Pelican

Your point about the Howard government having total control is a good one and probably why we now have a senate with enough numbers now to prevent Rudd from becoming a hegemony like the previous administration.

However, while I agree Turnbull did the right thing, I don't think it was for the right reasons. He offered no compromise or alternative solutions, he simply blocked the proposal. Did he not consider that the independents and Greens would be willing to work out a compromise? He could've achieved some real credibility in offering a viable alternative.

Fractelle
I agree and made a similar point in Foxy's "Have the Liberal's lost the plot" thread in relation to the sincerity and motivation behind Turnbull's stance on the stimulus package.

Dear Fractelle and Pelican,

I too had high hopes when Turnbull first took
over as Leader of the Liberal Party. But,
unfortunately he's disappointed me since due to
his stance on so many issues. All the Libs seem
capable of doing is attacking (ok that's their job),
but how about offering some solutions?

I watched the ABC's 'Q and A,' programme the other
night and Hockey was an embarrassment on the show.
Abbott of course ... no more needs be said there.

They had better wake up to themselves soon, even
Costello won't be able to bail them out.

Foxy,
There in lies my criticism of the way politics are 'played' like two head strong children neither prepared to give an inch....opposition for opposition sake. Both sides fail to see that their job is to run the country for the benefit of the people not vested interests and the party.
I remember listening to Fred Chaney (Lib WA) in Senate way back and thinking how objective and sensible he was (even if I disagreed with him he was trying to improve the legislation) once he went to the reps he was just another trained/controlled chimp in a suit, chewed up and spat out by the system.
A loss to Australian politics.

"I remember listening to Fred Chaney (Lib WA) in Senate way back and thinking how objective and sensible he was (even if I disagreed with him he was trying to improve the legislation) once he went to the reps he was just another trained/controlled chimp in a suit, chewed up and spat out by the system.
A loss to Australian politics."

True. The biggest problem is that the MPs who could do some good are placed in the party straightjacket as soon as they get into a position where they can make a difference. You then get the phenomenon where the best speeches and values are forced to the sidelines and ignored, while all party members are forced to move along a prescribed political path as a herd.

Unfortunately, it's the only way for political parties to survive. The best that can happen is that MPs with good ideas are able to enact them using their politically-correct screens as cover. The downside (for them) is that they might never receive the credit (as no one knows what they've done!).

Dennis Pryor, with his tongue-in-cheek
sums up the Members of Parliament thus:

1) backbencher:

A member of Parliament with a brilliant future behind him,
a trudger through the lobbies, a party man, a spender of
electoral allowances, a consumer of free air-tickets, a
collector of living-away-from-home expenses, a
commonwealth car passenger, a jet-set junketeer, a
cultivator of his electorate, a survivor of pre-selection.

There are three types - the disgruntled failed frontbencher,
the seatwarmer who will never make it, and the still hopeful,
hyperactive aspirant to a portfolio.

2) frontbencher

a) A friend of the Prime Minister
b) A long-standing party hack who cannot be left out.
c) A tool of the public service.
d) A political assasin ready to knife the Prime
Minister in the back.

Then of course there is 'preselection.'

preselection

The process of blackmail, bribery and ballot-stuffing
used by the parties to decide which of their nonentities
we are to have the privilege of voting for.
Preselection is a battleground of factions where friends
are rewarded and enemies punished.

Factions are the new growth stock in Australian politics.
Formerly monolithic in nature, parties are now developing
splits under the strain of special interest groups and
maverick individuals in the Party.