Post by: Joseph41 on July 18, 2017, 02:21:11 pm
EDIT: For clarity, Larissa Waters has resigned.
Post by: strawberries on July 18, 2017, 04:30:29 pm
Post by: Joseph41 on July 18, 2017, 04:32:16 pm
What do y'all think about the citizenship law though?
I don't fully understand it. Is it just a blanket rule that dual citizenship is a no-go? If so, what's the rationale? Conflict of interest?
Post by: vox nihili on July 18, 2017, 04:40:50 pm
I don't fully understand it. Is it just a blanket rule that dual citizenship is a no-go? If so, what's the rationale? Conflict of interest?
Yes, blanket rule.
Quote
Any person who:
is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power; [...]
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
My understanding is that the rationale is just as you said, a perceived conflict of interest.
In my personal view it was a completely reasonable provision then and is completely reasonable now. It protects against the potential for foreign nationals to influence our country in a way that serves the benefits of their own country, rather than our own. I think that's a reasonably remote possibility; however, the cost of having this provision in the constitution is fairly low in any case, so it's sensible to be a little bit careful.
Post by: Bri MT on July 18, 2017, 04:51:19 pm
Post by: Joseph41 on July 18, 2017, 04:56:50 pm
it seems quite sad that people are losing their jobs due to a formality which they didn't know about, I hope that there was an option for them to immediately begin the process of renouncing their citizenships and retain their seats.
Is ignorance a relevant consideration in a situation like this, though? (Genuine question.)
Post by: Bri MT on July 18, 2017, 05:09:08 pm
Is ignorance a relevant consideration in a situation like this, though? (Genuine question.)
It's very difficult to prove ignorance so maybe not
Post by: vox nihili on July 18, 2017, 08:25:55 pm
Is ignorance a relevant consideration in a situation like this, though? (Genuine question.)
Certainly not. I agree that Larissa Waters' story certainly seems like that of someone who was genuinely ignorant of her situation, but Scott Ludlum's was either total rubbish or ignorance bordering on incompetence.
Not a reflection on what you've said, but I think the discussion around this would be very different if the senators that had had to resign were far right of centre (polar opposite of Ludlum and Waters who are far left, of course).
Post by: K888 on July 18, 2017, 09:20:35 pm
I have two questions:
- Will Ludlam & Waters be able to re-enter politics in the future if they renounce their dual citizenships?
- Do their seats face a recount, or does another Greens member just replace them in their respective seats?
Post by: EEEEEEP on July 18, 2017, 09:32:05 pm
Is ignorance a relevant consideration in a situation like this, though? (Genuine question.)Hard to say.. .but idk.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't care if people are of dual citizen (as long they are competent).
Post by: vox nihili on July 18, 2017, 10:00:36 pm
Admittedly, I'm not super up to date with Australian politics. I sort of follow it on the news, but am not familiar with all the nuances of the system.
I have two questions:
- Will Ludlam & Waters be able to re-enter politics in the future if they renounce their dual citizenships?
- Do their seats face a recount, or does another Greens member just replace them in their respective seats?
1. Yes.
2. Both, actually. The Court of Disputed returns (a session of the High Court) will have to hear the case and determine what to do, but basically what will happen is they'll do a recount. Then whoever the next people on the Greens' senate list will be called up. The bloke who's replacing Ludlum though has already indicated that he might resign as soon as he's called up, so that the Greens can vote on who to replace Ludlum with. In this case they would be appointing someone to a casual vacancy and tradition (though not law) dictates that a senator who resigns will be replaced by someone selected by the senator's party. It's actually the state parliament of the state from which the senator comes that decides, but they nearly always follow the advice of the party (only exception I can think of was Arthur Field, who was appointed by Joh Bjelke Petersen's government in 1975 against the advice of the Labor party).
If the bloke who replaces Ludlum actually does resign and the Greens have to choose someone to replace him, that person could conceivably be Scott Ludlum if he renounces his citizenship. Go figure.
