The first thing that the ex National Party so called Independents have
said is that they will negotiate their position collectively.

Bob Catter an ex National party state member and Minister in the
Bjelke Petersen Govt, is of the "I fish and I vote variety".

I think, he thinks, that declarations and the conserving of wild rivers
are bad for business.

Whilst he's possibly right (and I don't think this is the point),
I would hate to think that someone like Bob would be ultimately
making the decision about whom is to be PM.

Not to single out BC, but voting as a group is indicative of single mindedness,
and the collective ex National Party mind of the 3 (Catter Windsor and Oakshot)
will clearly want Tony Abbott as PM, not Julia Gillard.

Despite the conviction bleatings of all 3 of these ex National Party Independents (NPI's)
currently portrayed in the media, the fact is, that should the Coalition gain 73 seats,
all that will be required to govern. is the 3, together making 76.

Isn't that the magic number?.

The only thing that can save the Govt is gaining 73 of their own seats and
therefore being, in equivalent position to the Coalition in negotiations.

Posturing (through statements made publically), for this possible scenario (Govt = 73)
have been made by these "collective independents" (ex-NPCI's) as early as election night.

Should the Govt fail in getting 73 you can say hello to Tony Abbott as your new PM.

Thank you to all those traditional Labor supporters who allowed themselves
to drift to the Greens this time, for it's the Coalitions program,
you'll be getting as your new Government.

"Thank you to all those traditional Labor supporters who allowed themselves
to drift to the Greens this time, for it's the Coalitions program,
you'll be getting as your new Government."

Thanks to all those green voters the coalitions programs (if they were to form government) will be blocked in the senate.

Dear thinker 2,

I watched "Q and A," this evening
and I must admit that I was very
impressed with Tony Windsor.
I also watched "Lateline," and the
interview with Rob Oakeshott and
was equally impressed.

Both men struck me as being - decent,
honest, and high-principled men,
and I suspect that the reason
they left their National Party affiliation
is because they well and truly do think
outside Party lines - preferring to
be "Independent." I couldn't help thinking
that these are the calibre of men we need in
Parliament.

I can't comment too much on Bob Katter as I
only saw him interviewed briefly on the night
of the Election - however, from what I saw I
doubt if he could also be manipulated by any
given political Party.

I think that your concerns may be a little
premature. I suspect that all three men will
make the decisions that they feel will be the
right ones for their communities, and for
the country. They all seem
interested in having a stable government for
the good of all Australians, rather than playing
on any particular "team." For that reason I
imagine that they would not be a good match
with the Libs - who tend to be team players.

Anyway, we'll have to wait and see what eventuates.
It's going to be an interesting couple of weeks.

The 2 NSW independents are honest trustworthy and loved by those who elected them.
Look at the seats they hold and the results.
NO side of politics should demand they act in any way other than the way they do, every day, in the interests of the voters who sent them.
Yet a red neck farmer this morning in the red neck Sydney media is already threatening one of them ,if he sides with Labor.
Who ever he sides with will be in government, cop it sweet.
ALP voters can thank our party as much as anything.
NSW is waiting the worst defeat in our party's history, the ONLY thing NSW can do for the party is have the election now,lets start the rebuilding a day after, in a phone box.
And federally? get it out there now! tell the public about government by dictatorship!
Let voters know the only thing we got wrong with Rudd was left it 12 months too late.

thinker 2,

I would think at this time with both parties seemingly on 73 seats that labor are in the better position. With the green support they only need two votes and the members for Lyon and New England have made it pretty clear they lean that way with the NBN, health reforms and total lack of trust in their old party the nat's. Don't forget Hasluck with a record postal vote that normally favours the incumbent, we could have labor 74, lib 72 yet.

I find the independent collective position to be responsible in terms of delivering stability, imagine if they were all loose cannons (as i expect Katter to end up) the financial markets would be in meltdown. Both of the north coast independents will also demand a strong response for rural infrastructure which has been crumbling for years. We have a bridge that was washed out in the floods two years ago that no government wants to fix and a council that is broke with a local member both state and federal that are unable to achieve anything for the country as they are held hostage by the coalition.

