Yes there is a mandate, given anything less would turn our "DEMOCRACY" [by the people, for the people, of the people,] into pure farce.

And Malcolm needs a crystal clear mandate from the people, to stamp his Authority on the government, and perhaps enable him to exert some influence on any and all upcoming preselections?

Disagree all you like, but in the imortal words of Robbie Burns," facts are cheils tha' dinna whinge."

Malcolm need the people's mandate, if only to get rid of oafish whiteanting trouble makers with a purely personal problematic power hungry agenda!

Even so, for some democracy is just a joke or to be sneered at as an inconvenience that subverts the will of the born to rule ultra arrogant Autocrats, Dinosaurs, Misogynists, Troglodytes, knuckle dragging netherendals and other pretenders!

Who invariably say anything, promise anything just to get elected. Or Trump democracy!? And the obvious pun was intended.

Or actioned in another way. Dastardly diabolical deals done in the dead of night to usurp/subvert the clearly expressed will of the people! And yet present terrorism as the worst threat to democracy!

We are not a communist or fascist country ruled by self appointed Autocrats! Leastwise, not yet!
Rhrosty.

I agree that innovation requires up-skilling and that this means replacing, over time, an unskilled workforce - and perhaps an unimaginative managerial culture. But I disagree with Rehctub’s approach to political argument.

In reminding us why the concept of a mandate is a myth he says most thinking people will vote for their interests. True enough, but they are also free to vote for a party whose policies they believe are best for the nation, that is, for the community as a whole, even if it is against their own interests because, for example, they have to pay more tax.

Politicians don’t have this choice. They are paid to serve the interests of the public, and have no right to use their power to advance their own interests or those of their friends or supporters. This truth rests on community values, including fairness, which imposes a duty on government to treat all citizens as having equal value - it must treat us with equal concern for our interests and equal respect as citizens of the same community.

I do not believe Rehctub would deny this duty, because shared values are the only foundation for rational political argument. Without it we are simply dogs fighting over a bone. It means, however, that IR laws must not only aim to free up skills, they must do so without unduly harming current employees. This argues for gradualism and perhaps compensation, quite apart from the need for more investment in education and training.

How to achieve this balance between productivity and fairness is a central problem for first-world nations, and Turnbull appears to see this more clearly than most. However that may be, the aim of the article is to challenge critics to explain what they would do in his place. They will, however, need to argue the case from community values, not just cite their own opinions, preferences and interests.

Max Atkinson

Max perhaps you could justify your obvious belief that if I give you a job, you can leave any time you choose, but I must continue to employ you for life, even when you are no longer of any use to me.

Hassbeen that has always been the unfair part about the whole unfair dismissal laws, but because there are more workers than bosses, the workers always win.

Rhosty, if governments do have mandates when the win office, why then do we have a senate. Shouldn't the peoples choice (your mandate) just be made law?

Sorry, but if a voter likes four policies out of six, but still votes for that party, it is not a mandate unless the change is made immediately after the election is won, without any form of debate.

That would be a true mandate.

calling someone who constantly undermined their elected leader as honourable is in line with regressive theology. The only runs on the board at all for the liberal party is stopping the illegal boat trade (saving billions and making country safer) and scrapping the idiotic breathing tax. Both these were done by Abbott. A close look at how Turnbull made his millions is not pretty. I seem to remember he supported his mate taking nude shots of 13 year old girls and then defining it as art. This man should be leading the regressive Labour party. Shorten and Malcolm have much in common. Unlike Max I believe private philosophy always works its way out in public policy. Malcolm is just waiting. I just hope the Liberals have enough sense and backbone to get rid of him before its to late.