A new election will cost the taxpayers about $170 million. It’s a small price to pay for stability, which is something neither side will be able to deliver as a result of the seemingly insurmountable impasse created by Saturday’s mad result.

Doing it for granddaddy…Bob Katter yesterday. Photo: Kym Smith

Governments are meant to operate in the national interest. The biggest worry about the current deadlock is that any balanced sense of national priorities will be compromised, as the party which forms government evaluates every major policy on the basis of what’s in it for Tamworth, Port Macquarie and whichever part of the planet Bob Katter hails from.

The last time we saw this distortion of public policy was in the late 1990s when Independent Senator Brian Harradine held the balance of power, and his home state of Tasmania was showered with extravagant telecommunications riches by the Coalition to buy his support for the Telstra sale.

Both Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor are level-headed men, decent and competent politicians, and would do a better job inside Cabinet than many of the people either side could serve up.

But even so, should we risk sidelining or subjugating the interests of voters in 150 electorates to a trio of men representing just three electorates?

And when the third MP in this triumvirate is Bob Katter, it becomes a more troubling proposition, as his rhetoric over the past few days has been framed around a totally unjustified sense of betrayal where he’s accusing city people of callous indifference to the plight of rural communities. 

Both Windsor and Oakeshott have said that they will not use the whip-hand they now enjoy through an accident of democracy to extort benefits for their electorates at the expense of the nation. Their track record in politics, firstly at the NSW state level in the 1990s and now at the federal level, suggests that they can be taken at their word.

It matters less what they say than what the major parties do in order to attract their support. Things are so desperate on the Labor and Coalition side that all sorts of inducements will be thrown around.

Oakeshott has displayed an infectious brand of optimism by proposing “a new politics” and has made some compelling points about how so much important parliamentary committee work, and the thoughtful proposals from major policy exercises such as Ken Henry’s tax review, are often crushed by machine politics and poll-driven short term political expediency. But his proposal for some kind of government of national unity, possibly with ministers drawn from across the parties, is totally unworkable, although it did at least give us all a laugh at hearing Tony Abbott talking up the prospect of “a kinder gentler polity”. 

But the biggest problem is Katter. The former Howard Government minister has made it clear that it’s his explicit intention to massively redirect the efforts and energy of Canberra towards rural Queensland and, presumably, the rest of the bush.

He bases this on a very hostile and unfounded sense of persecution. This old-school agrarian socialist appears blissfully ignorant of the billions that are spent on rural assistance, on adjustment packages for industry sectors such as sugar or dairy which have been affected by liberalised trade arrangements or competition policy. He even makes the fanciful and baseless claim that city people and the city media doesn’t care about issues such as rural suicide, ignoring the fact that when the drought was at its worst city people gave millions through the media-led Farmhand campaign to reach out to rural communities, aside what they do already through their taxes.

He also epitomises the unrealistic rural conviction that it’s the job of government not only to support good businesses, but to underwrite businesses which are plainly unviable. No-one whose small business goes south in the city gets any government assistance; yet the Katter view of the world is that if you choose out of a sense of tradition or familial loyalty to grow things in a place which has always been marginal, the state should save you from your own misfortune or lack of sense.

Katter made it clear in his statement on Sunday that he wants to massively shift the focus of Canberra. He said it’s “not payback time but pay-up time”, suggesting that in this overwhelmingly coastal, city-dwelling nation of ours that the suburbs have had it too good for too long.

He’s mused about how it’s no longer even legal to “boil the billy” in this country, suggesting a warped sense of what constitutes our national identity, with putting jumbucks in the tucker bag no doubt next on the politically correct list of forbidden activities.

His stroppy remarks on 3AW made plain how his sense of persecution would determine which party he supported, on the basis of what they’d do for his seat.

I’ve made my position perfectly clear 400 times, so for the 400th time i said if it’s up to me personally, as far as I’m personally concerned, I would give the gong to whoever gives us the right to survive. We haven’t enjoyed that right for 25 years. All we’ve ever seen is our businesses going down, down, down, our farmers just collapsing completely…these are not just figures plucked out of the air, concepts plucked out of the air, I can give you the actual figures, that’s why I’m carrying this briefcase around with me everywhere, i can give you the actual figures. No you listen to me because we have had it up to here with the media, you people have given a run to every single idea known to man, except us. And we got to a stage under successive governments where every four days a farmer in Australia was committing suicide. Did you ever give us a run? No. Now that we’ve got a bit of power you’ll be listening to us, my friend, not dictating to us.  I just got 74-75 % of the vote, right? I think there’s a bit of trust there. And I’ve lived with them all my life with my daddy and my granddaddy before that and I would like to think I know a little bit of what’s going on there.

In this election 85 per cent of the country voted for either of the two major parties. Rather than reflecting the will of the majority we now risk government by the few, flimsy and unsustainable government where the interests and appetites of three men who represent 300,000 people will inordinately influence the lives of 21 million. The fact that one of these men is waging some fanciful war in his own mind on the big cities of Australia is reason enough to go straight back to the polls.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

322 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Eric says:

      06:06am | 25/08/10

      Why assume that a new election would deliver a different result? I wouldn’t vote differently. How many people would? And would those who changed from Lab to Libe be balanced by those going the other way?

      And what’s so bad about this “instability”? My computer still works, water comes from the tap, the shops are still full of food. I think the whole “stability” argument is just a front for politicians who want power without limits.

    • john Williams says:

      08:16am | 25/08/10

      @Eric : How many people would?
      I suspect lots. An interestingly there is an agreement here from various quarters…Richardson, Kroger and most political commentators for e.g.
      It seems beyond argument that there was a protest vote in the Greens result. Ditto the informal vote count.
      Perhaps not.
      But it is clear that a the three amigos solution would likely lead to another election in perhaps less than 12 months anyway.
      Personally I see in another follow-on election the possibility that the alleged protest vote would return to the Labor side, which would not please me at all…but a definite result that allows a Government to operate is far better than the current situation of uncertainty. Presumably then the Labor Party would seriously consider their past errors.
      Everyone agrees that we need stable Government.
      The three amigos can not provide it.
      The media…basically Labor rusted-ons…would be very much in favour.The Labor Government certainly, because they would immediately be deluged with union funds , and their secret agreement with the mining industry and No Business Plan NBN would remain in play , with the Opposition left basically penniless for the rematch.
      As ,increasingly , it looks like only the Opposition will have a case for a patchwork Government expect Joolyia to latch onto this and demand another election….. “in the interests of democracy ” of course.

    • Kordez says:

      08:51am | 25/08/10

      I agree with Eric. Let the bastards work harder for our tax dollars. I’d vote no differently.
      Another month of election ads would drive Australia insane.

    • Phill says:

      09:34am | 25/08/10

      Well I for one voted above the line.  If the next election was held I would certainly take the time to number all the boxes as I think a lot of people would who took the easy option the first time. 
      They say it makes a difference, now I actually believe them.

    • Super D says:

      09:39am | 25/08/10

      I reckon the Libs would romp it home second time around, they are the party in ascendency and enough people out there like to back a winner.  It would be in more in the coalitions favour if the ALP was seen to desperately attempt to cling to power for a couple of months.

    • TimB says:

      10:11am | 25/08/10

      No it wouldn’t Phil. The “above the line” option is only on the senate paper, which I assume you’re referring to.
      The Senate results have no bearing on the House of Reps election and who gets into power.

      On that topic though, if we did go to another election to try and sort this mess, do we redo the senate vote too? Or do the results for that stand? Or is it like a DD election where all the senate spots are up for grabs?

    • Jason CR says:

      10:14am | 25/08/10

      @Eric
      We don’t just have 3 independents, we also have a green from Melbourne who disagrees with his leader, a National from WA who doesn’t want to be a National, we also have an ex green independent who doesn’t know if he’s Arthur or Martha.
      Let’s get fair dinkum here and go back to the polls.  I’m sure there’ll be less informals and also the protest vote to the greens will dry up.
      We need stable government, but we also need stable independents too and I’m not seeing either.

    • David says:

      10:27am | 25/08/10

      You are one of the reasons that it shouldnt be compulsory to vote.Stability is very real,when investors look at a country to invest their money,they look at the government and what sort of government is in power…did you know we have already sliped 13 places on the world investment list of safe places to invest,thanx to labors mining tax!
      The dollar has already dropped and petrol prices have already gone up!So educate yourself before you make stupid comments.

    • Steve says:

      10:30am | 25/08/10

      @Eric: good to hear so many things still work for you i suspect some things don’t!! Maybe you would like the same results that the other parts of the world found like going to K-Mart in downtown USofA and finding your the only person in the store… Old one vote Tony needs to be pulled into line one would think. Theres was the party machine that set us on this course towards the same out comes!!! Here in part an article from fin review about our account deficit. Do you think Costello and friends were the great debt busters after reading the following? Labor’s stimulus package comes in at about 1% of the total enjoy. Tony might happily forget that while his former government colleagues were steering the good ship Australia, the nation’s total debt soared from a mere $700 billion in 1997 up to $3.2 trillion by the close of their term. An increase 387% Deregulation brought growth all right. But there is a yin for every yang. Opposition may well brag that it left office with zero debt - zero government debt that is as the upshot of policy was to lump it onto the consumer. The first home buyer grant that artificially inflated house prices out of everyone’s reach sold every profitable publicly owned enterprise to get a very short sighted budget surplus pushed out the credit systems where people were actually given one two and three credit cards And we wonder how and why the GFC happened! http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/613694

    • Jane says:

      11:15am | 25/08/10

      Proof to some ( many of them first time and naive voters who followed htv cards) that a vote for Greens indeed really was a vote for Labor.
      Not a protest at all in most cases.
      They may change their mind and vote differently next time.

      I say bring on a new election too. Labor or Coalition to govern ..2 choices.

    • Baz of Ettalong says:

      01:29pm | 25/08/10

      Bring on another election. labor + Greens polled far more votes than Liberals + Nationals. Most Greens voters knew eactly what their vote meant, a protest at Labor for not being further away from Libs policies. In another election they’d naturally change their vote tback to Labor.

    • Don says:

      01:33pm | 25/08/10

      Why should we need another ellection. We voted 150 politicians to govern Auatralia, not 2 parties and and a handful of independents. If they are not professional enough to work together for the benefit of all Australians, and not just their electorate, maybe we need a new system of selecting the members of federal parliament.

    • Kevin says:

      01:55pm | 25/08/10

      Here’s an idea.  Identify the 25 most marginal seats and hold by elections in each of them.  I know the safe seat I’m in isn’t going to change hands in a new election and I’d rather be spared another 5 weeks of Punch and Judy going at it.

    • Bruce says:

      04:00pm | 25/08/10

      One reason we might get a different outcome is that we now know that the unions have assisted the greens and if radio reports are correct the unions have also given some million dollars the left wing “get up” crowd.

    • Jamie says:

      05:07pm | 25/08/10

      I agree RE VOTE!

    • Peter from the bush says:

      05:39pm | 25/08/10

      I agree with Eric….why waste more money on something thats not needed.
      I also wouldnt vote any different at all and being out in the bush this current setup would at least make sure that we were noticed.
      I applaud Bob Katter and I feel that Tony Abbott and all the Liberal supportersd just wannt to have more publicity that they dont deserve.
      Australia has spoken,we have a hung parliament and we just have to ‘get on with life.
      Why should we pay out another $170 Mill just to do the same thing over again,.
      Its time yhjou Lib supporters realised that hey there is life after an election.We pay their wages,so make them work for us…..

    • Sami says:

      07:39pm | 25/08/10

      It makes no difference if one or the other is voted in as a new government. The $170ml would be well spent on education, health & transportation infrastructure ( do away with the so called “Motorway-Sorroway”.

    • Stephan says:

      10:50pm | 25/08/10

      Another election would very likely see those postal votes that have got the Liberals over the line in Hasluck go the other way, it would also probably see that kid that got elected in Queensland thrown out. The informal vote which sucked 2-3% away from Labor would probably come back. If there was another election I think Labor would probably win comfortably.

    • Mia says:

      09:27pm | 26/08/10

      That bloke in Hasluck you would see chucked out happens to be the first indigenous person voted in as an MP in Australia.  If he wasn’t a liberal you would be doing high fives and hand stands.  This plus the kid in Queensland and the first Muslim voted in is a momentous time for the diversity of our parliament.

    • Mike from Melbourne says:

      12:27pm | 27/08/10

      “The media…basically Labor rusted-ons” - do you mean all the media, or just the ones you don’t agree with. Not sure Piers Ackerman and Andrew Bolt would like this description of them. (Nor Ms Henderson, ex ABC who just lost Corrangamite standing for the Liberal party).

    • iansand says:

      06:48am | 25/08/10

      Too long.  “Katter is nuts” would have sufficed.

    • Boganomics says:

      09:04am | 25/08/10

      He doesn’t sound that nuts to me and I live in Sydney’s Eastern suburbs (I moved here from the bush about 10 years ago because I knew there was no future in the bush).

      All members of the House of Reps are voted in to represent their electorate. They are NOT there to represent a party or big business or a party with the most votes or miners or small business or unions or universities or journalists.

      They must put the interests of their electorate first or their (properly educated electorate) will vote them out.

      I once lived in a marginal electorate and before an election we got a new train station. I’d love to be living in any one of these 3 electorates now. For a change it might actually benefit from politicians.

      We must respect the domecratic process. I doubt another election will change things because as Eric (1st comment) pointed out, I wouldn’t be changing my vote.

    • Boganomics says:

      09:05am | 25/08/10

      *democratic

      Cold hands this morning…......

    • Lesey Kilroy says:

      10:09am | 25/08/10

      The Libs have no money they would have to walk around the streets dressed in billboards!!  Abbott has decided to have a lobotomy and be a nice guy. Sure!!

    • Gregg says:

      11:22am | 25/08/10

      You got a new train station Boganomics!
      Was it in Whoopydoo?

    • Alfred Deakin says:

      07:03am | 25/08/10

      Just one problem, David, what if the electors deliver another hung parliament? Do we go for a third election. In a way I think it’s arrogant to say to the electorate “You’ve got it wrong, you need to vote again” - the people have voted in their representatives, let the elected ones sort it out.

    • Anne71 says:

      12:51pm | 25/08/10

      @Alfred Deakin, well said. I think it’s the height of arrogance to tell people they wasted their vote, or voted wrongly, by voting Independent or Green. What exactly are you trying to say, Mr Penberthy? That we are free to vote for whichever party we want, as long as it’s the Coalition or Labor?  If nothing else, this election has sent a strong message to the major parties that the Australian people are fast running out of patience with them. I can only hope that they take notice of it.

    • Sickemrex says:

      02:51pm | 25/08/10

      Absolutely.  To the 150 reps elected, sort it out, it’s what you’re paid for.  Another election would be an absolute insult.

    • Dave says:

      09:12pm | 25/08/10

      Geez I’d love it if the election actually opened up people eyes and saw how much responsibility of representation people got with independents, and instead you got double the number of Independents instead!

      Hilarious, lets have another vote because we don’t like the result. It’s the exact same mentality as a pokie machine addict!

    • Peter says:

      10:57am | 26/08/10

      @ Anne71. Absolutely agree. It’s time the duopoly of politics took notice of this result and respect the decision. Parliament has become a joke, electioneering has become a joke. The duopoly have been taking us for granted for too long and it’s time they listened…

      They should learn to live with what the voters said. Any party that responds positively to it, i think will be duly rewarded in the next election..

      Time to “stop the bullshit” games that have been coming out of Canberra for the 20 years…

      If the major parties don’t want to play ball and listen to others, then we should punish even further if they call another election…

      I voted for the Libs this time around, if the Libs are responsible for sending me back to the poles for their own power play games, i will vote for the Greens…

    • John Goslino says:

      09:47am | 27/08/10

      Agree, the people have voted and these votes should be respected.  The elected reps have an opportunity to form a workable executive, and have expressed interest in doing so, and we should withhold their payments until they find a solution.  It will set a good example to the rest of the community about collaboration in the national interest rather than petty, adversarial bickering.

    • acotrel says:

      07:09am | 25/08/10

      $170M is too much to pay, just to find an idiot to rule the country.  We should just elevate Steven Fielding to the role of monarch, and let him choose his own team. We must save money at all costs?

    • Greg says:

      09:48am | 25/08/10

      Yet you’d support $40+billion for the NBN actorel????

    • Matthew says:

      09:01am | 26/08/10

      Yes, do that, it’ll save costs.  I, and I’m sure a lot of other, would move overseas and never come back.  I’m sure Zimbabwe wouldn’t look so bad if he got in.

    • Peter says:

      12:06pm | 26/08/10

      @ Greg, it’s the $40 billion investment i’m worried about, it’s wasting $6 to $10 billion on a patchwork of technology we’ll have to upgrade again in a few years. The libs plan might sound like less money, but it’s their plan that is truly the wasteful one…

    • S.L says:

      07:15am | 25/08/10

      I’ve had the misfortune of listening to Bob Katter in parliament. The guy can barely manage to string a sentence together! Half the time nobody has any idea what he’s talking about. Now he has his 15 minutes of fame with the other 2 independents and looks like deciding government with a balance of power.
      Even though I’m 100% against Tony Abbott I’d rather see him get the gong then have this scenario!

    • Jason CR says:

      03:36pm | 25/08/10

      S.L,
      We can all rest easy as Katter said he wants to look at the government’s books before deciding!!! 
      Let’s hope they’ve drawn plenty of pretty pictures to help old Bob out to understand economics.  Maybe even some pop up features when he opens the page.  A big $ sign etc etc
      The guy is nuttier than a Xmas cake and all we hear about is stable governments.  How about we have some stable independents first.

    • Jim says:

      06:00pm | 25/08/10

      I had problems trying to understand why he was screaming the answer to a simple question, and the next thing he did during an irate rant was to joke about a joke he made during the irate rant, and somehow assumed we all got it.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      07:16am | 25/08/10

      Don’t diss Bob - he may well be better entertainment than anything on TV for the next 3 years.

    • Rebecca says:

      07:24am | 25/08/10

      Does he remind you of the Dalton boys from Lucky Luke comics?

    • PaulB says:

      08:53am | 25/08/10

      Dunno, but that picture achieves the previously impossible.  It makes him look even uglier than was previously suspected.

