Dear SM,

The senate voting changes are overall positive and had it been done honestly then I presume that Labor would have supported them as well.

But we all know the context in which they were made, that it is a part of a sinister scheme to force a double dissolution by hook or by crook in order to banish the senators they hate.

It's so transparent - now come May 3rd, the senate will be ordered to convene, but only the coalition senators (perhaps also Xenophon) will go to Canberra to attend - and so they will vote against their own ABCC legislation in order to pave the way for what their leader wants.

Y,

There is no precedent for labor putting the needs of the nation above its own. Labor finds the bunch of unrepresentative senators very useful.

Labor even agreed to do this in its pact with the greens in 2010.

SOL: I think this Bill will help weed out most of those mad little political parties that were surely started with a joke!

Like the Greens, hopefully.

Yutsie: all the parties except the big 3 dinosaurs.

Yep! That's what I'll be doing. Let's hope the Two big Party's have S#!t in their own nest.

I wouldn't count the Greens as a Big Party. With any luck the Druggie Party won't be around next time.

Now that we have a socialist leading the LNP, the changes would see the Senate dominated by Left of centre parties: Liberals, Labor, Greens and possible a few Xylophones. A blow to democracy.

What comes next if Malcolm Turnbull’s Senate clash on May 10 to create a new trigger for a double dissolution election is thwarted by the independents in the Senate by voting for the ABCC bill to keep their jobs.
Where to from there?

Dear Sonofgloin,

Even if the independents vote for the ABCC, some Liberals would be instructed to vote against it.