Post by: mixel on July 19, 2017, 12:28:41 am
however, the cost of having this provision in the constitution is fairly low in any case, so it's sensible to be a little bit careful.
Hey, I used to think the same but I read an article saying that 1 in 4 Australians is eligible for a dual citizenship, and it implied that if any of those 6+ million people were to stand for election, they'd have to formally renounce ties with that country (I haven't fact checked either of those claims, but it was in SMH)
I feel like the potential foreign influence concern is a bit unrealistic. If any dual citizens were to stand for election, its a reasonable assumption that either A) they wouldn't be standing for election for subversive reasons on behalf of another country because the long slog to elect one representative will probably have no effect / they'd be demonstrating preference for Australia with their residence and desire to represent, B) they'll get poor support because most people are understandably concerned about foreign influence, or C) they'd stand for election in an electorate largely representing Australians of similar cultural background, which would be a positive because there would presumably be no better person to balance the interests of Australia as a nation with awareness of the issues dealt with by the minority communities they represent.
That said, because it's a constitutional issue there's practically no chance of it ever being amended, so there isn't really any point debating it as much as letting it renew discussion about what it means to be an Australian
Post by: vox nihili on July 19, 2017, 11:29:30 am
It also raises some of the points you made, mixel :)
Post by: vox nihili on July 25, 2017, 08:39:17 pm
Another one bites the dust.
Post by: Joseph41 on July 25, 2017, 10:08:31 pm
FYI
Another one bites the dust.
Incredible sloppiness.
Post by: vox nihili on July 28, 2017, 03:11:49 pm
Malcolm Roberts (ON) was probably a British citizen when he was elected. He had supposedly applied to have his citizenship revoked, but his request wasn't processed until five months after he was elected (ergo actually a citizen). He's said today that he never saw himself as British therefore he was never a citizen even if the British government thinks he was.
There's some concern brewing that Julia Banks (Lib, Chisholm [North East of Melbourne]) may have Greek citizenship and might be ineligible. She has denied having citizenship, but there is discussion about whether she might have been granted Greek citizenship automatically because her father was born there, despite she herself having been born in Australia.
Thus far, the loss of anyone caught up in this debacle has really provoked a change in the complexion of the parliament; however, the loss of Julia Banks would not force a recount of the election, but rather a byelection. This is potentially a problem for the government, as they only have a one seat majority and, unlike the others caught up thus far, Julia Banks sits in the lower house. Chisholm is a marginal seat that was held by Labor for nearly 20 years prior to the 2016 election, when Julia was elected.
Victoria is the safest Labor state and obviously home to Bill Shorten himself. Chisholm is one of the few seats in Victoria that Labor could potentially win in an election, so any byelection here would be extremely dangerous for the government.
Post by: Calebark on July 28, 2017, 03:18:46 pm
Malcolm Roberts (ON) was probably a British citizen when he was elected. He had supposedly applied to have his citizenship revoked, but his request wasn't processed until five months after he was elected (ergo actually a citizen). He's said today that he never saw himself as British therefore he was never a citizen even if the British government thinks he was.
Malcolm Roberts thinks a lot of things...
Post by: vox nihili on July 28, 2017, 03:23:04 pm
Malcolm Roberts thinks a lot of things...
There is a certain irony in the fact that a One Nation senator may lose his place in parliament for being a foreigner
Post by: strawberries on July 28, 2017, 03:55:24 pm
Malcolm Roberts thinks a lot of things...I am choosing to believe Malcolm Roberts was never elected.
Post by: Lavar Big BBB Balls on July 28, 2017, 05:36:14 pm
With all this dual citizenship controversy going on and possibly an early election, will this affect the government's aim to force NZ citizens and permanent residents to pay full fee uni places from 2018?
Does anyone know when the Senate will be deciding the outcome of this issue?
Post by: JeffChiang on July 28, 2017, 06:08:13 pm
Hey,
With all this dual citizenship controversy going on and possibly an early election, will this affect the government's aim to force NZ citizens and permanent residents to pay full fee uni places from 2018?
Does anyone know when the Senate will be deciding the outcome of this issue?
Not sure if this would have a major impact specifically regarding uni fees for NZ and permanent residents. However if it does, it will probably be in favour of the LNP as both Greens senators are now gone who would be opposed to the changes so there will be less votes against when it goes to the Senate.
Parliament resumes on 8 August so the Senate basically can do nothing until then. So it will take at least few more weeks after that to resolve the issue.
Post by: vox nihili on July 28, 2017, 06:56:40 pm
Hey,
With all this dual citizenship controversy going on and possibly an early election, will this affect the government's aim to force NZ citizens and permanent residents to pay full fee uni places from 2018?
Does anyone know when the Senate will be deciding the outcome of this issue?
No. They're two separate issues.
Don't know, sorry!
Post by: Lavar Big BBB Balls on August 08, 2017, 05:20:54 pm
Is there a date where the senate term 'ends'? Not sure if that makes any sense but is there a set time interval where they need to discuss everything they have to? Couldn't find an exact date on the net.
Post by: Joseph41 on August 08, 2017, 06:11:51 pm
What a time to be alive.
Post by: EEEEEEP on August 08, 2017, 06:16:50 pm
**Politicians wanting power and the nation getting well screwed over**
Post by: vox nihili on August 08, 2017, 09:08:53 pm
Possible dumb question:
Is there a date where the senate term 'ends'? Not sure if that makes any sense but is there a set time interval where they need to discuss everything they have to? Couldn't find an exact date on the net.
Not dumb at all, complicated stuff.
There is a term when the senate ends. That's when the government calls an election and the senate is "dissolved". During the course of the election the senate doesn't sit to make laws, because they're in the process of electing new senators.
This becomes a little more complicated though, because some senators in the current senate are serving three year terms (so they're elected to be there for three years), whereas others are there for six. So at the next election, only half of the senate is up for election, even though the rest doesn't sit during the time of the election :)
Post by: vox nihili on August 14, 2017, 03:42:03 pm
NZ has confirmed that Barnaby Joyce is a citizen of NZ making him ineligible for parliament.
Supposedly the government's legal advice suggests that he would be able to stay on as a parliamentarian, but I think this is a really unlikely given the clarity of the constitution on this matter and the precedent that has been set by the High Court.
This is huge news because Barnaby Joyce is our deputy Prime Minister. He also happens to be a member of the lower house, where the government only has a one seat majority. His seat would likely go to a by-election, which may be difficult to win for the Nats if former independent Tony Windsor stood again. This could, very conceivably, lead to the toppling of the government.
Post by: Joseph41 on August 14, 2017, 03:44:20 pm
Very big news.
Post by: K888 on August 14, 2017, 03:59:24 pm
Supposedly the government's legal advice suggests that he would be able to stay on as a parliamentarian, but I think this is a really unlikely given the clarity of the constitution on this matter and the precedent that has been set by the High Court.How would it be that he could stay on as a parliamentarian? Is this like some legal loophole or middle ground?
If the government loses its majority - do they have to try and form minority government, or do we go to an election?
Post by: vox nihili on August 14, 2017, 04:17:20 pm
How would it be that he could stay on as a parliamentarian? Is this like some legal loophole or middle ground?
If the government loses its majority - do they have to try and form minority government, or do we go to an election?
In his case (and incidentally in Matt Canavan's) they think that they might be able to argue that they can't have taken reasonable steps to renounce a citizenship they didn't know they had. So effectively they're pleading ignorance, but in a more round about way. This shouldn't stand up in court (but I'm no expert).
One would imagine that they would probably receive support as a minority government but it wouldn't be a government that would last a particularly long time.