    • Nicole says:

      03:21pm | 25/08/10

      Hmmm, I reckon he’s been watching Dallas over and over, and thinks he’s J.R. Ewing.

    • PaulB says:

      06:03pm | 25/08/10

      J.R. Ewwwwww more like

    • Freeman says:

      07:44pm | 25/08/10

      he reminds me of the Texan billionaire from the simpsons with the ten gallon hat that’s always shooting his pistols in the air

    • Brewster says:

      07:38am | 25/08/10

      What a neat idea David, the election result isn’t the one you had hoped for so we’ll just wipe that result and keep having elections till the correct result comes out. That my friend is not democracy that’s a lucky dip with an open ended expense account. Consider this, what if you have the election again and you get the same result? That’s right, this is the situation we’ve been handed, it’s up to the people we placed our confidence in to deal with it now. Let’s start being grown up about all this rather than behaving like and making suggestions like petulant children.

    • re-election question says:

      09:26am | 25/08/10

      This might be incidental, but workmates here saying they would vote differently - they said they voted Green or independent because it “sounded fashionable” but wouldn’t do it again since this outcome.  I asked why not. Various replies, one that Green and independent votes caused a possible result they don’t like now it’s in play, they noticed in some successful candidates before unseen power grandeur, and even that they had “gone off” them since Saturday. A few said their observations of the three amigos is that they sound like “cowboys”.  I don’t have any comment about their thinking, they are entitled to think how they want.
      Overseas opinions (again they are entitled to think and say what they want) are writing Australia up as a laughing stock.
      I respect Brewster’s opinion and perfectly understand what he is explaining, but just for those around here we didn’t place our confidence in a hung parliament, but we got it and the trend just now is they would rather take their chances on a re-think.

    • Brewster says:

      11:25am | 25/08/10

      Everyone gets a vote in the first place and then we get what we vote for, to then say I don’t like the result and argue for another poll is not what the constituion says. Either David Penberthy is writing a beat up to get reaction or the majority o voters in this country are amazingly uneducated about what system is in place. A hung parliament was always in the mix, furthermore places like Canada, Britain and even the US all manage awfully well with hung parliaments or minority governments. All this tripe about us being a laughing stock in the view of other nations is absolute crap. When we will become a laughing stock is if we actually throw out electoral and constitutional process and have another election cause “some” don’t like this result!

    • Matt says:

      11:38am | 25/08/10

      In reply to re-election question
      While Katter is a nutcase and a cowboy, Tony windsor is certainly not. he is a compentent, professional person and has his head well and truly screwed on properly. I don’t know much about Oakshott but from what I’ve heard he seems ok.

      Its a shame Peter Andren isn’t still around- he would of been fantastic in the balance of power role.

    • Michael says:

      03:26pm | 25/08/10

      Brewster is correct, though that being said, the odds are likely that with the Greens holding sway in the Senate, we will be back to the polls wthin a year anyway, because they will block anything they don’t like and will trigger a double dissolution election. Now, that will be interesting to see, then really watch the scramble as the power balances will swing wildly.

    • Tarzan says:

      07:41am | 25/08/10

      I like him, he is pushing his cause just like any other BS politician, it’s just his delivery is what the media feel uncomfortable about. For too long we have had the other side and it’s been totally unbalanced. He is biased and everything will level out in the end, but he will surely create some some focus away from the old gay marriage, climate change, multicultural rights etc ect that we have had pushed down our throats for the last 10 years. Go Bob at least you are honest, entertaining and different.

    • Joan says:

      09:28am | 25/08/10

      Go Katter…. about time the country got a deal.  I too am sick of `the old gay marriage, climate change, multicultural rights etc etc that we have had pushed down our throats` .... this is the main worry of folks in seat of Melbourne who voted in Greens guy- ..I really laughed , the people choose to live packed to the rafters density, like a nest of rats crawling daily over each other and   think they are centre of universe of thought voted for - this Green guy -with ideas from same stagnant pond served to the people year after year, the guy beamingly claimed a victory - yes for him ... not Australia. The Green guy with nothing new offer that media takes more seriously than Katter. It is Katter who will shake us out of our rut in much the way Hanson did.  Rough, tough Katter , stands up for his electorate….  the real food producing land, real hard working farmers, real job creation,  more people in country,.... real action that can move people from cities to the country/bush/outback.  It`s time to start, talking, listening to alternative ideas, instead of unproductively chasing own tails round, round in circle in rats nest while sipping latte or chardonnay,  Instead of mulling and stewing, its is time to start doing, time to listen to the Katters of the world. Alternatives come from new sources. Time for real action for a better Australia- through hard, smart, active work. It gets China places. it can get Australia places

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      01:00pm | 25/08/10

      Joan

      nice post smile

    • Evan Findlay says:

      06:06pm | 25/08/10

      Joan,
      His biggest policy is the re-introduction of tariffs. He would be taking the country backwards. And we spend enough tax payer dollars on propping up the bush. If they are viable, then fine but if there not, stop wasting money on them!

    • auserix says:

      09:14pm | 25/08/10

      evan findlay says that the rural community and our farmers are being propped up with tax payers money. Well as I see it, if they were allowed to play on a level playing field instead of having to compete with cheap inferior imports,  subsidised by their own countries, they would be much more competitive. I don’t agree with everything Bob says but he has a very strong point on this issue.

    • PollieAnna says:

      05:35am | 26/08/10

      Whatever you think of Bob, he is forthright about what he stands for or stands against, albeit expressed in his unique style.  A pity other politicians who are so afraid to stand up for their convictions don’t take a leaf about being forth right.  This is why Labor has got into so much trouble.  I’m so over spin that it’s a welcome change to hear someone in parliament say what they do think, for once.

    • Louis McLennan says:

      07:45am | 25/08/10

      Even though my side didn’t win I’m a little jovial.

      “The former Howard Government minister has made it clear that it’s his explicit intention to massively redirect the efforts and energy of Canberra towards rural Queensland and, presumably, the rest of the bush.”

      It’s about time too!

      Farmers have no rights. They are the dying species in Australia! No point giving them all this cash when they can’t do anything with it. Bob Katter’s stance is more than justified. Just head west and you might start to understand. Farmers suffer higher prices for diesel, fertiliser and chemicals. The wheat price if anything goes down. They have to make up for that through efficiency. So how does the state government in Queensland help? Takes the locomotives off the rails so farmers have to pay trucks to go to Brisbane ruining nationally funded roads and putting more trucks in the city. Stops any further land development.

      I don’t 100% agree with Katter. I feel farmers can do it with no subsidies. However, they cannot do it when the governments of Australia are shutting them down. Banning any recreational activities! Failing to fix the roads. Giving the trains to coal mines. Forgetting about the hospitals. He is right that the rest of the worlds farmers is pretty much subsidised. So our farmers are really trying to compete. Our government needs to get out of the way when it comes to productivity and start assisting when it comes to services.

      At the end of the day this nation needs to remain sovereign. We cannot do that if we can’t manufacture or feed our selves. We put our sovereignty last when we sign U.N agreements and similar.

      The city people will never understand. They don’t want a NBN anywhere near as much as they want their life back!

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:27am | 25/08/10

      I’ve always wondered why ‘farmers’ are supposedly so Conservative when its the business slaved Conservative parties are the ones giving more and more power and rights to the big multinational corporations that are the ones buying up all the farms that have been in families hands for generations, buying up all the water rights and hoarding the water while towns go dry, buying meat, fruit, veg, milk from the farmers at abysmally cheap prices and then jack them up 300% to sell to the public and then turning around and not providing services because there is no money in it for private business.

      Kinda seems silly.

    • Gregg says:

      11:45am | 25/08/10

      Louis and Joan above too, you are really starting to hit a few nails on the head and feel free with the Real Dave too for he conveniently loves to twist a few things his and Labor’s way.

      What needs to be realised by even Bob Katter however and you have brought it into play Louis is that a large portion of what happens out in the bush, on the land is controlled by state and local governments who are either respectively selling of assetts or blithely always jacking up fees and just like their federal cousins in some respects and perhaps more so with Labor seemingly oblivious to living within the means we have.

      Federal governments reap the harvest and divvy the grain and they may rise and fall on what or how the decide to reap but it’ll still be those charged with the distribution of the grains and their economic mismanagement that will ahve the greatest effect on life styles including where and how we produce food.

      Why do you think governments are proposing to buy up water rights Dave and both governments at that?
      Merely to appease the greens and other near city dwellers.
      Who is going to produce the food Dave and yes, for you to go and buy something in your city supermarket, there’s an awful lot of transport, processing, storages and people involved in getting it onto the shelves and into open refrigerators, a heap of power to be consumed.
      You do it seems have lack of any grasp for how many things happen.

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:43pm | 25/08/10

      @Greg, the people that will produce the food and bring it to my supermarket will be the same people who’ve done it for decades now - big business. In-case you missed it, these big giants have been buying up hundreds of thousands of hectares from the old families. They’re the ones buying up water rights and hoarding it leaving towns downstream dry. They are also the ones that dictate to the families who farm what they will pay ‘at the gate’ for their produce.

      State Governments aren’t running these corporate giants or forcing them to buy up and consolidate the farms. State governments are making them demand extortionate rates ‘at the gate’ for produce.

      So remind me - which is the ‘pro business’ mob again? That would be the Libs wouldn’t it? Whilst they were gleefully counting he money coming in from the mining boom and the excessive taxes we pay they allowed a decade of this to happen.

      But somehow you expect, no demand, us to accept that the Libs are good for the bush? There’s a reason why Katter and Co left the Conservative coalition, and it wasn’t because they were awesome ‘for the bush’.

    • Gregg says:

      02:21pm | 25/08/10

      No Davo, it will not be the same fresh food people that produce food for you and get it to the supermarkets as though we’re all ageing you better check on average of farmers and whereas it used to be Dad, Manel and Dave, lots of Daves left for artificail bright lights long ago and lots of Dads and Mabels have sizable debts with things light droughts that also affect productivity and hence income, so Dave has left in many instances because there hasn’t been enough to go around.

      I’d not blame farmers selling out, water rights included in those situations for they too want to have a comfortable retirement.

      You seem to want to ignore that other than recent federal government involvement in buying up water rights and more for environmental reasons, it is still state and local governments responsible for most infrastructure.
      The government water buy back principle is debatable for if wetland waters are bought back not to be used, perhaps it will be just environmentally so fine for it being left to soak and evaporate away rather than find its way to downstream rivers and richer farmland, richer by way of agricultural production value.
      Perhaps those more sustained wetlands just become more prlific locust and other agricultural pest breeding areas.

      If it’s big business buying out want to retire farmers and installing their own paid employees as farm operators/managers, then so what if the farmers wish to do that and the food chain is maintained.
      Sure, they’ll not want to pay other producers anymore than they can produce for themselves and like all enterprises it’ll ultimately come down to supply and demand, the likes of independents needing to realise that just as governments need to be cognisant on over reliance on food imports and how that can affect the productivity and life of farms.
      It does not matter what major party government basis we have, both need to look a bit further ahead with planning for this nation and outline a plan to the people on essentials.

      The NBN this is it that we do not quite know how useful it’ll be, what you’ll actually get nor what it’ll ultimately cost you but it’ll be real beaut for the kids to play interactive games on is far from a plan btw.

    • Silent Elephant says:

      07:34am | 26/08/10

      The Real Dave, it’s not the Liberals that the Independents left, it was the Nationals. Yes, they’re all part of the coalition, but they’re different parties if only slightly.

      Labor has never made a move to have a party in the bush, that represents the needs of our regional centres (at least not in recent enough times) because they’re not interested in us unless it’s to do with the mines. Libs might be white collar, Labor might be blue collar, but what about the people with the flanno collar? That’s where the Nationals fit in, even if it was as a lesser of two evils…..That is, until Independents like Tony Windsor arrived.

      His ONLY interest is to make things better, if he doesn’t, he won’t get back in. He’s maintained EVERY election that he will not assume that he will be re-elected, it’s only if the people in his area think he’s good enough.

      If only our major parties would learn that lesson.

    • E says:

      07:46am | 25/08/10

      Ok first, the 3 independents are not an ‘accident of democracy’ they are an expression of democracy.
      And yes we do need a new politics. What we need is for sitting members to be able to vote on conscience on all matters. No more towing the party line. The only reason the three independents have any power right now is because each party votes as a block, change that abuse of power by the faceless men of both parties, remove the faceless men altogether and just have our representatives debating the issue on the floor of the house and voting according to their best estimation of their electorates and the national best interest. Geeze how hard is it?

    • Steven says:

      04:15pm | 25/08/10

      Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    • DJ says:

      04:56am | 26/08/10

      Yeh right .... then we would have 300 MP’s all arguing the toss with their personal agendas. You are a clown “E”

    • Just Sayin' says:

      06:35pm | 26/08/10

      DJ, I’m not sure why moving away from voting on party lines would dramatically increase the number of MPs.  Maybe you could explain?

    • Reg says:

      10:04pm | 26/08/10

      That’s not what DJ is saying at all. He is saying that if everyone was independent without the party filter, NOTHING would get done. They’d be too busy negotiating factions and the electors would have no idea what the candidates stood for.  Party politics is one of the weaknesses and strengths of the Democratic system.

    • Just Sayin' says:

      02:07pm | 27/08/10

      Reg, that is exactly what DJ is saying.  Somehow, he thinks that voting along party lines would increase the number of MPs from 226 (150 reps and 76 senators) to 300.  I don’t understand how that works.

    • Tamz says:

      07:46am | 25/08/10

      Don’t be so quick to dismiss the troubles faced by rural Australians. There is a very real sense of resentment there. As BK says, he’s got the actual figures, and they’re true - rural and regional Australians bear disproportionate burden for the costs of inaction on climate change, for changes to economic and trading policies, for deregulation of infrastructure.

      It’s disingenuous to compare it to a small business failure in the city . It’s not like they can just apply for another job - there are no other jobs out there. And they’re facing these struggles in areas which are isolated and beyond the reach of the facilities and services which might have been able to help them, and sometimes a long way from family and friends who could support them.

      Think what you like about BK and his attitude, but don’t dismiss the good work he’s doing for rural Australians, in his electorate and elsewhere. And don’t sideline the important of rural issues just because you want to sideline Katter.

    • Kordez says:

      10:32am | 25/08/10

      Well put Tamz.

    • Lisa says:

      11:30am | 25/08/10

      It’s struck me that city workers (journalists) who are overwhelmingly supportive of protection-free farming tend also to be very supportive of ‘protection’ for their own labour.
      Why are farmers - or indeed, any other form of small business - supposedly able to cope with global competition when Australian labour costs are themselvesintensely protected by government legislation?
      It seems crazy.. and more than a little hypocritical on behalf of the city dwellers.

    • Andy says:

      12:07pm | 25/08/10

      Well said Tamz. The city journos who have never gotten their hands dirty a day in their entire lives seem to have no understanding that the current parliament provides for absolutely no representation for the regional economy that supports the backbone of the Australian economy through the likes of wheat and food exports.

      The Nationals provide no such representation. They happily agreed to the likes of the privatisation of Telstra (resulting in the worst regional telecommunications our country has ever seen), they readily agreed to free trade agreements that have brutally crippled the regional economy.

      Finally some of those MPs have stood up and said enough is enough, the Nationals have brown-nosed the Liberals for too long, do not accurately represent the regions and for far too long have fooled many into thinking that they do.

    • Rob says:

      03:19pm | 25/08/10

      Exactly, I wouldn’t go as far as Katter does, but there is certainly a gap of understanding of country issues in some city people.  I go up to melbourne a lot for university, and it was pretty suprising how many city people just don’t at all grasp the significance of a long-term drought.  For a large portion of them, it seemed a long-term drought meant the annoyance of not being able to wash your car.

    • T.Chong says:

      07:49am | 25/08/10

      Even with the combined propaganda resources of Fairfax, Murdoch and The ABC -Australian Broadcasting Conservative, the coalition were still not able to win , what then,will it take?

    • David C says:

      08:10am | 25/08/10

      what makes you think they havent won?

    • Matt says:

      08:32am | 25/08/10

      If you think that the Fairfax/ABC collective weren’t pushing the ALP/Greens barrow as hard as they possibly could, then you are deeply deluded.

    • Mayday says:

      08:33am | 25/08/10

      Which ABC do you watch?

      Which ABC questioned the Opposition Leaders character but didn’t question our PM’s character?

      Which ABC via Lateline, Q and A, the 7.30 Report nightly show their bias like a lovesick Bridget Jones?

      The Media have been criticised by most commentators for their lousy job of missing the real issue and focusing on personality and petty gender issues.
      Tony Abbott copped a lot in that regard whereas Queen Julia got a pretty easy run with the media…..look at the airbrushing that went on at the Woman’s Weekly.

      If you’re talking combined propaganda the Left have it hands down.
      1. The Unions.
      2. The Greens.
      3. Academics
      4. Celebrities

      Time to take that eye patch off and have a look at the real world.

    • PaulB says:

      09:01am | 25/08/10

      The ABC?  You’re kidding right?  Were you watching America’s ABC and got a little confused or something?

    • dovif says:

      09:09am | 25/08/10

      T Chong

      Yeah it was the media, who stuffed up the ETS, it was the media who proposed the mining tax, it was the media who knifed Kevin Rudd, it was the media who cost Australian $2 to $6 billion extra on the BER, it was the media who wanted a citizen assembly and it was the media who proposed for the 8th time the NW rail line.  The Media made up all those leaks from the ALP

      Here is a hint. When Labor stop stuffing up, the reporting on Labor will be more favourable

    • ZSRenn says:

      09:20am | 25/08/10

      I am sorry T. Chong are we reading the same Newspapers. I thought they did well despite the combined efforts of the Fairfax Murdoch and ABC

    • Steve Turner says:

      09:44am | 25/08/10

      You must live in a paralel reversed universe T Chong.
      Or maybe your last name is actually Bitar.

    • Dash says:

      10:01am | 25/08/10

      Ha ha T.Chong, looking for excuses are we? Looks like 72 ALP and 73 LNP with three of the independents from conservative seats. Labor look like they may need 4 of the 5 seats to side with them to form government and for the independents to thumb their noses at the fact that the LNP may hold more seats and have the higher primary vote in their electorates. And given Labor’s infighting, rorting, waste and mess, I don’t think they deserve the support. Sorry but didn’t Fairfax actively support the ALP? I seem to remember the Sydney broadsheet screaming “give Jooliya a second chance”.

