""and free up public resources
for those who really need it."""

thats the spin
the reality is people hate paying extra
if they supposed to have the best insurance

private dont mean better
it just means someone id making money
from your sickness

""The zero sum game
is that the tax "given away"
encourages private sector investment"""

thgis is the FAILED top down
trickle down affect
[the bailout..to the rich
[paid for by the poor]..

that now is seeking a safe place
to put their illgotten booty...ie into food/futures?
and political parties pocketts[yeah both of em]..

""and saves far greater investment
from the public purse.""

if govt..""greater/investment''
ISNT paying ITS OWN WAY...YET
then its not there to serve us

..only them [your party mates]
the bankers/media boys club

[who will buy the nbn..
FOR PENNIES IN THE DOLLAR..
the first change the libs get
who will then do like with telstra

LET IT RUN DOWN
let it go obsolete
let it become a cash cow..!

so govt
can yet again..
build their next 'privatisation'.

Lexi,

In the Westminster system of constituencies, it is difficult for independents to get a hold. Where they do it is generally where the nature of the constituency is sufficiently different from the majority, and where an independent is capable of projecting an agenda that reflects the individual views of that constituency more accurately than either of the major parties.

If one of the major parties has an overwhelming majority, the risk to the constituency is that there in no benefit to the incumbent party to pay any attention to their needs. In a hung parliament, the independents can earn massive rewards.

Where the politics are particularly divisive, independents may also flourish.

I believe that Oakeshott and Windsor believed that if they took a gamble and got concessions from the Labor party, that if the government was seen to succeed, their conservative electorate could be won over.

The risk that they tried to mitigate was that of Tony Abbott's vigorous opposition. They had to make sure that the incumbent government succeeded. To this end they concocted the "group hug" where the opposition would pair the independents, the speaker etc. In this case Labor could govern unimpeded, and they could maintain some appearance of independence.

They must have been horrified when Abbott simply tore up the agreement and set about bringing the ALP to its knees. They are now in a no win situation. Oakeshott's career as a politician is finished, and Windsor is teetering on the edge, and the appetite in the area for independents is at a low ebb.

If the polls continue on their trajectory, the federal election in 2013 is likely to be a repeat of NSW, with the key issues being the carbon tax and illegal immigration, and any chance of recovery for the infamous duo will be lost.

I would guess that the message to the pair from the coalition is to either help dump the ALP, or suffer political oblivion.

I am sorry Shadow Minister for getting truth involved in this thread.
But, as you know, both Oakshot and Windsor, left the national party,and got elected each of them,more than once.
More than twice in fact, as independents.
Both by the way had no links to the party's they left.
And both owed them nothing.
Both had margins that made their seats safe.
Not now, but let truth shine, you infer they let their electorates down, no way and you know it.
Those taking part in this thread SHOULD go to todays goggle home page, read the news.
Read the story about the man SM charges here.
Read Turnbulls comment, quote we are not questioning his honesty,well worth the read.

Dear SM,

After reading your post I've reached the conclusion that Tony Abbott has set the groundwork of dissatisfaction of both political parties with most voters (his personal approval rating also fell in Newspoll)
and therefore it encourages Independent minded people to stand for election and set the course for the collapse of the two-party system.

Your reference to the "Westminister System" is the illusion that the Australian government works or should work on the same principles as the British government. The similarities between the two systems are largely ones of decor, like the use of the mace. The major difference between the two systems is that Australia is a federation, a concept totally incomprehensible to the British. An appeal to the "Westminsiter system," is a slogan used by Opposition parties in an attempt to trick their opponents into foolish resignations.

As for Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott - being finished politically?
Not according to their constituents they're not. I've got family members living in their areas - and their only criticisms are of Tony Abbott. They strongly feel that Labor needs to point out the two-faced nature of the man's responses on any number of issues. Like the NBN. When Tony Abbott goes aroung talking about a $50 billion or $100 billion NBN - that the cost is less than that - he needs to be held to account all the time. As for the immigration problems - if the
Malaysian solution works and the boats stop coming - this problem will disappear (simple as that). It may be working to tear down the
Gillard government but if you look at the latest polls - it's not building Tony Abbott's approval rating.

All the government has to do is continue to sell the merits of the budget. Part of the problem currently for the government is that at the moment they are busy governing plus the fact that they have to take everything past the independents and the crossbenches at every opportunity. Therefore it isn't easy to actually see a program through let alone sell it.

Belly and Lexi,

At the time of the election polling of the areas showed a nearly 3:1 2pp preference to the coalition more so in RO's electorate than TW's. While both separated from the Nationals some time ago the association and expectation of values were there. Recent test polling in their areas shows that their support base has largely eroded, and to quote a colleague of mine in Port Macquarie RO has more chance of falling pregnant than winning the next election. Of my various contacts in the area who originally voted for him, none will now.

Lexi, the Westminster system has MPs elected by constituency, as opposed say to the Italian system where they are elected based on proportional vote similar to the senate. In the lower house the only difference to the English system is the preferences.

P.S.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/i-got-it-wrong-michael-quigley-tells-mps/story-fn6tcs23-1226057092055

Quigley fesses up to a string of lies.