Both parties will be thrown out after serving only one term if local business does not get some red and green tape cutting before next easter. You can take that to the bank.

One can agree that under-performing govts ought to be afraid.
However it is hard and very simplistic, to simply blame any minority govt, because it was literally forced to break promises, or failed to fulfil instant gratification expectations.
It is argued that only around 30% of the vox populi understand economics, or understand the relevant issues, [politics.]
Meaning around 40% understand neither.
It is this same 40% that decide elections!
Little wonder we have a hung parliament and the exposure of ugly side of democracy, with offensive, shouted slogans, invective and banners.
Or patently partisan, decidedly disingenuous shock jocks, that prey on the weak minded, who have no formulated opinion, and or simply react to this form of, I believe, endless moribund mind manipulation?
What is the solution to all this, never ever political posturing, and endless non core promises; and or, career pollies too timid to stare down their detractors, or a perceived reluctance in public service higher echelons/ranks, to accept, usher in, or enact genuine and very long overdue economy enlarging reform.
Like quite massive real tax reform, and complementary vast simplification.
I believe the answer is as simple as always putting the current incumbent last on the ballot paper, and their preferential partner immediately above, for several election cycles.
Not only will we punish lazy recalcitrance, be it in under performing pollies or the public service, that is supposed to make them look good, with sage like advice?
But all those pollies, that believe listening to the will and intent of the people, is something reserved for election time, or simply to overcome policy paradigm objections.
A few more paper thin majorities or one term hung parliaments, will likely get rid of all the dead wood, party hacks/career pollies, who invariably put the interests of the party or political partners, ahead of the electorate, or indeed, their own conscience. Enough already!
Rhrosty.

Dr Ozdowski, you wrote:

< The governments that prosper will be those that are most adaptable to the new political landscape. >

Well, yes….

But what does this really mean? Does it mean that the political parties have to very carefully research what the electorate wants and pander absolutely to it? Or does it mean that they should lead, and by way of good governance, sway the majority of people to back them?

< The Gen-Yers, born between 1981 and 1994, are also voting now. They are said to be programed for instant gratification, “internet-addicted" and with unrealistic career aspirations. >

Yes! Actually most people are like that or they are pretty politically apathetic. Actually, that should be: And they are politically apathetic!

They are really not tuned into what is good politics for the country. But they do know that the same old same old, delivered by both Lib and Lab, is not cutting it!

So a government is not going to prosper if it just panders to the impossible demands of the narrow-minded or absent-minded here-and-now majority. A prosperous government HAS to lead!

If the philosophy and policies are right, then the voters will come onside.

So then, to my main OLO subject: a sustainable society which needs a stable population as its most important component, at least until we know that we can sustainably support a larger population. A major move towards this political philosophy and right away from very rapid population growth is what our government needs to do.

And there is no doubt that this, once it is seen to be genuine, WILL gel very strongly with the votership….and win prosperity for the party that does it… and long-term prosperity for the country and all within.

The governments that prosper will be those that are most adaptable to the new political landscape.
Ludwig,
I'd like to think the Government that culls the academics in its ranks will be the one that prospers. Get pragmatists to deal with everyday life not idealists theorising with our lives.
It's been tried for a few decades now & proven that the wheels keep falling off when academics pull the strings.