    • Shambolic says:

      10:33am | 25/08/10

      Chong There is no way you can make this argument as I seem to recall Fairfax newspapers endorsed Gillard at the end of the campaign. ABC are pretty fair, in large part, but Kerry O’Brien was guilty of trying to make news rather than report it with his set up of Tony Abbott in one memorable interview. This interview was seized upon by Gillard calling Tony a phoney. Pot, kettle, black to that. News are more conservative leaning to say the least but I think it balances out with Labor getting unions to pay for separate ads but the jumped up mob called GetUp.

    • Anthony says:

      10:34am | 25/08/10

      @Dash:
      Higher Primary vote is not what it’s about. It’s the preferential vote that counts and that shows that a majority DIDN’T want the Conservatives.

      You can see from the Victorian Senate results - when you look at the way preferences were distributed Family FIrst were eliminated from the count before the Sex Party. More people may have wanted them as first choice - but ultimately they were more disliked than the Sex party.

      Wiht any luck once the major parties have done their homework we’ll see no more pandering to the religious right.

      As for the media - why did no media ask the simple question of Abbott and his team of second-rate book keepers pretending to be economists?

      With all your carry on about debt, name ONE OECD country that has a better debt to GDP ratio than Australia? 

      Every Liberal supporter I’ve asked (including my local candidate) splutters and chokes on that one.

      They know that their statements on the economy were straight out lies but the media never brought them to task on this. 

      As for the blog article on the Drum - it’s interesting to see what the author has included as “ABC”. The count included opinion pieces clearly makrked as the contributors own opinion. and referenced statements within articles - not the number of articles which is more important. A typical right wing piece of spin.

    • Mayday says:

      10:44am | 25/08/10

      Thanks Doug B.

      Read the article on the link to find my suspicions were right.
      The ABC is BIAS to the left, has been for as long as I can remember.
      Fortunately for them ratings don’t affect their budget so we can’t just
      turn off to show our displeasure.
      Hopefully our new Coalition/Independents Government will give the other half of the population an equal voice and put some objectivity into ‘Auntie’ - I want some representation for my 8 cents a day and its been a long time coming.

    • Duff says:

      10:46am | 25/08/10

      No use arguing whether the other side has all the bias in it’s favour.  It just seems that way.  It’s like blaming a match on the referee’s calls.  Sometimes it goes your way, sometimes it does not, but you always think the ref is out to get you.  The bias actually exists in the viewers, not the broadcasters.

    • Dash says:

      11:16am | 25/08/10

      Anthony, sorry perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. The point I am trying to make is that the three independents and in particular, Windsor and Okeshott, do need to consider the primary in their electorates. What I am saying is that with the ALP support at only 8% and 13% in those two electorates, these independents may lose their seats at the next election if they side with the ALP. They need to consider what their electorate wants and the primary is an excellent indicator for them.

      And yes Anthony, the Howard government paid off Labor’s debt and left money in the bank (over $20b). They did a very good job to leave us in a better financial position than any other OECD country. They also presided over an economy that had higher GDP growth than any of the other western nations. And, they implemented financial services reform legislation which provided stronger banks and insurance companies than throughout the OECD. The LNP did a very good job and that’s why many people want them back!

      If you want to talk about lies here are a few: “I fully support the PM”, “I have more chance of playing full forward for the dogs”, “We wont touch the private health tax rebate”, “I’m a fiscal conservative”, “We’ll build 200+ childcare facilities”, “We’ll abolish compulsory uni union fees”, ‘We’ll deliver more affordable housing”, We’ll deliver “cheaper better childcare”, the profits tax is “not negotiable”, “biggest moral challenge of our time” (apparently not), “the impact of the profit tax backdown is only $1.5b to the budget” (Bullsh!t), “no child shall live without a lap top”, “Grocery choice”, Fuel watch” etc etc. That should give you plenty to choke and splutter about!

    • Jason CR says:

      11:18am | 25/08/10

      @ Anthony
      “Higher Primary vote is not what it’s about. It’s the preferential vote that counts and that shows that a majority DIDN’T want the Conservatives”.

      Just wondering then your thoughts on the South Oz state election where Labor received only 48% of the 2PP vote compared with the coalition 52%.
      Wouldn’t that suggest the majority didn’t want Labor?
      As for this election now, the Liberal candidate in Brisbane received 45% of the primary vote (10,000 extra votes) compared to the Labor, yet is fighting for her survival…
      Yeah I can see your point, it’s a great system.  Yet another Labor voter in denial.  Even Swan is behind on the primary vote, and needs the greens to get him home.

    • Mouse says:

      11:25am | 25/08/10

      @Anthony -  Just a thought….a donkey vote is just putting 1, 2, 3 etc in the boxes as they run, isn’t it? If that’s the case, wouldn’t have Labor got the #2 because they were the second box on the green paper? So their 2pp, in the senate at least, was a donkey vote!  What a laugh!! So, in effect,  the electorate gave Labor the ass!!

    • Macon Paine says:

      11:51am | 25/08/10

      @ Anthony.

      Just a few points:

      “Higher Primary vote is not what it’s about. It’s the preferential vote that counts and that shows that a majority DIDN’T want the Conservatives.”
      Not sure about that. Howard won in 98 with only 49.02% of the two party prefered vote and he lost the the popular vote as well. The seat count is what really matters and seeing as both have 73 then whoever can entice the independents to support them deserves to form government.

      “Wiht any luck once the major parties have done their homework we’ll see no more pandering to the religious right.”
      Amen to that!

      “As for the media - why did no media ask the simple question of Abbott and his team of second-rate book keepers pretending to be economists?”
      Thats a bit harsh. Abbott has a Bachelor of Economics as opposed to Julia’s (admirable) Laws and Arts degrees.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      02:40pm | 25/08/10

      Mayday!
      Yes the left side of politics sure has all the phony celebs & other rubbish. They gave us nothing. No policies,no government,no loyalty,no honesty.
      They gave us 4 dead people & burnt down countless houses
      The stole our money in Gillards “Julia Gillard Memorial Halls” programme. Won’t be long & this worst of any PM this country has been cursed with & she will be but a faded memory of a failure

    • John C says:

      07:52am | 25/08/10

      I could not agree more. The myth that Australia turned its back on major parties is wrong. 4 out of 5 people voted Labor or Coalition, less than 1 in 9 voted for the Greens, and the independents represent no more than 1 per cent of the electorate.

      To have this country run by a small gaggle of politicians is dangerous. Who are they - one is as mad as a hatter, another is living in Lala land, a third is inflated with his his own importance, another gets elected in his party’s name, then wants to sit as an independent. Then we have a Grunge Green whose only policy seems to be gay marriage, a renegade Green, and nine Greens in the Senate who don’t know whether they are pink green, red green or something else.

      God help us. The Bogan Queen and the Mad Monk may not be great shakes but either governing in their own right would be better than government by whim.

    • Hermano says:

      08:27am | 25/08/10

      Welcome to Australian democracy.  If you don’t like it, leave.  Or work for change.

      I guess it’s just easier to sit there and complain.  Me, I’m enjoying every minute of these shenanigans.

    • Christian Real says:

      11:16am | 25/08/10

      Hermano
      I wish these imbecile white fellas that voted for these liberal riff raff would leave our ancestor’s country.
      A vote for the Liberal party would have been like voting for Aldolf Hitler,seeing that the ‘workChoices’ and ‘Anti-terrorism’ laws are akin to some of the laws that Hitler brought in under his ‘Enabling Act’ of the 23rd March, 1935

    • john Williams says:

      07:53am | 25/08/10

      Another election…agreed.
      It seems clear however that you have never lived anywhere but the cities.
      There is a lot of justifiable anger in the bush, which is why we have / had National and Country Parties.
      The needs of country people must be addressed. People are being forced off the land at an alarming rate. Anyone that does not recognise that there is a crisis in the dairy and food industries is a fool.
      But fools abound these days.
      It is high time you journalists started focusing on some real issues rather than ear lobes and budgie smugglers.
      However your smug jibes re boiling the billy and jumbucks in the tucker bag indicates there is little hope you will be one of them.

    • Super D says:

      07:53am | 25/08/10

      I doubt there will be another election in the next month or two on the basis that Abbott will win convincingly.  The ALP will do whatever it can to avoid locking in its first term defeat.

      There has been a lot of talk as to whether the national outright vote leader or 2pp vote should determine the winner.  In my opinion the 2pp is the relevant vote, though not the nationwide vote.  The independents should align based on the 2pp vote for their electorates as reflected by senate voting.

      There has also been a lot of talk that Australia as a nation has elected not to give either party government.  This talk is absolute nonsense.  There is not a national decision, there are 150 individual decisions.  As for ushering in a new form of consensus democracy this is even more nonsensical.  The next election will likely see a party in majority so at best this brave new era has a shelf life of no more than 3 years and possibly a lot less.

    • Dave says:

      09:42pm | 25/08/10

      Your missing the point. If you knew anything about Constitutional Democracy, you’d know that convention is to ask the Sitting Prime minister first to form Government in a hung parliament scenario. Two party preferred is irrelevant.  What Australians have done however, is cannot DECIDE which party is better than the other. So, if Australians cannot decide, who are you/what right do you have to suggest that those electorates that COULD clearly decide who they wanted, should not count, & should not have the right to choose whoom they would like to vote with on most issues?  Presumably, under the same logic, because they had voted independent, on a majority Government, their voice should not be heard anyrate (Probably why BK is so angry).

      And guess what, what if people that give donkey votes, or swing, actually never considered independent, but did after seeing this outcome. What if MORE independents are returned instead of less.

      Will people like you need to be brought to heel before the rule of constitutional democracy. What if the Minority government actually passes more sensical reform in smaller areas than acheived in previous terms. What if the independents achieve more for the bush than the Nationals ever did and there is a bigger swing?

      Your a danger to the constitutional system. You seek to strangle the attempt before it has taken shape, and you seek to sow devious and evil actions of promoting instability talk to gain actions that are pervous to the meaning of democracy.

    • E says:

      07:58am | 25/08/10

      This article makes some ok points, but its conclusions are pretty flawed. The people are beholden to the constitution of Australia, no matter what they imagine the system ‘should’ be. In this case no major party won Government, therefore the choice of who forms government falls to the minor parties and independents.
      Neither major party is ‘forced’ to give them anything, its their own weakness and lust for power which is causing the risk you are worried about. Both parties could just offer nothing and tell the independents to make up their minds.
      So again its the major parties which are weilding inordinate power over the 21 million citizens of Australia, not three guys.
      Also this article is really one sided by ignoring the ridiculous beuracratic requirements put on people in the bush. The payroll, GST and OH&S requirements, designed by faceless mindless dead headed beuracrats in Canberra to protect workers from faceless mindless dead headed middle managers in corporates is a noose around all small business, farms included. Then add the stupid and ill conceived environmental restrictions and it gets to the point where a farmer cant remove a stump from his field without an environmental assessment, a health and safety officer and permission from native title holders. And while you may smugly shrug for the plight of the poor naieve backward farmer over your latte, please consider where the milk for that latte came from.

    • DougB says:

      08:21am | 25/08/10

      Maybe I’m not smart enough to fully understand politics, but I do know what I think. I think that I would rather have a politician who represented my electorate and it’s needs, than some party person who is only interested in feathering his nest and climbing the party infrastructure.
      Bob Katter has been in parliament for as long as he has, not because his electorate likes the entertainment, but because he speaks as a voice for the majority of them.
      Now imagine your representative doing that as vocally for your immediate communities needs and issues.
      Would you rather have a whimpering dog or a fierce mongrel guarding your interests?
      Go up to Katters electorate and stop in at some other rural communites on the way and see what luxuries they are buying with their “rural assistance” heck, I know some who have bought petrol to so they can go to town.

    • Hermano says:

      08:21am | 25/08/10

      Welcome to Australian democracy.
      Pembo, your piece really does sound a little bit whiny.  The Australian people have had their say and a bunch of them have said that they don’t like the major parties.  Nothing Labor or the Libs have said or done during the campaign (and before) has swayed me to vote for them, so why would a new election change anything?
      As someone else said in the comments: we’ve voted, now let our elected reps sort it out, whether they be sane and right-thinking or a bit loony and (heaven forbid) worried about the people in their electorate.

      And look on the bright side: you have something interesting to write about for the next little while.

    • Reg says:

      08:16am | 27/08/10

      You’re making it up again Hermano. The major part of the population likes Labor, a smaller part likes Liberal and another prefers the National Party. That is a clear indication that most like the major parties.

      Then there are some who want power at any price and others who would like to avoid another election by accepting the people’s assessment and making the government work.  I’d like to know what the time limit is, after which a failure to form a government of coalition, defaults to a new election.

    • Anthony of WA says:

      08:25am | 25/08/10

      Yes another election with out prefrences would be a good thing

    • David says:

      04:16pm | 25/08/10

      All that would happen Anthony is that the Greens and Labor would form a coalition and your beloved LNP still wouldn’t be in power.

    • Denny Crane says:

      08:30am | 25/08/10

      In thinking about the options, yes the easy way would be to have another election and hopefully get a clear result to either major party, but that wouldnt be right, and would set a precident for any further elections federal, state or local if hung straight back to polls.

      What needs to be done is one party to form government, the independents of course are going to want to push thier own barrow and get what they can, but they will need to be very careful in doing this, if they decide to go overboard, and it will be seen very quickly, it will most probably see the demise of them at the next election, and could also effect further independents hopes of getting seast in the house of reps.

      Should the independents work well with the formed governmeent and get crucial changes past, we could see the start of a change to Australia in politics where we see more indpendents in the house of reps.

      For the greens in the senate having the balance of power could well become the sword they fall upon, if they decide to block anything they dont believe, they will see a political backlash at the next election, which i am seeing to be a double dissoultion, and they will become the new Democrat party with nothing to have but being part of senate history

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      08:36am | 25/08/10

      You certainly wouldn’t get rid of Katter in the next election. For a start, half his constituents are as eccentric (and angry) as he is. Secondly, has anyone thought about the amount of funding he is due? Must be well over a million bucks. If he uses that for electioneering,  he’ll have more resources than the minor parties.

    • Joe Blow says:

      08:40am | 25/08/10

      We can’t have another election just yet.  How can Gillard be expected to make a decision on who will be her Finance Minister, Defence Minister, Foreign Minister etc in such a short space of time.  Or perhaps that will be Bill Shorten’s decision??

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      10:01am | 25/08/10

      Think they are trying to decide whether the CFMEU or the CPSU gets to select them this time round. Unless there is a demarcation dispute - apparently the post of Foreign Minister in Labor Governments has been a bone of contention since the Commercial Travelers Guild ceased ACT affiliation in 1978.

    • Phil Osopher says:

      08:51am | 25/08/10

      No, we just need to ban bullies in parliament from any group.  Send them to the sin bin and we might never hear from the Mad Monk again.

    • Polly Waffle says:

      08:51am | 25/08/10

      Better a Mad Hatter than a Mad Monk

    • David says:

      10:08am | 25/08/10

      Ha, You might get both Polly! Could be worse, we could have a self confessed Socialist Feminist Athiest Radical Homewrecker as PM

    • Richard B says:

      08:55am | 25/08/10

      Oakeshott and Windsor shouldn’t be given too much credit. I’ve seen a lot of giddy thought bubbles but few sensisble suggestions from any of the Independents.

    • Jason CR says:

      10:41am | 25/08/10

      Oakeshott is a worry.  If Abbott gets into power, he thinks we should have Rudd in Foreign Affairs!! Um hello.. Rudd couldn’t keep his mouth shut in relation to his own party’s cabinet meetings, imagine him sitting in on the coalitions…
      Memo to Rob…you chose to run as an independent and that’s fine, but don’t then tell the major political partys how they should run their business.
      It appears to be sour grapes from a man who the Nationals didn’t want a bar of.  Not a team player Rob???  As whacky as Katter? You tell me.
      15 minutes of fame and boy hasn’t it gone to their heads!

    • crizza says:

      08:57am | 25/08/10

      there’ll never be stability as long as abbott is in opposition. bring back turnbull. abbott is an attack dog, pure and simple.

    • Dash says:

      10:27am | 25/08/10

      Crizza, it looks more likely that Tony wont be in opposition!

    • Irene says:

      09:02am | 25/08/10

      Let us have some common sense.  The electorate did not vote in Independents as a whole.  So they should not come into the picture.  Labor and Julia have failed the country.  Tony and his Party have proved themselves over the years to do us all good.  They have far more votes than the rest.  Common sense says, “Let that number of votes be the deciding factor”.  Will intelligence prevail?  Oh, no.  For one thing, the dictator/despot attitude of the acting P.M. and Party would never ‘allow’ this.  Too bad about the majority of Aussies who decided for the Coalition.  Let the Football match play on.  Tony and Julia are at the center of the Scrum, battling it out.  The Referee panders to the latter and coming up field taking the ball and the fame, are the Independents who somehow or other got into the match as the deciding factor for now.  Hooray, Hooray, Tony has the ball.  The Coalition scores, time is up and they win!

    • Irene says:

      09:02am | 25/08/10

      Let us have some common sense.  The electorate did not vote in Independents as a whole.  So they should not come into the picture.  Labor and Julia have failed the country.  Tony and his Party have proved themselves over the years to do us all good.  They have far more votes than the rest.  Common sense says, “Let that number of votes be the deciding factor”.  Will intelligence prevail?  Oh, no.  For one thing, the dictator/despot attitude of the acting P.M. and Party would never ‘allow’ this.  Too bad about the majority of Aussies who decided for the Coalition.  Let the Football match play on.  Tony and Julia are at the center of the Scrum, battling it out.  The Referee panders to the latter and coming up field taking the ball and the fame, are the Independents who somehow or other got into the match as the deciding factor for now.  Hooray, Hooray, Tony has the ball.  The Coalition scores, time is up and they win!

    • Duff says:

      01:12pm | 25/08/10

      Irene, if people knew in advance that the election was going to be decided on the popular vote, without preferences counting for anything, they’d have changed their voting habits.  You would have seen more of the primary vote going to Labor and less to the Greens.