As for the Senate, this is the Greens big test. If they can handle the responsibility properly and deliver responsible and sensible outcomes they will secure their position into the future, if they fall victim to the power on offer they will be sacrificed to the electoral gods at the next vote.

Thinker, how seriously should we take your opinions if you cannot be bothered to spell Bob Katter's name correctly? Just how "informed" are you?
Geoffrey Kelley

The very notion of independents supporting one or other big party is fundamentally flawed. As soon as they do this, their independence and integrity is compromised, isn’t it?

Are they obligated to support one or other party in the current circumstances or can they insist on remaining neutral?

If two independents were to insist on remaining neutral, would the magic number of seats needed to form a government then become 75?

I don't see how the three independents could consciously side with Labor given the situations in their own electorates. 3 seats with very very low Labor support, so if they're interested in their own constituents wishes you would assume they have little choice on which way they'll go.. they'll just try to milk out the best deals they can get before they do it.

I do agree that both Windsor and Oakehott (particularly Windsor) come across as very open minded and honest blokes

Ludwig, the independents can remain as independent as they want. To avoid another election straight away, they would have to provide in principle support to one of the major parties to ensure there is enough confidence supply bills would get passed. The governor general would have a very tough time appointing a Government if there was no confidence supply would get through, in which case you would be forced back to the polls again anyway. If they all remained completely neutral in this situation then there would practically be no way there could be a Government appointed, so it's highly unlikely they would do this.

So basically, they aren't making promises to fully support either major party, and you would assume given what we've seen from each of them that they would remain very independent. They just have to support supply to one party or the other.

Them, 'remaining neutral' won't ever change the number needed to govern. As neutral as they are, they still have to give a yay or nay to bills put to the house, regardless of who introduces it. They still each hold a vote in the house, so they count towards the 150 tally regardless.

Wilson, thanks for your reply.

I’m sure the independents would remain essentially independent and treat each issue on its merits. But the very action of aligning themselves with a major party for the purposes of forming a government is not the act of a true independent.

Why can’t the independents and the Green MP just say that they won’t block any supply bills that are put forward by whichever party wins power, for as long as they are sensible and proper bills, without committing themselves to an alignment with either party?

Crikey, if I was an independent, that’s what I’d be wanting to do, very strongly!

The greens will be hoping like mad that labor get enough votes to get in with out the independents, but thank heaven, that's unlikely.

It will do my heart good seeing these bushies screwing the citified Greens, Labor & Libs into doing the right thing by the country, for a while.

It would be nice to see maternity wards in the bush again.

The same subsidised transport that is handed to the cities for country folk.

Some of the money earned in the bush spent there.

Best of all it will be great to see a stop to all the bull dust restrictions the greens have forced on the bush, wound back a bit.

I wonder how long any government can last with a few in the lower house demanding some sense & equity, while we have the greens in the upper house wanting the opposite.

Boy the next few months looks like fun.

Because the first thing whichever side is in opposition will do is put in a vote of no confidence against the minority government of the day, in which case the independents will still have to make a decision or you go back to square one again. Realistically, it just makes it a lot easier for everyone if these 4 or 5 non major party aligned members of the house can negotiate an outcome.

Also, if it did come down to a true deadlock of 73 seats to both the Coalition and Labor (which is quite likely at the moment), a supply bill would still not be able to be passed without someone from either party crossing the floor, which wouldn't happen. Again you would have the same outcome of a block of supply and the Governor General would eventually be forced to dissolve parliament.

At the end of the day, you wouldn't think the independents and greens would want to abstain from voting on such important bills, even if it does mean them temporarily 'picking a side'. They're elected reps and you'd think they've gone to the trouble of getting there so they can have their say. Would be a pretty dangerous political move on their behalf to simply stand back and let the rest fight it out when people are expecting them to make decisions.