You may remember that early on in the piece they lost control in the house (Labor managed to succeed in passing a couple of procedural motions). They also won a number of votes by a one seat margin (e.g. banking royal commission, penalty rate changes). So in my view it would only be a matter of time before the government lost the confidence of the House and thus the Governor General would be obliged to call an election.
Just as a fun aside, people usually think that for a government to lose confidence, they have to have a motion of no confidence passed against them. However, according to House of Representatives practice, they merely have to lose a vote on the floor of the House (and thus they go).
Another fun aside. The Governor General once ignored a motion of no confidence in his government. In this case, the House voted against the Fraser government and for the opposition (led by Whitlam at the time). Rather than appointing Whitlam's government, the Governor General broke precedent and called an election instead.
Post by: vox nihili on August 17, 2017, 07:17:08 pm
Fiona Nash is telling the senate right now she's a British citizen. She's a minister (can't for the life of me remember what for, probs irrelevant now anyway because lol bye, and a nationals member).
EDIT: lol she's Barnaby Joyce's deputy.
Post by: vox nihili on August 18, 2017, 11:07:54 am
Xenophon now referring himself to High Court re possible British citizenship. He was automatically a Greek citizen by descent, but unlike his colleagues actually renounced before entering parliament. He's made jokes this week about not being a Greek or Cypriot citizen and was even so bold as to give a quote suggesting he was just to rile people up.
His father is a Cypriot which at the time of his birth was British territory. This could make Xenophon a British citizen by descent.
Post by: EEEEEEP on August 18, 2017, 11:10:23 am
Another updateWhat do you expect to come out of all of this?
I expect another election in a year or two as too many people have left and there will be too much conflict within parliament.
Post by: vox nihili on August 18, 2017, 01:16:10 pm
What do you expect to come out of all of this?
I expect another election in a year or two as too many people have left and there will be too much conflict within parliament.
Really unpredictable. A lot depends on the High Court's interpretation of s44.
Losing the senators wouldn't be a huge loss (though Xenophon would for his own party, given it's named after him).
Losing Barnaby Joyce or Ann Sudmalis could be a problem. They would both go to by-elections. If they lost either of those elections, they would be in trouble. On current polls, Ann Sudmalis' seat could be expected to swing to Labor, seeing the government lose their majority.
Likewise, Barnaby could be in trouble. He won with a very healthy majority, but one wonders what this latest kerfuffle would do to his popularity. No one could really say. If he had Tony Windsor run again (particularly if Barnaby decided not to stand...which could happen?), then he might be in trouble.
In that case, government would fall pretty quickly. It would be a minority government with a cross bench that doesn't like it, effectively.
Post by: Zainbow on August 18, 2017, 08:03:19 pm
Post by: vox nihili on October 27, 2017, 11:12:46 am
Post by: elysepopplewell on October 27, 2017, 02:33:26 pm
Post by: zofromuxo on October 27, 2017, 02:36:10 pm
Still going into the election, I don't see the Liberals getting another term after this debacle.
Post by: K888 on October 27, 2017, 02:41:15 pm
Barnaby Joyce and four senators ruled ineligible in shock High Court RulingSo, if Joyce has lost his seat, it goes to a by-election, and he can just re-win his seat because he's renounced his NZ citizenship? So in effect, nothing will have changed?
Post by: elysepopplewell on October 27, 2017, 02:54:07 pm
Edit: Most interested in him because I thought his whole "my mum signed me up for citizenship" debacle was amusing.
Post by: vox nihili on October 27, 2017, 03:01:47 pm
Barnaby: pretty much, Kate. There’s a slight chance that he could lose the by-election, particularly if Tony Windsor tan again. You might remember him as the previous member of New England, who supported
Julia Gillard’s government. He resigned in 2013. He recontested the election last year and got smashed by Barnaby.
Canavan: he changed his story about his mum. Basically he just likes to everyone because why not? In the end, he was allowed off because his citizenship was conferred to him by having an ancestor who was Italian. The high court ruled that this was a bit silly (in effect) and that he probably didn’t really have citizenship.