    • Pat says:

      09:03am | 25/08/10

      Sadly, I think this is the last bastion of hope for the Australian agricultural and primary production sector. With either Labor or Liberal in power in their own right Woolworths and Coles will wipe it out over the next 4 years.
      Both have UK specialists that advised Tesco and Sainsbury and we are seeing exactly the same strategies replicated here. The 2, 3 and 4 items in a special not single price, they adopted a policy of not buying pork farmed in the UK in intensive stalls yet imported pork raised in same conditions from subsidised EU markets. The UK turned from a net exporter of pork to a net importer of pork and the local industry was decimated.
      Both import produce from anywhere they can to substitute for local produce to squeeze margins, oranges, bananas, dried fruit, tomatoes, peas and the 1ist goes on.  The squeeze on milk producers is another.
      Sorry Penbo, I am happy to risk it if Katter removes the market power of Wooles and Coles. Even the US reduced Microsofts power

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      05:40pm | 25/08/10

      Here, Here. I agree wholeheartedly.

    • Jeremy says:

      09:06am | 25/08/10

      Sure, have another election - are you changing your vote, Penbo? I’m quite happy with mine.

    • Digby Hughes says:

      09:07am | 25/08/10

      what a crock Penbo - for the next 3 years at least we may get a return to Parliamentary democracy as opposed to rule by executive - let matters be decided on the floor of the Parliament as oposed to the Prime Minister imposing his will on the Cabinet and then getting his Party to also fall into line - question time and committees might actually make the Executive arm of Government accountable!

    • R says:

      09:08am | 25/08/10

      “Go to an election! Go to an election!”

      Have you thought about what would happen if the Australian people voted for more independents and more greens, let the system work, stop harping on about this and let the pollies do what they do best, talk.

    • Al says:

      09:12am | 25/08/10

      I believe the curse goes, may we live in interesting times.
      My initial thought is that we let this play out before running back to the ballot box. If it all goes to hell in a handbasket an election would follow shortly anyway.
      That said, the independents will want stability because it allows them to retain their bargaining power. For that reason they won’t rock the boat too much.
      However, the indepedents will be able to be honest and upfront about any policy they don’t like because they don’t have a party line to follow. That should make this one of the most transparent, honest and amusing periods for legislative debate in a long time.
      The Greens have a similar position. The last thing they want is another election, as it would be very likely that they would lose the protest vote and the balance of power in the senate. They want a full term to show they are genuine alternative and not a ratbag collection of policies on the run.
      Both would lose their power if the result in the House of Reps between the ALP and Coalition was more definite - a likely outcome if the government is blocked at every turn, nothing is achieved and a new election is called. 
      Beyond this, there is something to be said for the independents bringing a focus to rural Australia regardless of the manner in which it may be achieved. And anyway, I think Tony Windsor may be the voice of reason in the midst of the three stooges that could help make this workable.
      If Australia’s new government can invest more in regional areas - even putting in a high speed train to go with that high speed broadband - it may have the benefit of stopping the one-way migration to the city.
      A high speed train that can travel over 300kms from the city centre in an hour could be just what is needed to make long distant commutes plausible. That alone could open up new regional centres that would take the pressure off large cities and create viable jobs and infrastructure in regional areas. It’s an expensive option but the benefits could make it something to be considered.
      Beyond that piece of whimsy, investment in rural Australia could help make rural industries sustainable. We would see the benefit of that on our food prices.
      In addition, it is very likely that much of our future renewable energy sources would be situated in regional Australia. We will need investment out there for that anyway, which is sure to have a knock on effect for our country cousins.
      We need to bring regional Australia into this country’s equation long-term. If this little bit of power achieves such an investment, it will have benefits for us all.
      The intriguing thought here is that the Coaltion may have more seats in the House of Reps (by one) but with the balance of power going to the Greens in the senate, it could be that the ALP may be seen as the more stable option.
      If that doesn’t come to pass, the ALP will be raising crosses along the road to Canberra.
      Should the decision support the ALP it would likely make Tony Abbott and the Libs get very hands-on-hips and hold in nasty words about the independents just in case they change their mind on important legislation.
      As for the Nationals, it would be interesting to watch Warren Truss’ and Barnaby Joyce’s heads explode.

    • ZSrenn says:

      09:15am | 25/08/10

      I read your article twice. Once as a city boy and once as someone who has lived in Bob’s domain N Queensland. (Great research there only about 2000km out.) It made more sense as the country boy.

      Your arrogance and back handedness to the people of the bush typified the way country people feel you Latte drinking city folk see them.

      What harm will it do that they may get a couple of new hospitals where none exist? Sealed roads which allow them to drive 200km over dirt each week to do the shopping and not rely on expensive air freight.  They get a service where they can phone an ambulance from a mobile phone rather than die in the heat with no communication.

      I am sorry that you guys in the city may not get a new train from Sydney to Newcastle for a little longer and you will have to go to the central coast for Sunday bacon and eggs in your favorite café by the old rattler.

      But I think the bush should get a turn for a while.

    • herman says:

      12:02pm | 25/08/10

      You are so right. we will cancel the money planned to fund latte drinkers brunches and send it to the bush. Unfortunately your application to spend $200 billion to seal the Hayseed Highway so you can get to rodeo practice ten minutes faster has been rejected. Instead we have decided to fund a V8 Supercar race at the Stockman’s Hall of Fame to ensure the greatest consumption of FourX by the greatest number (in the relevant electorates).
      But please as do feel free to point out other city folk excesses (like transport to work for hundreds of thousands) that could be redirected to support the prejudices of a handful of country bigots
      And BTW Bob Katter did you know (as you keep banging on about it) that farmer suicides occur at pretty much exactly the same rate as suicides in the rest of the community?

    • Ding says:

      12:24pm | 25/08/10

      Show me your cost/benefit analysis of sealing this “pork-barrel” highway and we can disuss it. No-one is forced to live in whoop-whoop and I’m sure they knew about the lack of hospitals etc when they made the decision to live there.

    • Duff says:

      01:03pm | 25/08/10

      What might settle this argument are some stone cold figures on per capita federal expenditures for rural vs urban population services.  Does anyone have these?

    • Pork says:

      09:16am | 25/08/10

      Penbo, Genius.
      Agreed.  Straight back to the polls is the only sane answer.  I can not see how any deal is workable, reasonable or sustainable.

    • Ray says:

      09:41am | 26/08/10

      Yes, agreed. Let’s all keep going back to the polls until Penbo gets the party he wants. It’s only reasonable, and at 170million, completely sustainable.

    • jb says:

      09:27am | 25/08/10

      Why have another election thats just like losing and then saying best of three losing that going best of five and so on.
      The result is the result regardless of liking it or not.
      Half the country will be happy the other half not.
      I would say it’s perfect Ying and Yang democracy, really doesn’t get any better than that!

    • Brutus says:

      09:31am | 25/08/10

      Yes we should have a new election but this time without the preferential vote.  A vote for a party is a vote for the party.  We will see how far the Greens go then.  One major party will then be voted in.  The Senate will still be a problem.  Maybe we should get rid of them along with the States.

    • AdamC says:

      09:32am | 25/08/10

      The fact is that you can’t simply have another election because you don’t like the outcome. And, as Eric noted, the outcome might be the same anyway.

      I fully agree that Katter is a nut with a bizarre persecution complex. While farmers in this country have borne the brunt of various government reforms, and simply social changes, over the years, it is simply incorrect to argue that farmers are penalised or handicapped by government actions.

      Assuming it doesn’t come to a re-vote, we can assume that rural Australia will soon be enjoying a great deal more pork for Canberra.

    • Hamish says:

      10:23am | 25/08/10

      I agree, AdamC. Democracy is not about getting the outcome you want. You can’t just take your bat and ball and go home if you don’t like the result.

      I think it’s ridiculous that we could be held to ransom by rural independents, at least one of whom seems to favour European peasant style agricultural policy. I think Katter would like to repeal the Corn Laws. The other two independents seem just as bad really. I mean, who are they kidding, how is shacking up with the ALP representing the views of their electorate? Did the ALP even bother running candidates in their seats?

      It will be interesting to see if one of the parties actively tries to torpedo any attempts at forming a minority government in the hope of going to the polls again. I’m not sure which party would benefit from that.

    • AdamC says:

      12:47pm | 25/08/10

      I am sure the snakes in the Sussex Street reptile sanctuary, who never met a dirty trick they didn’t like, have already started running the scenarios on sabotaging any government (even one headed by Gillard).

      What can they do, though, I wonder? We shall have to wait and see!

      I would like to say that there is something quintessentially Australian about Hanrahans bitching and complaining constantly. Of course, there isn’t. But what is perhaps more unique is Australia’s expectation that farming be economically viable. While they would never admit it, the end point of agrarian socialism must be farmers being put on salaries and collectively farming larger plots. What a nonsense.

    • Hamish says:

      03:36pm | 25/08/10

      AdamC, Gillard won’t be the leader of the ALP at the next election…at least according to the bookies who have Billy the GG’s son-in-law as the clear-cut favourite. Interestingly this market is for the next election regardless of when that is, so the chance that there may be one called (or essentially forced upon us) rather soon is factored into this market. It is certainly doesn’t look good for La Gillard.

      As I’ve mentioned before, there have already been rumours that the snake men think Gillard managed to ‘lose’ an unloseable election against an ‘unelectable’ opposition leader.

      Personally I agree with Morris Iemma. You have to hand it to the Labor Party. I mean, taking the architects of easily the worst government in Australia (NSW ALP) and putting them in charge federally, displays an ability to construct your own fantasy world beyond that of even the average Greens voter. For a political party in a democracy to treat voters with such contempt really is admirably brave.

    • Phil says:

      09:32am | 25/08/10

      So, who’s to say we can’t make a hung Parliament work?  Let the pollies see if they can sort it out.  Plenty of countries operate with minority governments or coalitions - are we less capable?  It’s just unusual in our system. To call a hung parliament a ‘crisis’, as at least one headline did yesterday is ridiculous.
      And even if you don’t like Katter’s politics, is it any worse than the major parties splashing cash around the marginal electorates during the campaign or focus-group driven policies?
      I think everyone should have a cool shower and give the system a chance to work.  If the pollies get stuck, fine, let’s vote again.

    • Cat says:

      09:33am | 25/08/10

      The situation has arisen partly because of our system of compulsory preferential voting. This assumes that everyone wants to make a second choice.  The reality is that not everyone does want to make a second choice.
      They are being required to pass their vote on to another candidate - and that candidate may even be one whose policies they find morally abhorrent.
      We need to be rid of compulsory preferences. It will not solve all the problems but it would give a much clearer picture of what the electorate really wants.

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:36am | 25/08/10

      the only way we should be having another election is if we can’t get 76 people signed up for the new government - one way or the other.

      IF either side had ANY integrity they would refuse to accept working with or allowing one or two morons to hold sway because of an accident with numbers.

      But you and I know that aint going to happen.

      Honest question, regardless of personal politics: What would you think of either the Libs or Labor standing up and saying ‘No, we have spoken with the independents and we refuse to be held to ransom by their demands so we refuse to accept their endorsement to get us over the line’. ??

      Would you applaud the decision or revile them for it? And would it influence your vote in the next election?

    • Markus says:

      11:39am | 25/08/10

      Call me naive, but I think it would be great to see both parties set aside the partisan lines and establish mature negotiations based on each piece of legislation on a case by case basis.
      Our system of government doesn’t require a majority party in the Senate, why does it require one in the House of Reps?

    • Bob H says:

      09:36am | 25/08/10

      Another election? this is exactly the result I wanted.  The pollies will have limited power to stuff thing,s up waste money and kill people.  They can sit in committees deciding how to do things while the rest of us can get the country rolling again with the real stuff.

    • franksting says:

      09:41am | 25/08/10

      Tosh, lots of other stable democracies are able to cobble temporary coalitions together in order to put a PM in place. Why is Australia so focused on American style two-party, all-or-nothing politics?
      Grow Up Australia, embrace collaboration, tell your politicians to co-operate. If they can do it in Israel, Italy, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands etc - why not here?

    • FlatPillow says:

      11:45am | 25/08/10

      We’ve been embracing coalitions for a long time. Liberal and National Parties have governed successfully for years. Its Labor that appears to have the problem with coalitions.

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:45pm | 25/08/10

      Are you sure you want to include Italy in that list? Aren’t they ‘toppling’ each other with regular monotony? Nearly 50 governments since ww2 or something isn’t it?

    • Mikko says:

      09:43am | 25/08/10

      Hey Penbo, why not let the dust settle and the game of spin the bottle draw to a close before we let pessimism rule. As for Bob Katter being a “former minister in the Howard government”, er, no he was a Queensland Cabinet Minister in Joh Bjelke-Petersen’s era before being elected to the Federal seat of Kennedy in 1993 and successfully running as an independent in 2001. If his flamboyant “Mad Hatter” style diverts some extra attention to rural areas, that’s not a bad thing.

    • Duff says:

      09:56am | 25/08/10

      I don’t think we need a 2nd election.  The Libs are going to win by the looks of it and I think a 2nd election would favor the Libs, anyway.  The Labor infighting is a bad look and people are sick of it.  They want the whole soap opera to go away.  I also think the idea of a government led by a Tony Abbott who is cuckold to the Greens is hilarious and we like a good laugh.

    • Steve says:

      10:03am | 25/08/10

      A new election? why? you going to change the way you voted?

      This is the best result we couldve got, it sends the message loud and clear, we dont want any of them.

    • Fed Up with IND says:

      10:05am | 25/08/10

      No. These three IND are unreliable and I fear for Oakeshott mental stability. As for Bob he was never stable. The latest allegations that he has threatened another Parliamentary with death are deeply troubling.
      The only one with half a brain appears to be Windsor but he too with his calling the Nationals a “cancer” has shown he is not to be trusted. These electorates should be taking a hard look at themselves and the types they’re voting for…
      As for the rest of us we will be back at the polls even if we don’t want to.
      You can’t base good Gov. in the whims of these two….whatever you think of Gillard and Abbott both are serious leaders. And do not deserve this ridiculous situation. Let’s go back to the polls and give our Country a real Government.

    • Dash says:

      10:38am | 25/08/10

      Fed Up, I agree with your comments about the Kennedy, New England and Lyne electorates. Given the substantial conservative vote and the virtually non-existent ALP vote, particularly in New England and Lyne, if these three side with Labor, they will lose their seats at the next election. That may not be a bad thing, and chances are another election will happen sooner rather than later.

    • MHT says:

      10:12am | 25/08/10

      The people have spoken, Julia has trouble understanding what they’ve said and as usual Tony isn’t listening. What would another election achieve? I can’t see either the ALP or the LNP winning 76 seats if another election was held (in another 12 moths maybe but not immediately), therefore it is up to the 150 elected members to sort it out! The final outcome of this election is looking most likely to be 72 ALP 73 LNP 4 IND 1 Green, the Green has already stated his intentions, if we leave Katter out of the equation (make him speaker wink) that leaves the other 3 IND to either jump into bed with Julia or make up with Tony, either way it will be a battle. Personally if I was Gillard or especially Abbott (thank God I’m not either) I would rather sit in opposition and bide my time until the next election in about twelve months time.

    • E says:

      10:14am | 25/08/10

      For the record, the city depends on the country not the other way around.

      We out in ‘the sticks’ wouldnt notice if the cities dissapeared tomorrow, maybe some inconvenience getting a few items but nothing serious.

      However if the country dissapeared, you guys in the city would be starving to death in a concrete death trap.

    • Hamish says:

      10:56am | 25/08/10

      E, we’d just import food from somewhere else. Wealth transfers from the city to the country are massive. Wealth doesn’t get transferred the other way. I’m not anti rural Australia, but this you-need-us rural fascism doesn’t help your cause. And doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

      Just out of interest, how do you think places like Singapore and Hong Kong survive?

    • Stiffy says:

      12:37pm | 25/08/10

      @E - reluctantly we would just have to adopt NZ as our 7th state. The days of Australia riding on the sheeps back have long gone. An interesting polling booth result was Wee Jasper, in the electorate of Hume. It had 64 voters with 35 voting 2pp Liberal and 29 to Labor. When Alby Shultz first rode into Canberra 92 voted at that polling booth with 90 going Liberal and 2 for Labor - the bloke on the dole and the primary school teacher. The bush has changed forever.

    • E says:

      10:17am | 25/08/10

      The problem is the major parties. If they allowed a conscience vote then we wouldnt have a problem.
      Also the three independents arent going to be running the country. They will get a few concessions as they sell their support, and then they will be forgotten. This is a temporary situation, their power only lasts until they make a decision.

    • Rick Eyre says:

      10:17am | 25/08/10

      Nonsense. We don’t need a new election. The people have done their job, and voted. They’re (we’re) not to blame. Let the people we have voted for do their job and govern us.

    • The Badger says:

      10:20am | 25/08/10

      One thing is for sure

      I don’t want the hayseed party running this country..

      even if they are the salt of the earth

    • Clem says:

      10:26am | 25/08/10

      Where’s this instability you’re talking about? A week or two not knowing who the next government’s going to be? Big deal.

      There’s no problem with a supply bill coming through. No public servants are short of pay. There’s no food or power shortages. Businesses are open. There’s no looting or rioting in the streets. The army hasn’t enforced a curfew. As far as I can see, it’s business as usual.

      And having a go at Katter because he dares put his electorate first - why are MPs elected to the House of Representatives if they’re not allowed to represent their constituents?

      After reading columns like this biased towards the cities, there’s little wonder rural Australia has developed a persecution complex, whether real or imagined.

    • Penny says:

      10:34pm | 25/08/10

      Agreed. The tone behind this article is exactly the problem and reflects the attitude of city folk to rural folk. Indifference. I’m disgusted by this article Mr Penberthy.

    • judy says:

      10:29am | 25/08/10

      Hi I’m a farmers wife western australia and we had the same scenario in the last W.A. election the nationals held the balance of power and held the libs and labor to ransom they joined the Liberals with a Royaltys for Regions policy that puts 25% of mining royalties back into regional funding Our country pensioners get a $500 annual fuel voucher to help fund transport to specialist appts family gatherings plus public buildings and govt services have improved and we seem to have a very stable govt at the moment

    • Waly says:

      10:37am | 25/08/10

      What we need is for the Labor Party and the Liberal Party to honestly split and reform along their true lines. Left-wingers in the Labor Party like Gillard, Rudd, Wong and Garret really need to leave the Party and join the Greens. There they can be joined by Turnbull. All those that remain can join the Liberals. Then we can have the Green Liberal two party system that is the more honest political dichotomy of how it should be.

    • Ed says:

      12:48pm | 25/08/10

      YES.  Splendid suggestion.

    • john says:

      10:43am | 25/08/10

      @Penbo. If the Greens were truly an independant 3rd political party, then why aren’t they joining the 3 independants to decide the outcome.????
      Siding with labor before the outcome is even announced shows they are not ready to play with the big boys and are merely the left wing of the labor party.

    • Jason CR says:

      10:47am | 25/08/10

      Adam Bandt tells us today that the reason he will side with Julia Gillard is on the wishes of his electorate.
      Adam, you only got in on Liberal Party preferences and I somehow doubt that the Labor voters had you as first preference!
      I think Liberal voters will be more inclined to place Labor ahead of the Greens at any future elections…I can live with Labor, but the Greens….??

    • AdamC says:

      12:35pm | 25/08/10

      I agree, Jason. Is he arguing that his electorate actually wanted a Labor MP to be elected? Why not just step aside and let Cath Bowtell have the seat then?

    • Hamish says:

      03:56pm | 25/08/10

      Jason and Adam, have you seen that Taiwanese animation of our election (if you haven’t check it out on youtube - the depiction of Tony Abbott is hilarious)? They refer to the ALP and The Greens as a coalition, I assume, because to their eyes the ALP/Greens preference deal and Adam Bandt’s announcement make them seem allied. Interestingly Adam Bandt actually came out before the election and said in the event of a hung parliament, he would side with Labor. probably because he knew most of his votes would come from disaffected ALP voters.

    • John V. says:

      10:54am | 25/08/10

      Wrong Figures I read said it will cost 227 million. You may be out.
      Regarding the election, maybe the parties should just suggest the party line when voting, leaving individuals to make up their own minds. The nwe may have a proper representative government

    • Dan says:

      10:58am | 25/08/10

      It is heading for a Libs win which will be great in the short term because we all know when its official the long knives in the ALP will really come out and they can then be seen for the rabble of lying coniving rats that they truly are.  This will pave the way for a re-elected Liberal Government in a stronger position to get our country back on track and get ready to take on the Greens who want to shut down our nucleur facility thereby compromising medical services- so people can really see what they are electing.

    • Nicole says:

      11:53am | 25/08/10

      Agreed Dan. It’s going to be pure entertainment watching them carve each other up. BTW, who do you think will replace Queen Jooolya as opposition leader?

    • Jim says:

      11:03am | 25/08/10

      Totally agree on the new election, but this country needs to have electronic registering of voters and some form of ID. Last election 22,000 people voted more than once, hundreds of dead people voted, and people in nursing homes were told which box to put a 1 in. All of these are well known grubby union tactics that have been around since federation…take away this form of fraud and I think many of these marginal seats wouldn’t be so marginal. A lot of people put in a protest vote by putting a minor party first, I think now they realise what a cock up that has created with the real danger of the Greens having too much say in the senate. If the three amigos side with Labor then we are in real strife.

    • Alfred Deakin says:

      12:43pm | 25/08/10

      This double voting is a conservative furphy. Very few people “voted twice” in the last election - show me where you pulled that 22,000 figure from. At the AEC these cases are investigated, and the leading cause of the (very few) double votes is old people in nursing homes, where the nursing home has already got them to do a postal vote, and then their family comes and takes them to the polling booth on election day - obviously a left-wing plot as clearly old people in nursing homes are so much more likely to vote Gren or Labor!

    • Rosie says:

      11:13am | 25/08/10

      Allow the people in the 4 Independents electorate to have their say into which major party their candidates should align themselves to. They are the ones to go back to the polls. By doing this the power goes back to the major parties and the party that ends up with the most seats will be at an advantage.

      At the moment the Independents are walking around as if the people have voted them in to take control of our political future. I honestly think they are revelling in their new found fame and have forgotten that the differences they may have had with other politicians and political parties in the past political arena should remain in the past. If they were truthful about a stable govt and putting the nation’s political future before their self serving interests they wouldn’t be indulging in a “talk-fest” with the media. They are just as bad as each other in their own different ways. At first I thought that Bob Oakeshott wasn’t too bad until he had this ridiculous idea of a consensus parties politics.

    • The Pouch says:

      11:17am | 25/08/10

      The navel gazers and squeezers won’t decide but we are going back to the polling booth soon, it is just a matter of when.  Suffer less pain and do it now because the longer it takes, the more pain the country and its people will suffer.

    • Ripa says:

      11:29am | 25/08/10

      Turn Parliament house into one massive paint ball arena, give our pollies paint ball guns, last man/woman standing takes office, loser has to clean up.
      Done next.

    • MarK says:

      12:59pm | 25/08/10

      I back Bronny in this death math.

      Or Julie Bishop…her stare could kill at 100 paces.

    • jon says:

      11:35am | 25/08/10

      Couldn’t the Greens just agree to increase their preference flows in certain seats? which would get labor over the line in several of the marginal seats won by the COA…..I don’t know how it works but is that a possibility if a new poll was had?

    • Daryl says:

      12:08pm | 25/08/10

      So you mean form a coalition jon?  Would Labor then adopt the Green policies and increase corporate taxes, increase personal taxes, follow a policy of socialist weath redistribution, shut down all coal fired power stations, impose a carbon tax, open our borders, decriminalise drugs etc. If so, I reckon the ALP would receive far fewer primary votes and lose even more seats!

    • The Badger says:

      04:34pm | 25/08/10

      Daryl
      Your thought process is part of the problem.
      You only think short term like your masters.

      Everything you talk about Labor adopting from the greens are good things.
      Should International Corporations making obscene profits pay more for the non renewable minerals they rip out of Australia?
      Should the wealth be distributed more equitably?
      Should we rely less and less on coal until it is fazed out?
      Should people who use more energy pay more for that energy?
      Should we be a compassionate and caring nation?
      Should we be realistic in how we view all drugs, or just ignore the two biggest drugs - alcohol and tobacco.
      etc.

      Daryl, Try thinking a little longer term than your next breath.
      Perhaps not today, perhaps not tomorrow, but all these are noble outcomes to which we should aspire.

    • Drew says:

      11:37am | 25/08/10

      It’s called democracy, David. The people have voted and the Tories in the media dislike their vote and so have determined magnanimously that the country needs another election.

    • Markus says:

      11:50am | 25/08/10

      We do not vote for a Prime Minister. We do not vote for a majority party. We vote for a member of our electorate.

      Katter is acting in the best interests of his electorate, which is exactly what he is supposed to do, and what he has done so much better than any party candidate has been able to (which is why he has been continually elected).

      That you think this is ridiculous says more about the pathetic state of both major parties than it does about Katter’s mental state.

    • underdog says:

      11:56am | 25/08/10

      This article seems to ignore the fact that even the major parties only ever really govern for a small group of ‘swinging’ voters in marginal electorates anyway. It’s this short-term idiocy that gets us policies like tax breaks negative gearing on housing, home grants, ‘cash for clunkers’, public funding for rich private schools, pandering to religion etc etc.

      If other countries can manage to put aside blinkered ideology to form coalition Governments the incorporate a range of views why can’t we?

    • Mark from Sydney's North says:

      11:58am | 25/08/10

      God help us. These Independents are raving Lunatics. The exception possibly being Tony Windsor. Oakeshot’s fanciful ideas about the consensus government only suggests to me the guy is obviously growing whacky-tabaccy at his farm.  Is he serious. We are about to embark on the most dysfunctional term of government in Australia’s history and we dont need this is we get the predicted double dip R, next year. As a conservative, my advice to TA is let labor have it. Whilst it hurts me to say it, we all could suck-it-up for another year under Labor. No doubt Gillard will get stabbed by Shorten or Howe and with the mess which is Labor,  we will be at the polls inside 12 months. Plus, these blustering independents and recalcitrant Greens will get the flick and with only 12 months more pain, we can start on a term of good stable Coalition government with a probable mandate in the Senate as well. What a mess we are in Australia.

    • Rosie says:

      12:30pm | 25/08/10

      Agree Mark, I would be tempted to give it to Gillard than give in to the demands of another factional party of self serving Independent lunatics.

    • Nafe says:

      03:31pm | 25/08/10

      Agree, Whoever takes government will loose alot of credibility due to the greens in ballance of power in senate and the disfunctional lower house as a minority government. Let the Labor party have it. The internal fighting of the Labor party over the next term of government while in minority government would ensure they will be unelectable for a generation.

      This is the time Tony you need to take one for the team. You did a fantastic job to the the coalition to this point, time to conceed and watch both the greens and the labor party commit political suicide

    • Jason CR says:

      07:13pm | 25/08/10

      Agree with all of the above.  Abbott shouldn’t change one policy that he took to the election and he’ll prosper in the end after 12 more months in opposition.
      Let’s just be thankful that Rudd didn’t have the ticker to call a DD election earlier this year before voters could see Labor’s true colours..We would have had another 2 1/2 years in opposition anyway.

    • nosthow says:

      12:21pm | 25/08/10

      A new election Penbo ? Good idea - the great man Abbott has failed dismally to win for the Coalition so why not have another election just to ram home the fact Abbott is a dud ! 2 flops in a row might just be enough to convince his wide-eyed fans hes stinks !

    • MarK says:

      12:58pm | 25/08/10

      I approve of the humour in this post.

      It is very good actually.

    • ZSRenn says:

      01:44pm | 25/08/10

      Sorry I have been living in China to long where they do not use sarcasm.

      I think I might have missed the joke

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      12:27pm | 25/08/10

      Reading these comments its really sad to see how blantantly partisan people are in their views.  Obviously the majority of people cant be objective about either party, or are missing the simple fact that both Labor and Liberal are mass-support parties, largely debasing themselves from their original ideological paradigns and have become analagous to the differences between Coke and Pepsi.

      Also for all those people talking about first past the post voting, they actually did have this in the past in Australia but it was stopped because it was benefiting Labor too much with the non-Labor parties often competing each other out of the picture….  while this is not the case these days with coalition agreements and the rise of the Greens on the left and other political parties, it would mean that the parliament would become even less proportional to what people actually want.

      If we are Fair Dinkum about having the politicans we voted for in there, then we would be better off going with state-based Proportional Voting without electorates.  It would be state-based so it would meet the requirements of the constitution by ensuring that all orginal states have at least five members in the House of Reps, but at the same time ensure that the representation in the lower house is more akin to representing the wishes of the Australian electors.

    • Bufo says:

      12:51pm | 27/08/10

      Good God, man.  Stop talking sense.

    • ibast says:

      12:27pm | 25/08/10

      Oakshot is not crazy.  The Westminster system doesn’t require the Government be formed only by the party with the majority of seats.  It’s just that way it is because one party usually dominates the lower house.  The government should be formed by the the ministers whom the majority would vote for.  If another election is called solely on the fact there is no clear majority it will be contrary to the intent of the Westminster system.  All parties should come to an agreement and get on with running the country.  Australia would be a much better country if the Federal lower house didn’t always vote along party lines.

    • Jason CR says:

      02:48pm | 25/08/10

      Would you want Rudd in your ministry???
      He can’t even keep cabinet discussions to himself when it’s his own party!!!! 
      Oakeshott comes across as someone who was always picked last in school teams.

    • Gregg says:

      12:28pm | 25/08/10

      Penbo, I reckon you’re either bored that the election is over or just considered it a warm up lap and if so and we’re still in the campaign mode as it seems Leaders are for the independents, I feel you’ve not only jumped the gun but this would have to be your worst piece of the entire campaign.

      Like why capitulate to having another election so readily when there have been and still are many examples about of minority/multiple coalition governments functioning.
      Sure there are some strange and wild eyed views being raised with a good degree of anger and depending on how situations are viewed, some very good reasons and there’ll likewise be some very good reasons why appeasing such angst will be rather difficult, but attempting to do so is the name of the game.

      If the Libs get up to the starting grid with 73 HP firing evenly and that’ll require the WA national too, then there’s some simple concepts that could see some very productive outcomes:
      JohnBull the Oats fella as speaker for he has the eyebrows and tthat gift of the gab that a speaker needs even if it means you wonder what he said, but he’ll surely use the Sargeants to throw a few out of the house!
      So let him have a loose rein with reforming the kids.

      Bob Katter needs to get a good appreciation of why his electorate and other rural regions are different, the interplay of different levels of government and how international trade have great impact but at the same time the whole country needs to be cognisant of us needing to have productive food regions with good facilities.

      Tony Windsor is something of the same mould though less virulently so and I thought my paperwork was atrocious - have you been able to see his desk in some TV footage - WTBHAU he could even be saying himself but maybe a team of good secretaries can help.

      The answer to these two is very simple and good for the nation.
      Decentralisation and Water Supplies.
      Two very important new portfolios need to be established:
      Minister for Decentralisation and Rural Infrastructure to also encompass the sustainable population issue.
      Perhaps Malcom Turnbull rather than Barnaby!
      Bob Katter can be the parliamentary secretary to the minister, assistant minister, minister for Infrastructure or whatever and also have a responsibility for International Agricultural Trade to not only get that international trading appreciation but also work towards how best our own national producers should function and be supported.
      Minister for Australian Water Supplies Security
      And you could even have Tony Windsor with that portfolio as it will very much involve significant dealing with the states and Greens because of their control of the Senate and will give him some insight into governance.
      His electorate is in a relatively high rainfall area and yet one from which waters are relatively unfarmed and do cause significant flooding, so something he should be able to focus on and perhaps use his own region as a model for expanding the concept such that we eventually get interconnection of water harvesting to better feed our nations prime food bowl, that being the Murrumbidgee/Murray.

      And lets not forget Andrew Wlikes, nor Adam Brandt or Whatshisname the Wilson replacement for all three could also no doubt be tapped into.

      And Kevin, where better for him to be placed for UN learning and as a feedback channel but heading up a committee for ASIO/AFP eavesdropping.
      He may decide to become an independent too!
      Maybe Julia could be the new CWA pie tasting consultant!

      I do think the team may have to stop trading though before Roxxing on way down on the Swannie river.

    • DougB says:

      01:56pm | 25/08/10

      @Gregg, it’s great to see someone else who supports de-centralisation. It is surely one of the greatest opportunities to fix our nation and spread population sprawl and re-energise rural communities.

    • David P says:

      12:37pm | 25/08/10

      I think this election result is the best thing that has happened to politics in this country for a long long time. We are always complaining that pollies dont listen to the public and now that they have to people are complaining and say we should have another election, how come other countries like England can function normally when a similiar situation has happened over there but all we do is bitch and moan because the result isnt how some people wanted it. We have all had our vote so lets just suck it up and get on with life.

    • ibast says:

      01:03pm | 25/08/10

      Zackly.  Just because it’s not the way it has been does not mean it’s not right.  I personally think it is much better for the Australian people than having both houses of parliament ruled by the same party, that is lucky to represent 50% of the population.  At least this way we will get some real debate.  Since 1996 we’ve had the Prime minister acting like a king.  The current situation is so much better for the people of Australia.  If the ministers come from both side of politics then even better, so long as the parliament engages in robust debate.

      Be careful here people.  It doesn’t suite the press duopoly to have a situation like this.  They like a single party so they can blackmail and bribe them when they need too.  Fair and unbiased reporting is not something we are likely to see at the moment.

    • Lachlan G says:

      05:48pm | 25/08/10

      With you David P.

      This is the best election result in living memory. I can’t believe how afraid people are of true democracy.

    • Dave T says:

      12:43pm | 25/08/10

      Lets not get rid of preference voting

      The reason we have preference voting in the first place is so that people who vote for third parties or independents don’t feel like they’re wasting their vote,

      Hell in the UK after their federal election earlier this year there were rallies demanding they bring in preference voting now that there are 3 major parties

      If we’re gonna have another election it’d be redundant to vote for MP’s again since not everyone would change their vote,

      What we should try is voting for a Prime Minister directly but instead of it just being a 2 horse race between Gillard and Abbott there should be 4 candidates, 2 from each party decided by preference voting. I know many Liberal supporters who don’t like Abbott or Labor supporters who want Rudd back in the top job. What do ya say?

    • Alan Hill says:

      12:50pm | 25/08/10

      You naughty electorate! You haven’t done what the political class wants . . . you’ve actually refused to endorse anyone.

      Go back and do it again! And we’ll keep making you do it until you get it right!

      Ungrateful wretches!

    • Matt Samson says:

      12:52pm | 25/08/10

      I wont be changing how I voted at the election if they call a new one. I thought the VOTERS were always right? To hold another election would be to say that the electors were WRONG in who they voted for. If another election is held based on the result will prove that there is something wrong with our system of government which shows a republic with a directly elected president who then decides on who the government is would be the best thing to have.

    • thestudios says:

      12:56pm | 25/08/10

      You can have a new election if you wish, but I won’t be voting!  Once is enough, as I’d only be doing the same thing again.

    • Biteme says:

      01:09pm | 25/08/10

      I wonder if Katter would have agreed to give the free to air TV stations the $250 Million like Rudd did. Today Kerry Stokes (Rudds Mate) announced a $718 Million Net Profit. They really needed that public money didn’t they?
      And for the purpose of tax minimisation Kerry has his Mining company locked to his TV company now too. I wonder if that was discussed with Rudd while he was at Stokes holiday home in Broome.

    • ZSRenn says:

      01:35pm | 25/08/10

      It really makes me Chuckle How this never once came out in any media report or discussion during the election.

    • The Badger says:

      04:18pm | 25/08/10

      The 718 million profit included profit from his mining companies.

      Tax minimization was invented by the Liberals and is a core belief.

      Do you have any idea why the free to air stations got money?  No, I didn’t think so. Your comments are rarely accurate.
      The answer is to produce local content and the cost of moving to digital broadcasting

      This partially explains why the Murdoch publications were anti Labor. He resented free to air getting anything and didn’t share in the “spoils”. Another major reason Murdoch was anti labor can be found in the capabilities of the Labor NBN and the havoc it might create bringing competition and choice into the world of Foxtel.

