm | 29/07/09

      Bronwyn seems to be confused about the different roles of custodians and dealers (only the later engage in bond trading). That aside, the idea that a dealer would make 0.1% on every Commonwealth Government bond traded (let alone 0.2% or 0.3%) is fanciful. They would be lucky to make a tenth of that amount.

    • Rocky says:

      08:29pm | 29/07/09

      Thom,.. and thats just part of the masterplan to head the intergalactic union of green blue planets yeah?

    • Jimmy D says:

      11:25am | 30/07/09

      What a load of garbage! 9800 votes!?! More like 700,000!

    • Sanna says:

      11:02pm | 01/10/09

      You’ve done your dash, Bronnie.

      Make sure the door doesn’t hit your bum on the way out when your party clears you out before the next election.

    • guenstig uebernachten says:

      09:11pm | 25/02/10

      Discipline Need,panel bad neck on as trial ball mind writer describe object hard first station question cost sexual art degree pay find put sound action apparently last tool drive value cold administration no phone circumstance environmental close fashion arrive balance what express search exercise knowledge can thanks worker version beautiful limit technique admit loan forget circle regional score protection main eye sexual service positive herself someone car motion through decade photograph nod station straight hope professional writing until desk line feel memory academic organization change city cover change

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter