Foxy,

The problem is that the senate is a wildly undemocratic institution that was originally designed to prevent the large states from riding roughshod over the others, but now it has just become a chamber where laws go to die.

Reforming this moribund institution should include seats proportional to the population of the state and/or allowing the senate to delay and suggest changes to legislation not block it indefinitely as per the UK upper house.

Hi Foxy,

I am not a great fan of Shorten, but at the moment he and Labor appear to be the only viable alternative to the rabble that is the Coalition now. The conservative side of politics is badly fragmented. There is open warfare between Abbott and his supporters, and Turnbull and his. That cannot give good government.

How does Turnbull turn things around before the next election? That is the $64 question, I find it hard to believe he can. At least Labor appear to be fairly united, that is a plus for Shorten.

The Hansonite LeoW, shoots his mouth off with his usual anti Green rant, nothing new in that. We could discuss the ifs and buts of the Senate until the cows come home. It was the brainchild of the men who formulated the Constitution. It would take a referendum to change it.

I've grown up with a two party system in a Liberal voting
family. My parents looked at the Labor Party with suspicion.
They lived during the times when the fear of communism was
very strong and having fled from the Soviet regime - they
of course could only support the Liberal Party.

I voted along the lines of my parents for most of my life
until Tony Abbott came into power. I won't say any more.
I've been accused of being a "Leftie". Perhaps I am. I
like to think that I tend to go for policies rather than
along party lines. I also like people that I think are
competent. People like Julie Bishop, Kelly O'Dwyer,
Josh Frydenberg, and I also liked Malcolm Turnbull. (Now
I'm not so sure). But then I also like Penny Wong,
Tanya Plibersek, Chris Bowen, Larisa Waters, and Jacqui Lambie.
I find Scott Morrison a competent politician.

As for Bill Shorten? I haven't made up my mind about him.
I would prefer someone like Chris Bowen as leader of the
Labor Party. He seems to know what he's talking about.

So you see, my loyalties are not set in concrete. I tend to
lean towards what Aidan has stated in his post thus far.
Independent, competent people should be given a chance to
shine in the future. However, realistically whether this
can happen I'm not so sure. Party loyalties seem to be a
priority.

Foxy, interesting to read your examination of your politics !

Re the senate, remember when the construction of the constitution
started, in the late 19th century.
Radio was a VLF (very low frequency) experiment that was just starting.
Telegrams could be sent interstate, but it was a four week return trip
to Western Australia.
The states were somewhat suspicious of Federation.
They wanted an upper house that was elected by equal vote for states
that could veto legislation that they did not like.

Now everything has changed, video conferencing around the world.
Western Australia is a five hour trip away.
Mind you that might not last all that long, except for politicians !
It is now time to discuss removing the senate.

Egos do bloom in the Senate. Some egos are puffed to monstrous proportions. Especially where Senators and one minor protest party in particular reckon they are there as a ginger group and have no obligation to take any notice of the will of the people for a coherent set of policies, an mandate, being brought to fruition by the government in the House of Representatives.

Here is the arrogant Greens' Sarah Hanson Young confusing a TV series with the Australian Defence Force (ADF),

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-tp2TkRgJ8

However, some small parties and independents do demonstrate a more mature understanding of the Senate's role. That is where the Senate can attempt to understand the more subtle, unanticipated negative effects of legislation in greater depth and to make constructive suggestions.

There is the example of David Leyonhjelm, a Liberal Democrat Senator for NSW, who regularly contributes thought provoking articles to this forum. Agree or disagree with him, he is putting on his thinking cap to earn his Senator remuneration,

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=6583

Now I will expect the Jackasses who play lets pretend as astroturfing Greens, to cat call me as a 'Leyonhelmite' or some other silly name.

To repeat, when considering the federal Parliament it is necessary to understand it in a mature way, to comprehend the rather finely balanced controls and balances that make it work so well in general. That is, if only some Senators would not be wasting Parliament's time strutting their egos and trying to drum up headlines through protests.

As an example of the last-mentioned, what might the respectable watching public think of that Greens Senator Larissa 'the lights are on but there is no-one at home' Waters who appeared to encourage protesters interrupting the ABC Q&A program that she herself was on!
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/current-affairs/young-people-are-being-targeted-protesters-fury-disrupts-qa-debate/news-story/7875124e0d244a08d3e3375084118878

Maybe that is the significant finding for this thread, that some Senators do not not fully appreciate their role. But they are likely incompetent anyhow. They are a dead weight and disruptive, but they still walk away with their golden handshake.

Peter Costello wrote in his Memoirs:

"My eighteen years in Parliament - in Opposition and in
Government - have confirmed me in the conviction, formed in
my youth, that politics, for all its rough edges, is a
civilised and civilising calling. Despite all the obloquy
shovelled on the head of politicians, they are men and women
who work the machinery of our liberal, democratic way of
life. They reflect public opinion - and at their best lead
public opinion - and transmute it into laws that shape our
society and our country... I have no doubt we can find solutions
that suit us, provided we do not succumb to the siren calls of
demagogues, charlatans and ideologues."

He goes on to say - "We now have opportunities we never
had before in Australia's history. The best years for our
country are still in front of us."

That was written in 2008. I wonder how many today would agree
with those sentiments?

I do. However, times have changed, elections have been lost,
and barely won, and federal electoral failure should lead
to serious critical reflection. Plainly something is going
wrong as more and more voters are becoming more vocal.
They are worried about their own future and the future of
their children.

Political parties must enunciate the values that define them.
And they need to apply these values to issues that concern
wider groups in the community. It by addressing these issues
that they can widen their constituencies.

There is an audience ready to listen to those who have the
courage to address their concerns. This means communicating the
values that motivate a party's political approach to the
issues of the day, and convincing voters this will improve
their lot and improve the fortunes of those they care about.
It also means showing what this will do for the nation.