    • MPS says:

      01:18pm | 25/08/10

      The 3 independents only have the power if one of the major parties supports their proposals. There has to be some accountability from the major parties. If the independents proposals are barmy or unfairly reward their own electorates then the major parties should have the nerve to say NO. After all there is a reason that they are members of the House of Representatives and that is because they are representing their electorate and with a significant majority at that. Much better than a member of a party hack who takes orders from “Head Office”. I find it hysterical that anyone should complain about what “special benefits” they might achieve for their electorates after the 2 major parties focussed just about all their attention on Queensland and Western Sydney during the election campaign. Sure Katter has some extreme views in my opinion but I’m not exactly excited about Barnaby Joyce becoming a minister either particularly in a Coalition majority government so I don’t see your problem.

    • Daniel Mendham says:

      01:24pm | 25/08/10

      I really can’t see this current situation working, it only needs one independent to throw a tantrum and the whole government would collapse. Australia needs good stable governance, there are alot of positives out there and we need a government to make the changes and make things work. I think if there was to be another election, a proportion of the public would vote differently, I think the greens vote nationwide was a protest vote, and in the next election would be put to use by voting liberal ( I think) to get rid of labour. I cannot see Gillard being PM for more than a year before being ousted, she may look good, and talk good, but i think when it comes to getting things done she will be found wanting, and please do not let ANY government tell you they can run a NBN better than private business, $43 billion is a waste of tax payer money to be honest. They can use that money to build infrastructure instead of creating a mining tax! (by the way i am not allowed to vote as I am only a perm resident and not a citizen, i wonder how many of us there are out there that would have made a difference to the rsult?)

    • Markus says:

      10:39pm | 25/08/10

      Australia doesn’t need a good stable government, it needs a true democracy as specified in our constitution.
      If you want good stable government over a government that is decided by the people, go move to a totalitarian dictatorship.

    • uu says:

      01:28pm | 25/08/10

      Bob Katter is the clearest about his position.

      He is here to represent his electorate and the farming communities of Australia. I am incredibly impresses at his ability to enunciate what are the most CRITICAL issues relating to farming, free trade and food security. In that respect he represents all of us - to ensure we have Australian grown food and ownership of major agricultural land.

      I wish we could clone Bob because quite frankly we need more of him. Now that we have lost all our manufacturing industries, our farming is next on the the hist list. Australia is now a net importer of food.

      Australia has an imploding population and we can’t even feed ourselves. WAKE UP.

    • Terry Coulson says:

      01:32pm | 25/08/10

      If you look at the amount of export revenue that comes out of the countryside and then match it with the services and infrastructure within this region its no wonder the rural community finally feels vindicated by the likes of Bob and co having the balance of power. Previous to this electoral outcome rural Australia has been left on the back burner by both big parties. Even the likes of Macfarlane a few weeks ago was spruiking about how the LNP will most certainly construct the Toowoomba bypass. He had umpteen years to achieve this during the Howard years. Promises that are for the most part very shallow indeed. You can say what you like about our country bumpkins but lets face it, we’d be third world status without them. When you see all the tax revenue that is generated and see very little in return, you have every right to feel jaded, pissed off and a little taken aback when the big parties treat you with ignorance, arrogance and dismissal.

    • Ben says:

      01:38pm | 25/08/10

      I think this is all very healthy. There’s nothing like a good feather ruffler to get some positive change in national politics. Life will go on regardelss and Australia will always be a very lucky place.

    • Nickc says:

      01:39pm | 25/08/10

      I don’t see what all the fuss is about…....we will be back to the polls soon enough because what ever cobbled together coalition forms will break down soon enough. If i were Tony a big part of me would like to see Gillard have a go at dealing with the problem then walk in to government at the next poll.

    • Shane says:

      01:39pm | 25/08/10

      Of the 150 members of the House of Reps, 149 will have exactly equal voting power on every issue and law (the speaker can only vote to break a draw). There is no law or rule that forces MPs to always follow party lines. This hung parliment will show us which of the politicians are willing to do their actual job; discuss the issues affecting the country and find solutions! This will requir diplomacy and compromise on all sides, but that’s DEMOCRACY for you.

    • Allan says:

      01:43pm | 25/08/10

      There is a huge potential in the next election to re-engage the electorate.
      It has been truly amazing to look at the turn out figures for various electorates. Eden- Monaro 81% turnout (minus 14% from the last election)
      Grayndler 76% (-18%),  Wentworth 71% (-21%).
      The Greens are not the fastest growing party, apathy is.
      Only 78.99% of Australians turnout which means that the first leader who can motivate the electorate will shoe it in.
      I would expect that there would be a definitive result if there is an election in the next month.

    • HBlacly says:

      01:45pm | 25/08/10

      Back to the Polls! The only way we can get proper representation across Australia. I am for the Bush but not for “crazed power mad independents” who think they can change our system. It works perfectly well thanks and is by far the best system in the world today.

    • DougB says:

      01:53pm | 25/08/10

      @HBlacly, I’m going to be blunt. You’re a bloody idiot.  Ours is one of the last 2PP systems left in the world, why do you think other countries have got rid of theirs? Because they enjoy corruption and power control in the hands of a few? Read about the systems world wide and educate yourself.

    • Daniel Mendham says:

      02:38pm | 25/08/10

      the electoral system here is bonkers! there were areas in australia where the Libs where /are in front but labour got in because of its grubby deal with the greens. Its should be one vote, and first past the post system, none of this 2nd preference rubbish. why should the greens have such representation in the senate when 90+% of the population didn’t vote for them.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      01:46pm | 25/08/10

      I see Bob Katter is going to tour the Murray-Darling over the next couple of weeks. If he can stop those Labor-voting water hogs in Victoria and NSW from leeching all the water from the Murray, he won’t get out of SA - they’ll canonise him and make him Premier.

    • Mad as a Hatter says:

      01:54pm | 25/08/10

      There will be no long term peace with the three independents ruling the roost. While they have some common ground there is also a lot of things that they will oppose one another and which ever party the try to assist. They will no longer be unable to hide behind the fact that they were previously anonymous members. Now they are front and center, those who voted for them will judge them, they will judge which side the join, they will judge on what they decide to support or block and what they can bring home to their electorates. Their constituents will also be listening to what they say, I guess the mad hatter may find his stock may slip accordingly. The national and libs will certainly spend more money to see that these guys have a real hard time at the next election.

    • Stephen Moyle says:

      01:56pm | 25/08/10

      Spot on column. Katter raises one decent point (aside from wind farms at Mt. Isa) - the Dept. of Locked Gates aka Balmain Bushies and the Govt. don’t really let you boil the billy anywhere anymore David. Most coastal people think the country is McLeods Daughters and that is a problem.

    • Tails says:

      01:56pm | 25/08/10

      I’d take him a lot more seriously if he had have said “father” and “grandfather”.

    • Ziggy says:

      02:02pm | 25/08/10

      We don’t just need a new election, we need a new system. The preferential voting system is a complete farce, where voters HAVE to assign preferences on the Lower House ballot paper and if they vote for a candidate from a minor party, their votes flow up to a candidate for which they might never have voted for. This needs to be scrapped completely and voters should be only allowed to vote for one candidate and that’s all. Then the candidate with the highest number of votes wins the seat and the voters know that their votes ONLY went to their chosen candidate. So what’s wrong with that? And then this idiocy of so-called “compulsory” voting needs to be scrapped. It’s NOT compulsory to vote - it’s only compulsory to get your name crossed off at the polling station, but you don’t have to vote at all. The law is a complete ass. Yes, we should have another election - but this time, NO preferences, NO compulsion, just freedom - just like a proper democracy should have, not this quasi-police state that exists in Australia with a rigged voting system that entrenches the two main parties on preferences.

    • Rowdy says:

      02:27pm | 25/08/10

      First past the post only works when there are only 2 candidates. For example, if there are 10 people in an electorate and 3 people run for office (A, B and C). A gets 4 votes, B gets 3 votes and C gets 3 votes. Then according to first past the post, A wins. BUT only 4 people wanted A elected whereas 6 people did NOT want A elected. Hardly democratic and people would still bitch and moan. Sure the preferential system is not ideal, but, like the Westminster System of Parliament,  it is the best available.

      People just have to understand that they need not follow blindly the “How-to-vote” cards handed out at the polling booth. This is part of the reason why we are where we are. Take time to allocate you preferences the way you wish. That way, if the person you voted No.1 against has no chance of election, then your vote still remains valid, it is just allocated to the candidate you nominate as No.2….then if they stand no chance of winning the seat, it goes to number 3….until there is only 2 candidates left, which is when the fist-past-the-post approach is taken. It certainly isn’t rocket science.

    • Baz of Ettalong says:

      07:48pm | 25/08/10

      Rowdy, you’re right but you’ll never get through to first past the post advocates. They don’t get it.

    • Jason CR says:

      09:18pm | 25/08/10

      Rowdy is right?  Which electorate has 10 voters in it? 
      What a truly ridiculous example.
      How about the electorate of Brisbane as a proper example.
      One candidate received over 45% of the primary vote (10,000 more votes than anyone else) yet is looking down the barrel of defeat.
      Then you waffle on about ‘x’ amount of the electorate not wanting the one who wins.  Have you ever considered that most voters would happily choose one candidate only, and are forced to mark preferences?
      In the South Australian state election Labor won with 48% of the 2PP.  But hang on, 52% didn’t want them…..
      This is typical Labor mentality of people who really don’t get it.  Without 2PP you would’ve copped a caning guys.

    • Jamers Hunter says:

      02:09pm | 25/08/10

      I’m all for putting Bob Katter down no matter what government we get.
      But even more seriously,  allowing three people to esentially call the shots is allowing minority rule and that is not democracy.

    • Dave says:

      10:40pm | 25/08/10

      Just to point out the fallacious logic (It’s unbearable): The People (lets say just for now) elected the two major parties 72 seats each. The other People, voted for 4 Independents. Democracy lets them choose who they are allowed to side with & hence form Government.

      The logic is Bunkum. To reach a governing agreement. They will focus on the areas they can agree on. The side who governs is the side which can reach agreement. They are an elected REPRESENTATIVE, and as such are free to represent the will of their electorate. Whoever campaign promises can best be met (and even able to be scrutinised for better outcomes) will get their support.  That is a democracy.

      If one used your logic, conscience votes on passing legislation would be banned, because they enabled a hung policy vote dependent on the independents when the vote fell on party lines. To get it through would need rewriting the legislation with changes (gee this is starting to sound what happens when the senate rejects legislation) What would we do then, not allow independents to vote?! Just like independents can vote, they can vote to form government. They don’t have to fall to peer pressure bullies & tall poppies. Just because people didn’t vote your your pepsi or coke outcome, and instead became an Adelaide & chose Iced Coffee.

    • Phantom says:

      02:11pm | 25/08/10

      Hands up those who have either met Bob Katter or lived in his electorate?

      Just as I thought, most don’t know the man, yet judge him over the tidbits fed to you by the media.  When you rely on the media to assess a man’s character, you have no idea of what they are really like.

      One of the best politicians this country has ever had and his continued re-election is greater testament to his character than any of the misguided assessments made by most of you.

    • David says:

      04:22pm | 25/08/10

      I’ve worked in Isa for a couple of years (FIFO) and thought Katter was a joke before I went there. After I got to know the locals I quickly realised what the locals liked about Bob Katter was that he called a spade a spade and was passionate about his electorate. I no longer think of Bob Katter as a joke.

    • Ziggy says:

      02:16pm | 25/08/10

      Further to my previous comment here, I would also advocate one other major reform - and that is - secret ballots in ALL houses of parliament, state and federal. Right now, the parties can intimidate their parliamentarians and disendorse them if they vote against the party line. So much for democracy and the needs of the constituents over that of the party. So if we enshrine secret ballots to elect these clowns, why should they not have the same rights to secrecy when they vote on bills? We live in the age of electronics and computers so how easy would this be? Each seat in parliament would have a keypad with a shroud for privacy. The keypad would have a number pad for entering a PIN and three voting buttons - YES, NO and ABSTAIN. When a bill comes up for a vote, there does not have to be a time-wasting division and a count of hands - that’s archaic. Each member would key in his PIN and press one of the voting buttons. The results would be sent to a computer, tallied electronically and the results displayed on a panel. The actual identitiies of the members voting would be suppressed and only the results shown. How democratic would that be? There would be no need for party whips to coerce members, no need for divisions, no need for hand-counting, but just a fairly instantaneous result. The computer program to do this is dead easy and the hardware is cheap. So why don’t all parliaments have secret ballots? We should push for this to be introduced and if secret parliamentary voting comes about, a lot of stupid laws wouldn’t see the light of day. Let’s have some democracy in parliament instead of the coercive crap that we have now.

    • Gruff says:

      02:35pm | 25/08/10

      While it would be nice to break the party voting blocs, parliament does not have secret ballots because constituents have a right to know what their representative is supporting or blocking.  How else are we going to know if they are doing what they promised they would do and if they are representing our interests (or not)?

    • Ziggy says:

      05:00pm | 25/08/10

      Gruff, I understand that the constituents need to know what their representatives are doing, but the issue of coercion by their parties to force them to vote the party line needs to be dealt with.

      I well remember the Gerry Hand issue, when the Sydney third runway was being proposed and Gerry Hand’s electorate overwhelmingly demanded that he vote against it. I remember seeing Hand on TV stating bluntly that despite what his constituents wanted, he would vote for the third runway because his party demanded that he did so. Is that democratyc? Of course not. Did Hand follow the wishes of his electorate? No, he ignored them and toed the party line.

      I still think that the intimidation issue in parliament has to be addressed and the only solution in my view is to have secret voting. If you can think of a way that each member can cast a conscience vote for his electorate without being coerced by his party to vote the party line, then I’d like to know. Until then, secret voting in parliament seems to be the answer.

    • Peter says:

      03:57pm | 26/08/10

      @ Ziggy. I was also shocked to learn that a private members bill doesn’t get an opportunity to get voted on unless the goverment of the day allowed it. Now that stinks!!

    • DD Ball says:

      02:17pm | 25/08/10

      and what if everyone votes the same way again?

    • Majority says:

      02:24pm | 25/08/10

      Penalty shoot-out.  If still drawn, coin toss.

      btw, can we start calling Katter, Oakeshott & Windsor the Independent Party? hmmm, that sounds silly, KOW Party?

    • John says:

      02:26pm | 25/08/10

      While a few people at the top are paid so much money to do very little and those who perform the work earn so little our capitalist system is self destructing rapidly. Unfortunately those who proport to represent the interests of business fail to acknowledge the fact that when the workers cannot afford to purchase the products they make everything turns to sh!t. We need to devise an economic model based on sustainability or rein in the executives, politicians and others who take much more than a fair share. The most ironic part of our system is the fact that many aussie company shares are owned by workers via superannuation but greedy executives stiff the workers and the shareholders so as a result the average bloke is screwed twice over and has no bloody hope of ever getting ahead.

    • Helen says:

      02:31pm | 25/08/10

      In my view the independents and major political parties are focussing on the wrong issues, which are not priorities with mainstream Australia.  Fix the community problems such as health, roads, homelessness, decent aged pensions, support for the disabled before you even think about a $43 billion Fibre Optic Broaband Network (which is uncosted) or imposing taxes which are likely to crush the economy.  Overseas investors are already cooling toward our markets, because of the disastrous implications which could flow from the Labor Government’s deal with the Greens.

    • Ding says:

      05:05pm | 25/08/10

      $43 billion Fibre Optic Broaband Network (which is uncosted) ???  So how do you arrive at the $43b figure ? Is it because Tony says so ?

    • Max says:

      02:32pm | 25/08/10

      After listening to 5 weeks of campaigning, I finally had my democtratic right to cast my vote last Saturday. I didn’t have to dodge bullets or bombs on my way to the ballot box, since I live in a country where my right to vote is supported and appreciated. I am therefore outraged to find out that over 600 thousand people cast an invalid vote and many are thought to have done so deliberately. Thank you to those of you spineless enough to have chosen not to make a decision, but instead chose to take no responsibility at all for the future of our country - your country. I sincerely hope you are enjoying the result you have created for the rest of us - the very fact that we have no result at all. Shame on you. In my opinion the only course of action now is to have another election as soon as possible. I cannot accept that it is democtratic for our future to now be held in the hands of three or four people who are pushing their own barrows.

    • Rosie says:

      02:39pm | 25/08/10

      OMG have just finished listening to the 3 Independents and 1 Green at the Press Club. Can someone please explain how the 3 Independents would be allowed to make demands on the 2 major parties. It now seems we have another election campaign with 3 Johnny come lately candidates who the people have already voted in.

      I thought the idea of forming a minority party was for the Independents and 1 Green to choose which of the major parties they were going to align themselves with to get that magic number of 76 seats. I didn’t think we had to hear the different issues they were facing in their electorates. Now they are asking the 2 Major Parties for costings, about policies etc all of which we have heard so many times during the 5 weeks of the Election campaign. If they were listening they would have also heard what Tony Abbott & Julia Gillard were trying to tell us.

      What right have they got to have another choice at who we want to lead this country by their demands? They should just say which party they will back and enter Parliament as an Independent fighting for the electorate they represent like every other MP.

    • Jason CR says:

      04:15pm | 25/08/10

      Spot on Rosie.
      Surely Gillard or Abbott cannot change any policy after the election to appease 3 Independents?
      We all went to the polls knowing what each party presented (and that wasn’t much) and voted accordingly.

    • Gregg says:

      04:27pm | 25/08/10

      Yes Rosie, it does seem they are making something a lot more complex for themselves than it needs to be and then also saying they should not have to feel all this pressure they’re bring on themselves alone!
      Not so surprisingly, Brandt has aligned himself with Labor and so conveniently removes himself to be just a pawn for them.

    • Nicole says:

      07:56pm | 25/08/10

      I shall repeat Rosie’s words..Oh My God !!! I watched them and I’m just gobsmacked. Who the hell do they think they are? How’s their list of ‘demands’? One’s a grumpy old pr!ck, two’s living in the land of love and wants a massive group hug, and three thinks he’s J.R. Ewing who sleeps with a loaded gun under his bed…Lord save us. I’m with Penbo now, I want another election!!!!!