Just my two bob. It's an awkward situation for them but it is one of the perks (or risks depending on how you look at it) of running as an independent or minor party member; that you may one day hold the balance of power.

Plus, given Labor and the Greens struck up a deal prior to the election, you should be able to fairly safely assume that the Green in Melbourne will be compelled to support Labor, regardless of what he's saying now. If that was the party line prior to the election I couldn't imagine it changing bar something drastic happening.

So if he's going to take a side then it puts pressure on the rest to act too I guess

Wilson,
While what you say is true in theory and despite the noble talk from two of the 'independents' I doubt that democracy will be served.

Firstly, Bob Katter he is Queensland's answer to Tuckey.

I suggest you read on what he has fought for in the past. This man is by all accounts the lowest common denominator.
He has supported shifting the financial support from the non custodial parent; Staunchly anti gay; Staunch Joh supporter (gerrymander included) has described citizenship as "dee wogging" and the list goes on.
Does anyone really believe he will be neutral in his preferences or predictable? His career says not. He is the politician for his area.
Remember even bigots are nice to their friends some are reasonably smart/devious too. i.e. Enoch Powell.
Do we want this man filtering what gets passed and what doesn't i.e. more repressive boat people laws.

The others offer high ideals but as pointed out if they sided with the Labor they will suffer a local backlash and they know it.
This would extend to policies as well.
They will be under intense electorate pressure to filter and advance Conservative fear policies.

Tony Windsor has suggested issues like question time being cleaned up, an independent speaker, improved listening to committees and better communications with the Senate.
Chikorofski (no idea of the spelling) said on tv the independents forced that in NSW but all but the 4 year term were subsequently dumped. The conservative MP was subsequently dumped too.

In other words Chooks will be Chooks! Progressive? if it means bigger focus on the bush but not when it comes to urban progressive ideas.

Clearly I have no faith in the party system other than it will continue to do what it has done for years.

Yep I expect a coalition govt even though the majority 2PP (current numbers) of the people want a better (Labor?)progressive party.

The bloke who had a go at some one for not spelling catters name right, ok katter.
Why did you not separate your last and first names in your tag?
Because bloke it does not matter do not be so petty.
IQ is not measured by spelling ,understanding can be aq messure however

I'm with you there Belly.

If some of these people spent a bit more time thinking about what was said, rather than how it was said, or spelt, they would end up much wiser than they started.

examinator, very well said. I totally agree with you on Katter being erratic and unpredictable. It really wouldn't surprise me if any or all of the 3 independents end up supporting Labor. The other argument towards that I suppose is that they obviously all hold some sort of grudges towards their old party and it seems like they've all been given hell by the Nationals trying to pinch their seats back off them.. so that may be enough for them to ignore pressure from their constituents. Who really knows at the moment.

I'm making a lot of assumptions in a lot of what I've said. Whatever way they go they will cop a backlash from some of their supporters. The most logical way for them all to fall would be towards the coalition where you'd assume they all lean fundamentally (having all been National Party members) and given the strong anti-labor vote in each of the electorates, would cause them the least voter backlash. I think Windsor polled so strongly that he must be pulling Labor votes anyway, and he's been broken away from the Nationals for the longest, so it may be easiest for him to support Labor.. the other two may struggle to be re-elected if they were to make a move that way. Having said that, you could still safely assume that the better part of Windsors vote is conservative.

I still think the reports on the 3 independents leaning towards favouring Labor that came out in todays reports is a bit of scaremongering to up the ante on whatever deals they're all looking for, and they'll still be at least two of them, if not 3 that support the coalition. Wouldn't at all be surprised if I opened up the paper in a weeks time and they're backing a Labor Government though either.. it's just one of those situations.

One thing's for sure, I bet they're all sick of receiving random phone calls from 'long lost friends' on both sides of politics that wouldn't have congratulated them on winning their seats any other year!

