We have had much talk about the senate, but between the following
The coalition
Labor and the Greens
Who will have the majority control of the senate after this election.

As 2 party prefered
labor
coalition.

Who do you think or know.

It is no wonder that nobody has posted to this as labor and the unions know that with there workchoices ad, this is nothing more than scaremongering and a lie.
The lie is that the coalition would not be able to change the fair work act and this would still allow the unions to get a 25 million dollar payday.

Wouldnt it be better to educate the workers instead of lying to them.

Treating them as stupid,gullible idiots as usual will only last so long, but when the workers really learn that it was just wrong then the heat will turn up for labor and the unions.

No question needed the Greens will have the balance.
It need not be so if greens get too radical main sides could agree to combine but that is nor going to happen.
Or is it?
A returned Labor government could get short term support from who ever replaces Abbott, that would be a start to rebuilding the conservatives vote.

Dear Mr Tapp,

The most likely result of the 2010 Senate election
is that the Greens will gain control of the
Senate balance of power from July 2011.

This outcome is certain if the Gillard Government
is elected.

The Coalition will loose seats to Labor and
almost certainly deliver the balance of power
to the Greens.

ok Stewart you have your answer more than unlikely other than as said greens balance.
How about some answers for me.
Your constant insults to anything union/ALP what are your IR policy's?
What would you do about boat people.
Migration
457 visas.
tax, mining tax, ETS, you are standing for election any one can throw stones but what are your intentions?
do you see a place for unions?

Sorry Belly

That is not what this Discussion is about

Foxy, given the current range of no hopers on display, we can but hope Gillard gets in, and Brown turns the red seats green.

The standard of debate around Gillard is absolutely pathetic, with 'shacked up' being the new anti-female cry.

I know Julie Bishop is 'shacked up' with a divorcee, and it makes no difference to her when Lib pollies are talking about the sanctity of marriage, does it?

Neither should it, but how low can the media crews get?

Meanwhile, reasonable questions concerning just what changes, and how we should start to make them to move from an 'oil' economy, are not being dealt with.

Still, when Turnbull is back, and Abbott has taken his place on the backbenches, as he waits for his post parliament PR job to come up with Pell, and the older less useful Libs start to fall away, fearing another three terms in Purgatory, we might make some headway.

Belly's questions are relevant, but will unions remain so under Gillard, after her keen support for the anti-union building employers?

And her gormless assaults on the AEU and its affiliates?

Our school has not 'got better' at all, not under Gillard, not under Bishop, it just keeps on going 'irregardless' as Senator Rubble says, and it remains a management disaster whoever is in government at state or federal level, like most schools without proper leadership or funding.

Many of us here have stated how disengaged we are with this election, more so than other ones, and so we must carry some of the odium that follows our foolish pollies, I reluctantly accept, but... what to do when all is lost anyway?

The mythical 'strong leader' we are all, seemingly, waiting for is, of course, an illusion but gathering the will to fight on all fronts is beyond all of us, I fear.

I suspect Mr Tapp will not start flowing in whatever seat he seeks a safe berth in, but someone will.

The question is, does it really matter who gets in?

It seems not, so far.... except in the Senate maybe?

TBC after the election lets debate the future of the trade union movement.
Workchoices is not dead Labor not a lot like we once thought but after not before the election.
Sorry after years of insults to me, unions, Newcastle, ALP tapp has not respond to a wish not know his policy's.

Belly, let's hope there is no end to the unions, since there will be no end to bosses, or safety issues, or frauds in emtitlements and so on.

But I do wish the unions would 'get with it' just a little, and spend more time 'edumacating' members, maybe even with scholarships to colleges.

Check out Ruskin College in Oxford UK, for an idea or two.

My experience, in a couple of unions, was that they are run with the same mentality as a 'small business'.

They need to avoid the 'corporate' attitude, develop past the corner shop mode of thinking, and find a new niche.

The problem is our community, who resent unions, and bad bosses, and taxation, and politicians.... the result of a very poor education system, with no effort to 'citizenise' (if I can invent a clunky phrase) the citizens, and too little imagination to understand why they should be.

Take no offence at that, you may do what you can, but I am talking about the 'big picture' of the union movement, which is smaller than a 'cigar box' series of paintings.

I know nothing of Tapp, where you clearly do, but he sounds like that new dud party the 'repodems', a rightwing bunch of anti-workers with nothing more than 'power' in their sights.

I think the reform of the ALP is more pressing, but I also know that unions create the ALP.

So, it's a chicken-and-egg situation.

Which needs to be reformed first, to reform the other?