    • 21st Century Citizen says:

      02:43pm | 25/08/10

      Why aren’t we doing this online or by phone - Press 1 to Vote for HEMP, Press 2 to Vote for The Greens etc

    • Pavlo says:

      02:47pm | 25/08/10

      Another election may just produce exactly the same result.

      I for one, would vote exactly as I did on Saturday. You run the same lame old dogs, you’ll likely get the same result!

      Isn’t this election result a very accurate barometer of what the Australian citizenry thinks of the 2 party system and the power hungry pollies that are wanting to be voted in to power?

      Just because you don’t like the result doesn’t mean we should play another round of 2 up. What if another election simply results in another $170m dead-lock? Best out of 3 maybe?

    • Arthur Spencer says:

      03:03pm | 25/08/10

      Penbo I have to agree I was getting excited about experiencing a hung parliament but I must admit the gloss is coming off quickly.

      If you look at the outcome its clear that there was a huge protest vote towards the greens. But will these people really change their vote towards the Libs?? I don’t see Labor’s primary vote lifting, so will we actually get a different result?

      Qld Labor won’t give up any more seats simply because there aren’t that many left. If the libs were to win they would need to win on the central coast and victoria and a seat in Tassy would help…

      No matter what happens I wish people would just vote Labor or Liberal if there is another election so we can get on with some real government.

    • Antennna says:

      03:03pm | 25/08/10

      Katter has been watching too many John Wayne movies, Ah guess Ah bedder git oudda town before Big Bob comes a ‘shootin’ at me too.

    • Graham S says:

      03:43pm | 25/08/10

      Antenna, if there were more Bob Katters in Parliament, an Independant member who truly represents his constituents, is vocal and stands up for them, demands attention and is uncompromsing in his efforts then Parliament would be a better place. He’s not tied down by the party line, he is not some time wasting, lazy, union hack, failed social worker or an unemployable apparatchik “rewarded’ with a seat. So he wears a 10 gallon hat, big deal, do you remember that silly old fool from Bennelong in his track suit? I live in an electorate represented by some prissy, plummy voiced, private school girl lawyer come Liberal Party worker where a disaster in her day would be a luke warm latte. Katter deals with rural Australia, diminishing farm incomes and suicides. I wish there were 50 of him representing us instead of the clowns we have more interested in their perks than people

    • Lauren says:

      03:03pm | 25/08/10

      To be honest I really don’t want to stand in line for another 40 minutes to vote when I live in a very safe Liberal seat anyway. I would vote exactly the same and the result in my electorate would be exactly the same.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      03:12pm | 25/08/10

      What we probably need is for the Army to take over the Government of Australia for a fixed period of 12 months. No new rules,laws, regulations etc. The bureaucrats, they are the ones who really run the joint, can continue to do so but make no changes to anything with regard to chrages,taxes etc.
      The Governor-General would then instruct both leaders to go away, take a deep breath, then sit down with their respective advisors and come up with some New. Intelligent. Achieveable POLICIES. Policis which can actually be put into effect. When they have got their houses in order the G-G, but only after a full 12 months, then issues the writs for a Federal Election.
      Financing? The minor parties get their $2+ per vote allotment based on the % of votes out of the 14million voters they received at the 2007 Federal Election. The two majors splitting the remainder equally.
      The majors have themselves to blame for the current impasse. They were so busy indulging in stupid, unitelligent (they ARE politicians fter all is said & done) personal, bitchy attacks on individuals. One current Federal Minister deliberately lied when she alleged Abbott had cut funding to health when in fact he had increased it. When this was pointed out to her she suddenly went silent & Abbott is still waiting for her or Gillard to apologise.
      They allowed what policies thay had to be buried under a stream of personal abuse so we poor punters had no idea whom to vote for!
      Bring in the Army!

    • N says:

      08:22pm | 25/08/10

      Haha, so a military coup is your solution Robert? Should do wonders for the stability of the economy!

    • Jezza says:

      03:39pm | 25/08/10

      The Australia wide drought is not the fault of any politicians. People who live in the bush received dole money to help them survive, which, just like their city counterparts is very hard to exist on.  I think another problem is that our super markets are buying in fresh goods from overseas because it’s much cheaper for them to do this, even though they are still charging us the customer very high prices for this. In comparison to most of the rest of the world Australia has a very high standard of living & wages are extremely high.  It’s inevitable that there will have to be adjustments to this because we cannot survive paying high wages, which puts the price of our goods up which means we can’t compete with places like China where wages are pathetically low. Small business in Australia is hurting & it’s small business which is our biggest group of employers. I predict a big adfjustment is coming in our standard of living, & it won’t be pretty. Sorry Labor….but the Liberals are the only party in our country that has the know-how to deal with this.

    • Robin says:

      03:45pm | 25/08/10

      If they do have another election I would hope it would be fair dinkum.  I feel the appropriate thing would be to have a number of referendum questions included so then the wishes of us the people of Australia would be known and could then be implemented.  They could just be yes/no answers to make it easier for all.  Questions could be on e.g. Refugees, Hospitals, ETS, etc We assist to pay for the polies wages through all the taxes which we pay and the government is supposed to work for the good of all Australian people and our country.
      Let us have a say please.

    • Peter Simmons says:

      03:48pm | 25/08/10

      As we will be going back to the Polls in 18 - 20 months when the Greens control the Senate,  irrespective of Labor or Liberal,  better to go now.
      Cannot bring the Army in, Robert,  as we now have a compromised GG,  who remains the Commander in Chief of the Defence Force.

    • Harquebus says:

      03:59pm | 25/08/10

      The people have spoken and elected their representatives. Is it democracy to say to the people “you voted the wrong way therefore, we will have another election”?
      If I am forced back to the polls then, my vote is worthless and I will vote informal.

    • Julie Coker-Godson says:

      04:51pm | 25/08/10

      Yes Harquebus the people have spoken but not definitively and given the personalities of the people involved in these present negotiations for government all that will happen is instability in government itself which is not a good look to our overseas and internal investors, to the commercial market et al.  We may well have to go to the polls again because the parties themselves refuse to govern together.  In which case who do you blame that you would vote informal?  Voting informal is one of the reasons we have this mess now I believe.

    • Markus says:

      10:59pm | 25/08/10

      Julie I thought it would be ideal for foreign investors. Provided the two major parties continue to be immature twats and bicker amongst each other (I don’t see that changing), the companies are free to continue on their merry way for 3 years without having another joke of a tax passed through parliament and heaped on them.

    • fairsfair says:

      04:04pm | 25/08/10

      I am happy to see that a lot of posters have chosen to ignore your portrayal of Bob Katter as an idiot and focus on the actual situation. It is a little uncalled for and I am not entirely sure of your motivation for it.

      I have actually met BK in person and the tv screen and media do him a diservice. He may be seen as eccentric to some yes - but he is real. He laughs with his entire body and he looks you in the eye when he speaks to you. He wears a hat yeah - because he doesn’t want to get sunburnt. He spends a lot of his time out on the road talking to his constituents. He is genuine. He has a presence about him and people stop and listen to what he has to say. Why? Because he is good at his job. His personality does come into it - and that is a positive thing. He was recently at a community funcion in my area and as he walked down the street past the pub - everyone cheered. They weren’t all there wearing a red or blue T-Shirt in a crammed room with TV cameras - they were bikies, cane farmers, dads, 18 year olds . It speaks volumes as the mayor was there, the labor state member was there and people didn’t even notice (or care). He is RESPECTED for what he stands for because he shows impartiality (in every aspect of his person) and that is why he will be returned to his position again. He gets results and with his suggestion that the bush is ignored he speaks the truth. I have lived in the city and the bush - it is painfully obvious. He is not my sitting member (I am the neighbouring electorate) but if I lived ten minutes up the road, he would have my vote for the reasons that he is currently demonstrating. So far he has only highlighted the plight of regional Australia and he has everyone running scared. Heaven help you all down there if his decision is actually required and a cent is actually spent.

      What are you all so worried about? Bananas might be cheaper? Some population may leave the city and return to the bush because it becomes viable? Renewable energy may be used to completely power Mount Isa with the construction of massive wind farms? Ethanol may be added to your fuel and reduce the price? I am sorry - but I see these things as good for all Australians.

      What has happened is a statistical freak but we must acknowlege it and deal with it as best as possible. No matter the result, 100% of Aussie’s are not going to be happy - but that would not have been the case if either of the two major parties were returned.

      It is high time that more sitting MPs took a leaf out of BK and the other independants book - you are elected to represent the interests of your electorate - NOT the agenda of your party. I think this is an exciting time for Australian politics and I am really looking forward to see how it plays out, because even if it doesn’t go my own personal way - a lot of issues have been brought to the surface and it is clear that whoever takes on the role of PM - People like Bob Katter will ensure that that person can’t just keep on sweeping these issues under the carpet.

    • Ivan says:

      04:33pm | 25/08/10

      Keep having elections until you get what you want.

    • Brett Smith says:

      04:59pm | 25/08/10

      The result from the weekends election proves that the whole country is fed up with political system and that both of the mainstream parties and their leaders are only in it for their own gain. Bob Katter, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott are all saying what any Australian who is in touch with what is happening in our country has thought for years. Anyone who thinks that this current political situation is no good for Australia is either completely oblivious to what is going on around them or due to jealousy, they fear that the bush and the responsible primary producers that undertake their business there will actually get the fair go they deserve and may regain some political power again. My last point is proven by the author of this article, either through poor journalism or pure ignorance, not being able to state which part of Australia Bob Katter is the representative of and that the benefits of this election result will only flow to three electorates. I don’t live any of those three electorates but I can see that this the best chance to get the whole country out the political quagmire that we have been driven into, not just a better chance for rural Australia to have it’s case heard.

    • Steven kaye says:

      05:31pm | 25/08/10

      I agree, Penbo. Whenever it’s held it’ll result in a comfortable Coalition majority, so why not hold it as soon as possible?

    • Rob Wearne says:

      05:38pm | 25/08/10

      I live in Katter’s electorate being a recent Sydney blow in some three years ago and the anger at the indifference to the economic situation is palpable and justified. Although I do not agree with some of B.K’S policy prescription, the issue of allowing global competition whilst tying the regions in green and red tape and taxes that are not being paid by our competitors is patently discriminatory. Most living in the regions are not socialists and are not looking for a hand out but a fair go.
      If city politicians wish to have these statist policies across the country in contrast to our major trading competitors in the emerging market (not the oecd) then it is only right that the infrastructure needed for the regions to compete should be provided.  This is the main point Katter and the other rural independents have been making.

    • wreckage says:

      07:30pm | 25/08/10

      That’s the best summary of the situation I have ever read. If the city politician wants to spend less out here, that is genuinely fine by me.

      But stop using our labour and capital at no expense to yourselves.

      Stop forcibly acquiring land use rights for your personal use as carbon credits.

      Stop implementing every environmental policy by legislative force and try negotiating in good faith and PAYING FOR WHAT YOU TAKE. We are reasonable, well educated and care more about the environment (measured in work volunteered and money spent, not pious rhetoric!) than you do.

      Stop tying us down with counter-productive regulations and laws.

      Give us back control of our hospitals, schools, and roads!

    • 4leaf says:

      06:11pm | 25/08/10

      Someone needs to explain to Katter that per capita, country people get more tax dollars spent on them - by far - than those of us in cities.  Think for example, how much it costs per capita to build a kilometre of road in the Queensland bush, compared to downtown Sydney.  Both sections of bitumen cost the same in total, but many times more people will use the metro road than the country one.

      I agree this euphoria about a hung parliament is misplaced and not based in reality.  But on what basis, David, do you assume a new election will produce a clearer winner?  I think it’s likely it will, which of course means thousands of voters have changed their minds in the space of perhaps a few weeks (on what logical basis you might ask?).  Presumably enough people in enough seats will either think “wow that was close, we nearly got Abbott as PM” and then vote Labor, or think it really is time to change governments and vote for Abbott.  But that can’t be guaranteed and $170 million is a hell of a lot of money to waste for another draw!

    • wreckage says:

      06:53pm | 25/08/10

      It’s more expensive to build roads in rural and regional Australia, but then, the road past my front gate will carry 7000 tonnes of wheat from this farming enterprise alone. What’s yours carry? SUVs?

    • fairsfair says:

      07:56pm | 25/08/10

      re your road example - What an irrelevant point to make.

      What about how cheap it could be for me to have power generated form the nearby power station and delivered to my home - yet I have to pay the same per kwh as southern cities who live further away from the station and require infrastructure for delivery. Actually, I pay more - because due to a lesser population density there is no market competition and we rely on the one supplier. Or, Bananas grown in Innisfail - trucked to the sydney markets and then trucked back to Cairns for sale by the grocery stores. I have to pay more for bananas due to transport costs when they are cut off the tree the days prior only 100km from my house.

      You really have no idea about the city/country divide.

    • 4leaf says:

      08:59pm | 25/08/10

      Actually I do - you two are taking an economic point as a personal slight on regional areas and have wrongly assumed I’ve never lived in the country.  Firstly, ‘Wreckage’ the fact it is more expensive to build roads in rural areas actually proves my point.  That is, the rural road still gets used by considerably fewer people than the city road and therefore, as a question of basic maths, country people get more cash from the government per person than city people for that piece of infrastructure.  ‘Fairsfair’ - last time I checked tax-payers didn’t supply bananas in this nation, so your point isn’t even in the same ballpark.  As an aside, I very much doubt you are buying bananas that have been down to Sydney and back and I am almost certain you are not paying the same price as I do for bananas in Adelaide.  If you are, then fruit growers/suppliers in your area are very poor businessmen.

      By accident ‘Wreckage’ highlights why we do need to support rural communities - to a point.  That is, though fewer people live in such areas, in economic terms those areas are huge sources of national income and food supply (we need them).  Where Katter’s claims are just plain nonsense is in suggesting (actually declaring) that country people are getting a raw deal from the tax payer.  That is simply mathematical humbug.

    • fairsfair says:

      08:54am | 26/08/10

      That is how it rolls with Coles and Woolies - they go down to market, they get purchased and then they come back for sale to the public - all accross Australia - including where they just came from. The farmers have no avenue for local sale direct to the big stores - and might I add that this is just another issue that Bob Katter is trying to bring to the fore.

      My point may have supplied non taxpayer examples - but the fact of the matter is, we all shoulder the burden of increased costs to ensure basic services be afforded for all Australians - like Electricity. Your point with the roads is stupid - people don’t want roads - they need roads. I understand the maths behind it and you are correct - but when you are talking about essential services it is not relevant. Talk to us about parks, landscaping, curbing and channeling, bike lanes, traffic mitigation on those same roads. We get the road - that is all we get. A strip of bitumin, sometimes lined. That is OK - we live in the country “there is not as much traffic”. Then lets talk about Hospitals after someone rolls it in a pothole the size of Tasmania because that really expensive road that doesn’t service a lot of people was last resurfaced in 1998.

      It is about equity - not equality.

    • wreckage says:

      11:43pm | 26/08/10

      If the masses of tax money don’t proportionally add up to a similar share of GDP to those that produce it, then it is not, in fact, a fair go. Farmers produce 500% the per-capita GDP of the (mythical, I admit) “average” and earn the nation’s balance of trade $254789 in exports per capita compared to $11,120 average. Now, that suggests that farmers at total “fairness” parity might get 500% the infrastructure and services spending -  maybe more, maybe less, but the point is that we should be working from roughly there. If it’s under that, then it’s likely farmers are subsidising the rest of the economy. Only if it’s over that is there the possibility that farmers are getting some “cream”.

      But then, if we’re talking about rural and regional Australia then we can use the “agriculture dependent” GDP which is 13%, nearly 5 times the raw number I quoted above (in USD for GDP and AUD for exports) and when we come to exports and add mining- not much of which happens in the suburbs- then we are looking at upwards of 65% of exports.

      When people start talking about what it would be fair to give the rural electorates they also ignore the fact that currently the Australian economy at large is in possession of billions of units of carbon credit it took for free off rural Australia, and the fact that environmental and resource management works across the majority of the landmass are similarly compelled as needed from rural people, without payment.

      Governments also impose levies and fees on rainwater tanks, farm dams, and on-site anaerobic sewage processing against rural voters, often whilst subsidising the same for urban voters. In other words, we who do not receive a service are compelled to pay for it anyway- illegal if a company does it, peachy-keen if the government does it.

      Finally, agriculture creates roughly a million jobs in the capital cities. That’s one million household incomes we “give” the urban electorates.

      The fact that most rural electorates haven’t flipped the Coalition off tells you we are broadly on-board with free trade and free markets. What concerns us is that it seems to be a one-way street. Worse, governments are all for free trade when it suits them, but then also they’re happy to seize carbon assets, compel our labour, and take control of local facilities, often only to subsequently shut them down!

      When you hear us say we want a fair go AND we want less interference, it’s completely true, and it only sounds schizophrenic because we’re trying to argue with governments that have serious multiple personality disorders!

    • wreckage says:

      11:47pm | 26/08/10

      By the way, 4-leaf, I didn’t highlight anything by accident. We agree on more than you expect.

    • SA voter says:

      06:34pm | 25/08/10

      Wonder how long it will take for the electorate to work out that they are wasting their vote on the major party candidates. Vote independent, increase the chances of a hung parliament and wait for all the goodies to come your way. How would you form government then in a parliament full of independents??

    • Peter Musgrove says:

      06:38pm | 25/08/10

      Saterday afternoon I was around a friends home,and his 23 year ols son came home and proudley anounced he voted for the sex party and the green party.
      I asked why he voted for both partys his reply shocked me
      (1) the sex party, why not they grantee us more sex
      (2) the greens Well a really pritty girl with big titties handled him a how to vote card, well he told us with pride how could I say no.
      We should really ask the question.
      Did the brain dead twenty year olds ever go to school and if so what did they learn.
      Peter

    • Sally says:

      06:38pm | 25/08/10

      Yes, let’s have another election as long as we don’t get Maxine McKew back.

    • Ray says:

      06:43pm | 25/08/10

      We are becoming increasingly angry, are you people in Canberra getting the message - from voters of all persuasions.