I also wouldn't put too much emphasis on the highest 2 party preferred vote. It's so close that I doubt many will be giving much weight to it. If you were to look at primary votes then the coalition trumps Labor considerately. Once you start cutting the preferences Labor marginally win the 2 party preferred stakes. Without the green preference deal I think we probably wouldn't even be in this situation, and it's just not possible to know how many green voters voted green knowing they'd be assisting Labor to retain Government in the bigger picture.

Although traditionally the greens are closer to Labor than Liberal and they would have received a greater majority of green preferences anyway, in my opinion the overall margin for the highest 2PP vote (remembering after preferences) isn't big enough to draw the conclusion that the Australian people as a whole want Labor in power, as is being implied by Gillard.

Belly and Hasbeen, Iam not sure of the point you are trying to make. My tag is my conjoined name, but I did sign off the comment with my real name. It is a pity more of you do not have the same courage instead of hiding behind a sad tag such as Belly, or even worse, Hasbeen.
Perhaps I am just a pedantic fool but why do you left-wing socialist have to hide your real identities? Are you ashamed of your opinions? Are you frightened of making a fool of yourselves?
As I understand it, we have five independents, Tony Windsor, Oakeshott (NSW), Katter (Qld), and one from WA who took Wilson Tuckey's seat and now Wilkie from Tasmania. All of them have backgrounds in the National Party. The seats they represent are notionally conservative and rural, yet each player has had a falling out with the National/Country Party in the past, and continue fighting it out in the present.
Each individual has won, or hopes to win, special treatment for their electorates by virtue of being independents, and have/will be successful. But, if they collectively band together and return the Rudd/Gillard Govt., the worst Fed Govt. in living memory, their conservative electorates will almost certainly dump them at the first opportunity.
The dilemma is how will Abbott win them back to the consrvative side of politics and allow them to save face at the same time.
Geoffrey Kelley

Geoff, you had best jump on the phone, & send an ambulance around to Belly's quick like. He may be passed out in shock, or rolling on the floor in hysterical laughter. What ever, he will probably need help, after being paired with me, as a lefty socialist.

He has actually accused me of being Wilson Tucky, or one of John Howard's sons, in the past. However I can't stand anyone being put down, due to a lack of education, a learning difficulty, or any other reason they may lack vocabulary or spelling ability. With my typing ability, I sometimes have trouble even knowing what I meant to write. So what.

Some of us were lucky with their schools, & some weren't. Those who weren't don't deserve to be put down.

If you would like a test of courage, come & try me any time mate. What will it be, a race around Bathurst in an F1 racing cars or a thousand mile race single handed in 40 ft yachts.

Perhaps you would like a dog fight in jet fighters, or a round of show jumping on a large horse.

You see, I don't find it a badge of courage to put my name on a blog, & a joust with keyboards is not exactly exciting, but I do find it amusing, after struggling to fit all I wanted to do into just one life, to know I am, & to call myself, a Hasbeen. It is a badge of honour, a private joke with a mate who is no longer here, & none of your damn business.

If you don't like what I say, don't read it. No one is twisting your arm are they?

Now I'll get back to watching these blokes give the libs a very hard time for their past sins, & tease the daylights out of little Julie & co, with hints they may have a chance.

GK I grow weary of people like you, true.
Not unlike so many who both underestimate those they debate with and over estimate them selves.
Honesty, integrity, understanding, are not measured by spelling.
Like Hasbeen my education has been a whole lifetime of learning, in a world you could never understand.
At 13 I formally left schooling, but in reality started education.
I know people who while my age still can not read, but who no one can out think.
Petty remarks such as the one bringing this on your head speak about your failures not others.
Now independents, first do those who doubt them know about them?
Katter should be judged on past actions not his way of speaking.
The other two need no questions, if tomorrow they form government, and not with my mob, they remain honest good men.

GK you post a truly grubby untrue comment.
Are you a member of Abbott's cabinet?
No one should be forced to unmask here but my name, job home are known.
And bank on it you would never say that to my face.
Of huge amusement to me on election day, while fending of a drunken fool insulting the Liberal booths husband and wife team, the idiot told me, in my ALP shirt , I was a liberal heavy!
65 next few weeks quite chuffed but maybe still too proud to walk away from such a gutless comment, well never have so far.
Allan Bell
Proud to confront such as you until death
ALP voter
other enemy's include loony Lefty's right wing bigots and am a road hog, love the center of the road.

