While I support the idea that all parties should be put under scrutiny, the Greens will not win the balance of power in the Senate after this year’s election. For them to do so would require the coalition to be cut to 36 senators. Given that the coalition has 19 long-term senators, this means that it would have to win no more than 17 this year, two from the territories, three from each of three states and only two from each of three states. While the coalition is on the nose, I do not see its vote collapsing that badly in half the states of the nation. It needs only 42.9 per cent to win three quotas in any state, and it does not need that in primary votes but after preferences from various micro parties.

The more likely Senate numbers will be: coalition – 38, Family First 1, Labor 34, Greens 3. Under this scenario the coalition will be able to block the repeal of WorknotcalledChoicesanymore, leaving the Labor Government no option but a double dissolution. Then the Greens would have an excellent chance of winning the balance of power because the quota will be 7.7 per cent.

Yes, lets get some hard questions asked of the Greens.

Unfortunatly all we tend to hear about is the Libs and Labor as if they are the 'be all and end all' of Aust politics.

There are a lot of voters who are fed up with the 'two party' system that we are lumbered with.
Is it any wonder that we see a rise in the number and interest in Independants?

Other than hearing the Greens say 'no' to everything, lets hear what they say 'yes' to.

For example, What Social Welfare policies do they have , what ideas do they have to offer the Indigenous Peoples of Australia.

And as Malcolm King asks, how will the Greens fund their ideas?
probabaly by bringing home the troops from Iraq.

Hey now, there is a good idea!

The Greens and Democrats have not 'got off easy' in terms of scrutiny so much as been comprehensively ignored, the former more so. How often does any Green get more than 15sec on mainstream TV or radio? When was last time you saw any govt minister publicly debate against Greens?

Closest you get is in the Senate, and Sen. Rachael Siewert was crucifying the Govt during qu.time on ?Wedn for its inept and unconstitutional NT intervention legislation. Unconstitutional asset seizure, thats not news eh, not if its Greens that raise it. So by all means lets raise the level of scrutiny, it will make a refreshing change from the neoliberalism vs. neoliberalism-lite/pepsi vs. coke/Liberal vs. Labor 'choice'.

Runner.Can Family First make water? Not just 1.88% water? But what is good for all Australians, not just Family First!

As for Pauline Hansons fried fish and chips, if your happy with cholesterol, who are we to argue!

Good article. I'm a former active Democrat supporter who like many others departed following what we saw as the GST sell out. I'm now supporting the local Green candidate. The Democrats have a lot to offer again now with the likes of Allison and Bartlett, so hopefully eventually become reinvigorated. Once burnt though, still wary, I'm hoping that the Greens if they get control of the Senate will use it in a positive way.

From George Orwell's Animal Farm.

"No question now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

Power is a dangerous thing.

Yes… Yes …. Yes!

I’d like to see the Green asked the hard questions … and so too would the Greens. In fact, I’d like to see them asked any questions at all – instead of our being subjected to continual sound bites from the two majors every ten minutes.

Just ask the Greens some questions – hard, light, medium light, extra light, extra bold, medium bold, confronting, personal, impersonal, rude, obnoxious – anything will do. Somebody … just ASK them something!!