Post by: Joseph41 on October 27, 2017, 03:03:02 pm
Post by: Vegetable on October 30, 2017, 09:06:34 pm
Here are some topics:
-Mass Immigration
-Foreign Investment
-Safe Schools program
-Euthanasia
-How screwed our economy is
If anyone has any other topics I'd be happy to discuss them
Post by: vox nihili on October 30, 2017, 09:41:41 pm
Alrighty fellas, since this is the general Australian politics thread, why don't we discuss some important issues facing Australia today!
Here are some topics:
-Mass Immigration
-Foreign Investment
-Safe Schools program
-Euthanasia
-How screwed our economy is
If anyone has any other topics I'd be happy to discuss them
Interesting you raise euthanasia, actually. For those not from Victoria, you might not know that we've just recently just seen a bill to legalise euthanasia pass our lower house. It's going to the upper house this week, where the government hopes it will pass and euthanasia will become law.
The bill itself provides for a fairly conservative approach to euthanasia, where the patient would have to jump through a number of hurdles. The critical requirement—and perhaps a source of contention among euthanasia advocates—is that the patient must have a prognosis limited to 12 months or less, which is fairly restrictive.
Love reading your posts on this thread, vox nihili.
Thanks mate :D
Post by: strawberries on November 01, 2017, 04:30:55 pm
Post by: Joseph41 on November 01, 2017, 04:42:59 pm
Senate President Stephen Parry is British and resigns......wow
Fashionably late to the party.
Post by: vox nihili on November 01, 2017, 09:53:46 pm
Senate President Stephen Parry is British and resigns......wow
This is already causing a little bit of trouble. Until the high court can sit again to decide whether or not he should be removed (he's voluntarily resigned and we know he will be excluded, it just has to be official), the libs will be a man down. There's been a lot of argy-bargey already between the Nats and the Libs about whether the president of the senate (Parry's old job) should be from either party. Traditionally, it has always been a Liberal job—with neither the Country party or the Nats taking the role.
Post by: vox nihili on November 01, 2017, 10:09:59 pm
There are heaps of below the line votes in Tassie. If you exclude Parry from the vote, it actually affects the results of the entire senate election. This could mean that the high court may need to exclude another senator (Nick McKim, Greens) and replace him with another from One Nation. gr8
Source: https://theconversation.com/newspoll-54-46-to-labor-as-turnbulls-ratings-slide-further-if-parry-dqd-a-green-may-be-unelected-86537
Post by: vox nihili on November 13, 2017, 02:38:33 pm
shit's fucked.
It all seriousness though, since my last post the government lost its majority. There are now some Labor MPs who could be in trouble (they have a better case to answer than everyone else, because they actually renounced before being elected and put their papers in to do so before nominating). Jacqui Lambie will probably go (her dad is Scottish). New bloke from One Nation quit One Nation within an hour, which makes him brighter than most of Queensland (still an insult, don't worry). Where does everyone see this headed?
Post by: EEEEEEP on November 13, 2017, 02:41:05 pm
Latest updated:
shit's fucked.
It all seriousness though, since my last post the government lost its majority. There are now some Labor MPs who could be in trouble (they have a better case to answer than everyone else, because they actually renounced before being elected and put their papers in to do so before nominating). Jacqui Lambie will probably go (her dad is Scottish). New bloke from One Nation quit One Nation within an hour, which makes him brighter than most of Queensland (still an insult, don't worry). Where does everyone see this headed?
I see a huge reshuffle of parliament, battles for leadership and an election (earlier than expected).
So many cards have been played and shuffled that it's basically a mess now :P
Some bi-elections may turn out to result in Labour getting a member in and Liberal losing a member.
Post by: Bri MT on November 13, 2017, 06:08:56 pm
Latest updated:
shit's fucked.