I must say I agree with you on the issue of names, Belly, but I do take issue with your mode of expression. You're obviously not one of those who can't read or write, but you do make a point of doing so idiosyncratically, I believe deliberately.

Personally, I don't have a problem reading your meaning, but only because I know what your likely stance is in the first place through fairly long acquaintance. Your actual words don't always make your view clear.

It is coming across pretty loudly, that because you dont like what Bob Katter is all about, he must therefore lack independence.
What the major parties hate about Bob most of all, is that he does a great job of representing those he promised to represent. He shows them up completely, to a point where they didnt even seriously bother to compete with him in any way, apart from threatening us with not getting any resources if we didnt vote for either major party.
He talks the talk and walks the walk, and does not have puppet masters in Canberra or Brisbane. He also wants a separate state of North Queensland, as most of us do, and that makes him a target for Blight etc.

Ahh yes, dogged old Bob Katter!

From Wikipedia…..

In 1996, Katter supported his National Party colleague Bob Burgess's comments which described Australian citizenship ceremonies as "dewogging". Katter described critics of Burgess as "little slanty-eyed idealogues who persecute ordinary average Australians."[3] Two weeks later, Katter complained that it was "nigh on impossible" to send children from his area to boarding schools "unless you're rich or unless you happen to be of Aboriginal descent".[3] Pauline Hanson later said that Katter would be welcome to join her One Nation party if he wanted to leave the Coalition.[4]

In 1997, Katter advocated changing the Child Support Scheme to lessen the financial maintenance obligations for non-custodial parents. He claimed there was an "anti-male bias" in the scheme, and that "in 90 per cent of cases the bloke has done nothing wrong . . . (and) the woman was at fault".[5]

He is a climate change sceptic and has been an opponent against enacting legislations to control emissions. "I mean, if you could imagine 20 or 30 crocodiles up there on the roof, and if all that roof was illumination, and saying that we wouldn't see anything in this room because of a few croco-roaches up there," he continued stating that "Are you telling me seriously that the world is going to warm because there's 400 parts per million of CO2 up there?" [6]

----

And now he’s in a pivotal position of power. Wow!! Interesting times ahead indeed!

geoffreykelley,

Why do lefties use pseudonyms?
Firstly Hasbeen is so right he makes Genghis Khan look like Karl Marx.

Secondly
My personal history is a good example why.

My wife, daughter were threatened by a right voting drone.
My two sons and I were threatened with physical violence by a builder and his subbies because he had told them that I was threatening their jobs. The fact that I was just one public face of a very large group of ratepayers didn't sink in.
BTW the builder scarpered interstate with their payments and declared his shelf co bankrupt.
PS he is in business in Darwin.

My property and that of my sons were damaged by other dissenting yobs.
My wife's private medical file was used to pressure me.

The house was egged , obscenities were painted on the road outside my house.
my then 80 yo mum got late night phone threats about me.

What had I done You ask? I was involved in local (council) politics, writing to the paper under my name etc.
Did I mention a bogus law suit designed to shut me up.

We won the argument the * six were thrown out but the damage they did is with us to day.

Apart from that, what is said is the issue not the name.

BTW I not a lefty in the sense of OLO .I hold views from both sides (sic)
Does that answer your question?

PatTheBogan

It's not that I don't like Bob Katter (I neither know him or care) nor am I saying he has low IQ. I simply don't like the way he uses it to appeal to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. He fans prejudices that can't be proven not to mention he deprives his electors from the motivation to think about anything but themselves. he fosters the the Joh mentality "don't you worry about that (I'm here to think for you) syndrome.

I distrust his avowed anti intellectualism as the Gate keeper's standards for me and mine.....I didn't and wouldn't vote for him.

This is politics and all participants are politicians regardless or of their party affiliation or so called independence.

Whilst I follow, enjoy and agree with most of your posts Foxy, I think this time your indulging in wishful thinking.
Politics is a numbers game. And thats it.

The taking over of the Liberal party, by it's neo-conservative hillbilly faction since
Abbott, fits neatly philosophically, and with the constituency of the ex National Party Independence Group.

Together they have already managed to block climate change policy and now they can
do so with the N.B.N. renewable power action etc. Interesting times ahead be stuffed.
All three Independent's represent mining or coal interests.

The proof of the pudding on this, will be 76 seats. Should the Coalition win 73,
say hello to an Abbott Gov't.

And on that subject; how ironic it would be, should the person least wanted,
by the Australian people to be PM, (Tony Abbott) become head of a new hillbilly
alliance Govt.

Abbott gained 38 % preferred PM rating in a 2 horse race, where the opponent
(apparently) failed to impress either. If you asked the question " would you have
preferred if Tony Abbott (and for that matter, his plans for our future) were not a candidate for PM ?

Would you have got 20-25% approval for Tony. I think optimistically.

In fact, if it wasn't for Tony Abbott being leader, and a whole lot of ineptitude
on the part of the Govt's campaign and tenure, the election would have been
a Coalition landslide.

Independence, shm-independence, the proof will be in the pudding.
And politicians will be politicians.

In addition the large Green vote was drift from traditional Labor support.
Naturally, preferences are mainly Labor, this was not due to "the preference deal"
but due to the fact.

The Govt assisted the green drift in the minds of many traditional Labor
supporters by not standing by climate change policy, not standing by the
mining tax, not standing up for refugee's, among other issues of principal.

As a New England voter I am really pleased to see the outcome of the election, so long as all sides can remain civil (in the not very distant past that would have been a funny joke, but there is suddenly an air of politeness in the political arena!).

Tony Windsor's appearance on Q&A on Monday is the Tony that I know as my representative. He is a man that is very active throughout his electorate and gives all issues fair consideration. Even when I dont agree with his approach on a certain topic, I can be sure that he has given it fair and thorough examination.

I believe that the Independants that have been put under the microscope so far will do their best to ensure that stable government can ensure, but at the same time if the side that they choose to support the majority of the time tries to "pull a swifty", they will quickly set things straight. Windsor has stepped back from party politics for that very reason.

Katter may have a reputation as a loose cannon, but at least he says whats on his mind and doesnt try to create a false image for the camera's like most of our pollies - you get what you see. That said, I do believe that he will take a position of power responsibly.

These men do not risk being voted out if they side with Labor - they have enough trust from their people that they may drop a few votes, but will still show a landslide majority. Their electorate will TRUST them - something that most other pollies only fantasise about.

I am really looking forward to the days ahead.

examinator sorry I write as I think.
And in truth have often had to look twice to see if you said what I thought you did, none of us gets it right all the time.
I am angry believe me very,, about such dribble about hiding, never ever think I would do so.
While you are much further left than me I feel reality is greens should consider even with boats full of Labor refugees/traitors they are bound for ever to be a minority,
There now you can dislike me even more.

Country Gal, I was a student at The University of New England, graduating in 1970. It was then the most conservative education institution in the country. We even had a residential college named after Sir Earle Page, the eminent leader of the Country Party way back in the twenties.
Whilst universities in the big cities had rabid left-wing radicals such as Albert Langer, Peter Steedman and Gareth Evans, we had ONE radical, known as the University Radical!
The biggest event in Armidale was the annual visit by Slim Dusty, and most of the students were drawn from rural areas.
I doubt that the New England region has changed much over the last forty years. The local member before Tony Windsor was Ian Sinclair, the leader of the old Country Party.
I know you trust Windsor, but if Windsor was instrumental in returning this very bad Labor Govt., how do you think he would fare in your seat electorally?
The Rudd/Gillard Govt. has been the worst federal govt. in this country’s history. Do you really suggest that Windsor can put this very bad Labor Govt. back in power and not cop extraordinary flack from the New England electorate?
Regards, Geoffrey Kelley.

Dear thinker 2,

Of course politics is a numbers game,
as the current Election has proven.
I was merely commenting on being
extremely impressed by what I saw of
the three Independents. And I still
trust that they will make the right
decision as to who they will or will
not support. Thanks to the Australian
people, we can only hope that our
political scenario may have changed for
the better.

What I find stimulating is that since
the Election, we on this Forum have
indulged in rigorous uncensored debate,
and that's the way it should be.
We should be able to confront a variety
of opinions, whether we like them or not.
By the way, I've got family living in
Port Macquarie,
Kempsey, and Quirindi. I'm somewhat familiar
with the area and its politics.

What the independents are doing is biding their time to see who is getting the most seats. With 3 seats they are no use to a party with 72, but are for a party with 73. Their "independence" is the first stage of bartering.

If the libs get 73 seats you will see Abbott as PM. With Labor at 73 you will see JG as PM.

GeoffreyKelley,

UNE has changed quite a bit - I graduated a significant time after you (>30yrs), and I know I found the whole uni experience a little to Left for me.

Take into account that New England has a State Independent too, who has very known Labor leanings - Richard Torbay. So I dont think that deciding to go with a Gillard government will be Windsor's undoing. If he does, and votes with their worst policies WITHOUT explaining himself well to the electorate, then he is in danger. But Windsor has shown in the past that he communicates very well with the people around him, so the risk is reasonably low.

Country Gal and others, according to “The Age” the current state of play is, ‘If counting trends continue in these three seats, the final result will be Labor 73, the Coalition on 72 - including WA National Tony Crook - plus four independents and one Green.’
The Green will go to the ALP, and so will Wilkie in Tasmania, although he will stay an “independent”, giving them 75 seats. If the three remaining independents go with the Libs, we have a hung parliament.

If the Three Amigos (Windsor, Oakeshott and Katter) go to the ALP, the results will be ALP 79 and the Libs on 72 seats. Gillard will apparently have a manageable majority of seven seats. But will it work? I doubt it.
Katter represents a large mining constituency and does not want the Great Big New Tax on mining. Katter also represents farmers and has mentioned on numerous occasions the number of farmers in his electorate that are committing suicide. Gillard will have to lean far to the right to accommodate Katter.
The Three Amigos all represent rural electorates so they will oppose the carbon tax, yet Gillard will face a senate controlled by the Greens.

Either way the country is in trouble. We either get three more years of the worst govt. this country has seen, or a hung parliament. We are in for a wild ride ☺

Geoffrey Kelley

In a previous post on 24 August I asked:

<< Why can’t the independents and the Green MP just say that they won’t block any supply bills that are put forward by whichever party wins power, for as long as they are sensible and proper bills, without committing themselves to an alignment with either party? >>

Wilson replied:

<< Because the first thing whichever side is in opposition will do is put in a vote of no confidence against the minority government of the day, in which case the independents will still have to make a decision or you go back to square one again. Realistically, it just makes it a lot easier for everyone if these 4 or 5 non major party aligned members of the house can negotiate an outcome. >>

I can’t see it. It seems to me that the LAST thing an independent would want to do is align himself with one of the major parties in order to determine which party governs.

While the independents would then remain essentially independent, except for the agreement that they have struck to not block supply bills or whatever, the act of aligning themselves with a major party for the purpose of deciding who governs, absolutely violates the principle of independence, and enormously so!

Tony Windsor said yesterday something to the effect that whichever party he ends up supporting will result in a swag of his supporters, in his electorate and around the country, condemning him for it.

So it is surely very strongly in the interests of the independents to NOT support either party, but to simply say that they will not block essential bills and that the party that wins the most seats should govern.

If it came to a no confidence motion against a minority government, the independents would again have the balance of power and they would surely vote it down, unless the incumbent government started really playing up.

Just how independent are the independents?

Hmmm….good question!

We need INDEPENDENT independents !!