    • David Z says:

      06:47pm | 25/08/10

      So basically your argument that we should go back to the polls is based on your belief that the independents will forsake the goodness of the whole (australia) to gain benefits for their own electorate. However, in providing support for your argument, you only single out Bob Katter and his extremist views, but fail to mention the other independents take on things. Your attempt to use the 1990s event to somehow draw connections between an electorate receiving benefits, in this case ‘extravagant telecommunications riches’, and the negative effects of that on Australia fails because the sale of telstra as having a negative effect on Australia is purely rhetoric - it can’t be proved can it?

    • Rob says:

      06:50pm | 25/08/10

      What’s up David? Afraid of a ‘democracy’? Unfortunately I agree with you for once “BUT”!!!!! Can we please find out first if the 100,000 so called voters really exist. And if they don’t, can we have them removed from the roll? And could we then have “GET UP” charged with treason and locked up???????? Seems pretty simple to me.

    • Justin says:

      06:59pm | 25/08/10

      David,

      I don’t think Katter was ever a Howard Govt member let alone a Minister?

      He was a Minister in the Joh Bjelke-Petersen Government throughout the 80’s.

      Justin

    • moofox says:

      07:06pm | 25/08/10

      Reading between the lines, our country is in more strife than everbefore. We are creating coalitions within coalitions, independent electorate blackmail is now envougue .Pack up the old kitbag and get to the queensland border before   the reds and greens give you the blues.

    • Geoff says:

      07:17pm | 25/08/10

      What the result actually shows is that we desperately need a third major party.  And no it is obviously NOT the Greens.

    • 4leaf says:

      09:03pm | 25/08/10

      How do the results show that?  And if they did, surely the Greens are the third party (I don’t see any other 3rd party with more than 10% of the vote).  Presumably you don’t like the Greens, but that doesn’t and can’t alter the reality of their vote.

    • Stewart Henstock says:

      07:38pm | 25/08/10

      OMG…The Marx Bros are holding the balance of power.

    • Agrarian Socialist says:

      08:16pm | 25/08/10

      And if I don’t get my own way let’s have another election after that. And if I still don’t get my own way, another, and another, and another ... until I do. Damn the expense because I know what’s best for everyone. I know grammar, you see ... I used to check it ... and punctuation! What’s more, because I’m so smart and know how the world works and how people think and feel and know what’s best for them I have been granted a platform so everyone can read my words and do what I say ... and hate all the people I hate.

    • Mark from Sydney's North says:

      11:32pm | 26/08/10

      Hey Agrarian Socialist. I bet your real name is either Katter or Oakeshot. Actually no, I know who it is, it’s Bob Brown you tricky devil…..

    • Rosie says:

      08:23pm | 25/08/10

      I don’t think anyone should give in to the demands of the 3 Independent lunatics. The country should have a military regime for 3 years with the two major parties forming a consensus govt. Ms Gillard can remain a caretaker PM for the first 18 months and Abbott the other 18 months. We should by no way allow the Independents to dictate to the two leaders what they want. That would stuff all of them up and for the next 3 years until the 2013 elections we will have stability and the best of brains from either side governing our country.

    • Stirling says:

      08:29pm | 25/08/10

      It’s not a bad thing that the regional voter is getting a fairer go, so i reject the premise of your article. Think of it as payback after so many years of neglect. Frankly, hung parliament = govt that can do very little damage = small government = good government.

    • Ania K. says:

      08:35pm | 25/08/10

      Bring it on for another the election. Let’s go back to the Poll.
      I’m sure we will have different results.

    • Dave says:

      09:06pm | 25/08/10

      I have no problem with Katter, He’s just another guy with a view. In a modern democracy you are supposed to be able to accept individuals from all walks of life in a multi cultural, multi faith, multi background country.

      Thats why you got the outcome you did.

      Two sizes does not fit all. Perhaps the intelligence factor is stuck on “Two Party Preffered” Should we only allow two parties to run? Lets stream line it, lets say it’s at 75 all. Lets allow only one party to stand and call ourselves a Constitutional Communist Australia, or CCA for short, has a kinda ring to it, like Copper Arsenic. What if two parties are basically the same.

      The Premise of the article is wrong anyway. Marginal electorates which don’t fit into the party promises for the election are forgotten by the big parties. Hence the result. You will live with it.

    • wakeupcityslugs says:

      09:41pm | 25/08/10

      Katter is colouful and a politician, but his job is to represent his constituency, and he is giving it his best shot. You might not like what he says, especially when it hurts by reminding city folk that they have it pretty good.  My 90 year old parents live on the NSW side of the Murray River, 3 hours from Melbourne in a town with 1800 people and a part time doctor.  The hospital (originally built entirely with local funds), essentially administered by Sydney bureaucrats is not much more than a clean, warm sick bay; the local doctor only sees patients 4 days a week; and an ambulance takes 2 hours to get there.  Locals don’t need a $43 billion NBN, rewiring for which will still have to be paid for to get the much vaunted high speeds into their premises.  The doctor could/would only use it 4 days a week and there is not the expertise at the hospital.  There is no taxi, irregular public transport to larger towns with services (like a dentist) and they pay higher council rates than suburban Melbourne.  City slickers may not like the way Katter talks, or what he has to say, and he may make city people feel smug and self-satisfied, but they should be prepared to at least try to understand what he is saying. After all, it is ‘modern’ cities like Melbourne that have us to the point where police resources can be applied to book for not locking your car.

    • Jon H says:

      09:58pm | 25/08/10

      David, This is by far the best and most important article that I have read for many years. We have to have a second election even though we dont want one. We can’t have a population of 20 Million people put in limbo by 3 or 4. The world is laughing at us and only those 3 or 4 people are laughing back.  These two leaders now have to back themselves as Australians and have another go. We don’t want second best, we only live once ,so go on have a second go. For AUSTRALIA.

    • David E says:

      10:23pm | 25/08/10

      I absolutely agree David. $170m isn’t too bad. In Julia terms it’s roughly equivalent to one library and half a computer.

    • Looloo says:

      10:58pm | 25/08/10

      I think the tone of Mr Penberthy’s article is exactly the problem - the indifference of the city towards rural Australia. The inability to take their concerns seriously.
      I’m pretty sure that if The Punch were to stop, we’d all be OK. You can’t say the same about food production and the extraction of resources to create electricity.

    • pete says:

      11:25pm | 25/08/10

      A new election is the only way but ban political advertising.

    • You are hearing but not listening says:

      11:27pm | 25/08/10

      Hey Haters.  The people have spoken, don’t insult them by assuming they somehow got it wrong.  Neither major party was worth voting for and the joe on the street will tell you things need to change.

      Now we have an opportunity for real vision - parliamentary reform, returning to how Parliament was intended to run by our founding fathers.  Even Katter has some decent views in regards to personal liberties (eg firearm ownership).  Good luck to them, for the first time the pollies will be accountable to the public and be forced to be transparent, to debate and to drop the spin.  Have not felt more positive about our political system for sometime.

    • David E says:

      07:56am | 26/08/10

      Nobody spoke for this scenario because who would’ve predicted that, nearly a week after the election, 3 individuals would holding both sides of politics to ransom. Furthermore, if a minority government is formed then nothing will get done. I’m not sure how that’s good for anyone.

    • Felix says:

      11:31pm | 25/08/10

      I think we should go back to the polls. There is something wrong with the way elections are decided if a situation like this can result. You have a loud bully representing a small constituency who wants to “control” what does or does not happen in government and for the rest of the country. This guy, representing a small electorate with a population of bugger all, will now decide who’s going to govern and who’s going to be PM????? Let’s guess. Well clearly it will be who ever goes along with him will letting Big Bob calls the shots and make the ultimate decisions. The GG should decide in situations like this and let the Independants carry on their normal role without this much overt power. Only 0.000000025% of the population voted for Big Bob but now we’re all stuck with him in this situation. We need a miracle.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:27am | 26/08/10

      Oakshott and Wilson have done the most talking and I have noticed that Bob is getting the most attention due to his hat. The real hard hitting issues clearly.

      Kennedy is actually one of the largest electorates in Australia. And you know the mining tax - well it will really affect the region and contribute greatly to revenue for the entire country. Seeing as though it will ultimately affect the livelihood of the region and contribute to the economy of the nation - don’t you think Kennedy’s rep has the right to raise some queries with this and many other crippling issues?

      The irony of all this is that regional Australia has sat since the year dot with three or four idiots in a big city making decisions for us without appearing to be interested - how funny that the shoe is on the other foot and you are all running scared. Not good is it?

    • C says:

      12:30am | 26/08/10

      I am actually enjoying this circus that Australians and their political leaders are putting up. Please don’t stop. Come on, let the rest of the world have a good laugh at Australian!

    • C says:

      12:32am | 26/08/10

      I am actually enjoying this circus that Australians and their political leaders are putting up. Please don’t stop. Come on, let the rest of the world have a good laugh at Australian!

    • WayneT says:

      02:39am | 26/08/10

      No matter how badly democracy has turned out for you, you don’t get to have another election.  The country can run with a minority Government - many do.  The only trigger for a new election is if supply is blocked to the government.  No new legislation being introduced because it gets blocked is not a sufficient reason either, because those type of things can reach a conclusion through compromise by the parties involved.  The senate would not be included if another election were held because the one just voted doesn’t even start until July next year, so we will still end up with the greens holding the balance of power there.

    • Bob the Builder says:

      04:57am | 26/08/10

      You’ll always get 89-90% of constituents who like to be led by the nose while the remainder struggles to keep a balanced democratic political process afloat. This time a larger number of us have woken up and said “enough!”.

      We DO NOT need a new election. Nor do we need to have the Inependents absorbed into one or the other merry group of no hopers to keep them in check. Let the political bloodbath begin to cull out the garbage within both major parties, including Abbott and Gillard. There’s an excellent opportunity to bring to account the political process and have some serious, soul searching questions being asked of both major parties. It will be VERY VERY uncomfortable for them for the next term but out of it we’ll get better candidates and better performance than the current bunch of trcky-dicky “experts” together with their 2 inept and loudmouthed, prancing hacks we’ve been asked to back.

    • jon gen says:

      06:53am | 26/08/10

      Waste another $170 million no way .Why assume that a new election would deliver a different result? I wouldn’t vote differently. How many people would? And would those who changed from Lab to Libe be balanced by those going the other way?

      And what’s so bad about this “instability”? My computer still works, water comes from the tap, the shops are still full of food. I think the whole “stability” argument is just a front for politicians who want power without limits.

    • Mike says:

      07:51am | 26/08/10

      As a small business person I fully back Tony Abbott’s decision not to have treasury cost the coalitions election promises. Treasury would in my opinion be very biased to the labor cause and would then be in a position similar to the independents bloc in influencing for all Australians which party will govern. More self interest in the hands of a few for the majority.

    • Christian Real says:

      07:58am | 26/08/10

      David Penberthy,
      You appear to be right, a new election needs to called immediately, because there could possibly be ‘A Conflict Of Interests” with the three Independents because they were all Former National party members,that now hold the future of our Country and people in their hands.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:17am | 26/08/10

      and you’d so be saying this Christian Real if the three independants were swaying to labor before they visit the GG who just so happens to be the mother in law of Bill Shorten. Maybe you should look up the definitions of democracy and majority - oh and while you are at it don’t forget “Conflict of Interest”.

      You mentioned yesterday in another post that things would be different if the dumb white fellas didn’t vote liberal. I’d respond to you in my desired manner - but hold up - that might be interpreted as a wee bit racist.

    • johnb says:

      07:59am | 26/08/10

      The punters sent a message to the major parties : a plague on both your houses. Let everyone draw breath and see what happens. It is refreshing that we are all having to have a good think about the abysmal state that politics has reached in this nation. We were treated like village idiots by both Labor and the Coalition. Perhaps now they will have got the message. Who knows? Another election might increase the protest vote. Radio callers to 774 in Melbourne were overwhelmingly in favour of the three amigos.

    • jg says:

      08:48am | 26/08/10

      Katter is obviously a nutter and completely full of his own self importance.

      No-one wears a cowboy hat in Canberra in the middle of winter. It’s wet and freezing out there.

    • Bill says:

      09:22am | 26/08/10

      obviously…based on his hat…

    • Pavlo says:

      09:33am | 26/08/10

      @jg “No-one wears a cowboy hat in Canberra in the middle of winter.” Well Bob does.  A hat in winter actually keeps your head warm and keeps the rain off. You’re obviously a city slicker.

    • Joao de Deua says:

      10:45am | 26/08/10

      He needs the hat kept on in Canberra so that when it is soaked with rain it would keep his head cool.  Wonder if that would matter much when he opens his mouth.

    • JDiamon says:

      09:22am | 26/08/10

      New Election is the only answer.

    • Joao de Deus says:

      10:39am | 26/08/10

      Enjoyed reading this article, David.  Lots of food for thought.
      Many of the comments were precise and worth reading.
      I could not care much for how the leaders look (as a MUG Aussie now living in England is reported to have stated).  I and all Australians would like to see transparency and leave the load of garbage they profess to be in the best interest of the “vox populi” in their smallest little rooms at home.  Bring on the NEW ELECTION.

    • Amber says:

      11:41am | 26/08/10

      I think another election will be more polarising rendering the Indies and Greens less effective, as anything different will just deliver the same result.  Is this a good thing?
      Labor will benefit as they have already been sent the ‘‘Not Happy’’ message and people will probably see their win as better than another cliff-hanger. Liberal may pick up stray Green votes for the same reason.
      I think it would be a very different outcome, but benefitting Labor.

    • jim says:

      08:45pm | 26/08/10

      Oh and who is to blame for this state of affairs? Perhaps the result is because both major parties rushed to the same right wing policies not wanting to take any risks offending anyone with principled ones. Labor certainly got the result it deserved and who knew the libs were unprincipled as well?

    • Youdy beaudy says:

      08:39am | 27/08/10

      Let’s just have a new election. These independent blokes are just stuffing around and enjoying their hour of power. The whole fiasco will probably be unworkable.

      Next time around people should vote on the best government to run the economy and bring in changes necessary for future benefit for all Australians in particular for the young who will have to take over eventually.

    • Ronny Eaton says:

      11:25am | 27/08/10

      If Australians want a stable government get rid of the Greens and Independents and let Pinocchio Gillard and Budgie Snuggle’s Abbott go at it.
      If Greens control the senate hang onto your purse strings as the chief Tree-Hugger will increase taxes everything.
      The choice is yours

    • Christian Real says:

      05:31pm | 27/08/10

      David Penberthy, I agree a new election should be called as soon as possible, especially now that it appears 3000 ballot papers from the Oaklands Park Pre-Poll station were tampered with.
      This news Story “Labor makes claims of vote-tampering in Boothby”, was written by Daniel Wills,political reporter, from ‘Adelaide Now’,  on August 27, 2010 @ 3.04PM.
      One paragraph of the story reads: ” Subsequently, I was informed by the Australia Electoral Commission that following an internal audit, an AEC employee had now admitted to improperly dealing with approximately 3000 ballot papers and that numerous potential breaches of the Commonwealth Electoral act had occurred.”
      I think under these circumstances that the Liberal incumbent, Andrew Southcott cannot claim victory untill a full investigation into this matter has been properly carried out.

    • Christian Real says:

      10:23am | 01/09/10

      In Another story in News.com.au “Mistakes means 452 votes won’t be counted”,  source: AAP, August 31,2010 @ 7.26PM
      “More than 452 early votes cast in the central Queensland seat of Flynn will not be counted after it was found they were handled incorrectly.”
      “Electoral Commissioner ed Killesteyn said an urgent examination into the circumstances which lead to the exclusion of the votes were underway.”
      “Mr Killsteynsaid it was a serious matter which had resulted in affected people not having their votes counted”
      With these so called mistakes and alledged ‘vote tampering, there should be no other option than a fresh new Election being called.

    • jono says:

      11:28pm | 27/08/10

      Well said Ronny Eaton… I’m praying the Libs get in so they reverse those stupid Marine Park rules so that Australians can actually fish the waters that surround, them instead of standing around looking at the water and wondering why idiots keep voting for the greens and labor.

      There is a lake on the north coast that we fish in that now has heaps of fish but they are all skinny because there are now too many fish and not enough food.  This lake was comercially fished for 30 yrs and they have taken the same amount of fish out of the lake each year. Which means in regenerates fine. Now you can only fish a very small part of it and the fish can’t be eaten. An example of a clueless government ignoring the figures once again.

    • Youdy beaudy says:

      12:26am | 28/08/10

      Why not leave the independents and greens with the seats they have won and have a fight off election between the Coalition and the Labor Party without any further talking on policy. Within the next month would be good. Getting a bit sick of waiting for the tango to stop. Isn’t everyone.! Let’s get a result and get on with it. !

    • masealake says:

      09:10pm | 29/08/10

      Why needs a new election that cost another $170 millions from people’s money for the good payment of all politician?

      $170 millions will create a wonderful “Health Olympic Australia” that directly benefits everyone in Australia within 3 years, and then apply to everyone globally?

      People demands fairer resources supported of lives today, not tomorrow, another 3 years on and on?

      “Health Olympic Australia” is a nationally and international significant movement in the 21 century “knowledge economy” in “Health Economy Gold Rush”. It would comfortably meet the commitments in full of development, no matter who won to run the government.

      There are at least five economic productivity outcomes will resulting significant GDP progressing from a “Health Olympic Australia” as follow:

      1. Reductions in Australian Health Workforce cost;

      2. Reduction in Healthcare cost;

      3. Reduction in lost productivity cost;

      4. Increase from agriculture outcome;

      5. Increase from “Health Olympic Australia” creation in goods/products exportation.

      Australia people will fill the miss opportunity to them should it exist today in the worldwide fast growing “knowledge Economic” in a “Health Economy” soon, if not to discover the “Preventive Health” action from the root base idea of a “Health Olympic Australia” for them.
      Ma kee wai
      (Member of Inventor Association Queensland since 1993)

    • John says:

      06:31pm | 07/09/10

      If you think the cost of a new election is a small price to pay, you can pay it.

    • Paul27Arlene says:

      11:28am | 21/12/11

      Some time ago, I did need to buy a building for my corporation but I did not earn enough cash and couldn’t order anything. Thank God my mate proposed to get the loans from reliable bank. Hence, I did so and used to be happy with my short term loan.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter