I do agree, GY, that Oakeshott would be a bad choice for Speaker for the reasons you outlined, however Shadow Minister thought this a shameful incident which when compared to antics by the Libs thoughout their regime and Labor more recently is not remotely shameful, just typical pollie ambition.

Dear SM,

No one is talking about "unchallenged rule,"
but how about doing what's good for the country?
Coming together on policies that are for the good
of everyone - regardless of who suggested them.
How about putting party politics aside as Graham
Young has suggested in his post?

There is a time to challenge, and a time to support,
what scares me is that the Coalition doesn't seem to know
the difference between the two. And I very much doubt
whether this is going to change anytime soon.

Graham Y, the Australian National Party is a "separate" political party to the Liberal party. The National party has it's own leader, Warren Truss, and it's own internal processes. If the opposition had won the election, it would have been a "coalition" between the Liberal party and the National party, plus supporting independents.

In Queensland the Nationals (the dominant party there) and the Liberals merged to form one party ........ the National party there is not a division of the Liberal party. As you would be very well aware, but didn't mention, they merged in Queensland because the Liberals knew they were getting decimated at election after election after election there. Their only hope for survival in Queensland was to merge with the dominant National party. The vast,vast,vast majority of those LNP votes in Queensland were in "reality" National party votes. As I said, the Australian National party is a separate political party, it's not a branch of the Liberal party. If the Liberals in Queensland ever get back their previous influence and power they'll dump the Queensland Nationals quicker than you can say "phony policy costings". The National party and the Liberal party have their own separate identities, even when "temporarily" merged like they are in Queensland.

And as I previously correctly wrote, the official results regarding the primary votes for the Labor and Liberal parties are:

Labor: 37.99%

Liberal: 30.46%

That's a mathematical fact.

Labor + Greens got 49.75% of the primary vote

Liberals + LNP + Nationals got 43.31% of the primary vote

It's plainly obvious the public sentiment was towards the left of middle ground rather than towards the right

On those obvious and clear figures it would have been a grave miscarriage of justice if Tony Abbott was now Prime Minister. He's NO Liberal hero, because he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Eventually the Liberals will come to realise that.

Tony will be knifed, and replaced by either Malcolm Turnbull if they want to win the next election, or Joe Hockey if they want to lose the next election.

Oops, sorry for 3 posts in a row. I forgot to mention something I wanted to say.

I think Rob Oakeshott as speaker is a fantastic idea. In parliament the members scream and shout at each other and continually go for the "personal" jugular. They behave like naughty little children. It's pathetic to watch. We need a speaker who's prepared to spank their bottoms. If a speaker acts unconstitutionally, illegally or with undue favour there are processes to remove the speaker.

Therefore Rob Oakeshott is a threat to nobody as speaker - - - - except those parliamentarians who think they can get ahead using abuse and personal aggression; the very ones who need their bottoms spanked.

Severin,

Your agreement with GY on RO is an admission that Rob Oakeshott is primarily motivated by self interest, and the only reason for your stance is because I said it first.

I also agree that Labor has no shame.

Jockey,

Maths is obviously not your strong point. Quit before you dig any deeper.

Foxy,

The coalition is not going to block legislation they agree with, however, Labor pork barrelling and fantasy projects that are not really in the interest of the country will be opposed.