It all seriousness though, since my last post the government lost its majority. There are now some Labor MPs who could be in trouble (they have a better case to answer than everyone else, because they actually renounced before being elected and put their papers in to do so before nominating). Jacqui Lambie will probably go (her dad is Scottish). New bloke from One Nation quit One Nation within an hour, which makes him brighter than most of Queensland (still an insult, don't worry). Where does everyone see this headed?
The odds aren't looking good for Liberals in terms of re-election: Turnsbull's being viewed as an ineffective leader, strong resentment (from both sides) over the plebiscite, the dual citizenship mess, & I imagine Indigenous Australians in particular are unhappy with recent decisions.
I think they'll try to wait until after the sleepy Christmas period has passed so people "forgive and forget", then try to promote their desired image for an election.
Post by: Joseph41 on November 14, 2017, 09:16:36 am
Post by: vox nihili on November 14, 2017, 09:22:00 am
Sounds like Jacqui Lambie's done. Amazing.
Can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’m actually sad she’s gone.
Plenty of crackpot ideas that I can’t hack but she has a way of cutting through the bullshit at times.
Post by: Joseph41 on November 14, 2017, 09:25:09 am
Can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’m actually sad she’s gone.
Plenty of crackpot ideas that I can’t hack but she has a way of cutting through the bullshit at times.
I thought she was pretty good value. This is getting beyond a joke, though.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on November 14, 2017, 01:33:21 pm
Post by: K888 on November 29, 2017, 12:26:56 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-29/euthanasia-is-now-legal-in-victoria-after-passing-lower-house/9205472
Post by: Mada438 on November 30, 2017, 07:29:32 pm
The assisted dying legislation has just passed the lower house in Vic.But it doesn't mean the other states are going to follow.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-29/euthanasia-is-now-legal-in-victoria-after-passing-lower-house/9205472
Although we may now see a mass migration to victoria
Post by: vox nihili on December 01, 2017, 01:38:00 am
The assisted dying legislation has just passed the lower house in Vic.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-29/euthanasia-is-now-legal-in-victoria-after-passing-lower-house/9205472
Thanks for putting this up! I'd missed this in the news.
Personally, I think it's excellent news. Even if you disagree with euthanasia, I'm just glad that people now have the choice.
Post by: K888 on December 01, 2017, 01:54:11 am
Thanks for putting this up! I'd missed this in the news.No worries! Really happy that it passed also. I'm glad that people will now be able to choose to have a death that is more on their own terms. :)
Personally, I think it's excellent news. Even if you disagree with euthanasia, I'm just glad that people now have the choice.
Post by: The Special One on March 17, 2018, 10:18:49 pm
Post by: Calebark on March 17, 2018, 11:33:45 pm
Not conservative enough!
In what ways?
Post by: The Special One on March 18, 2018, 01:54:44 am
In what ways?
The media doesn't help
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/many-australians-resent-the-abcsdaily-leftist-sermons/news-story/b279cffd84db521c0c5554bba3c5c395
And programs like the safe schools program gives me bad vibes.
I'm not happy that the liberal party is the figurehead of conservatism in Australia, since the Abbot era they've given conservatives a bad rep.
That party is in need of major reform
Post by: Calebark on March 18, 2018, 04:07:37 pm
The media doesn't help
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/many-australians-resent-the-abcsdaily-leftist-sermons/news-story/b279cffd84db521c0c5554bba3c5c395
And programs like the safe schools program gives me bad vibes.
I'm not happy that the liberal party is the figurehead of conservatism in Australia, since the Abbot era they've given conservatives a bad rep.
That party is in need of major reform
I actually can't access that article as it's behind a paywall. Correct me if I am wrong, but just judging from the title, it sounds like the article is about the manner of communication, rather than is what being said itself. I don't see why this should turn you off a certain view. It could turn you off certain groups, yes, but it doesn't invalidate what is being said.
Is there any reasoning because these 'bad vibes', or just a magical sense of intuition?
Post by: vox nihili on March 18, 2018, 11:51:05 pm
For those who missed them, there have been a few big elections recently.
The Liberals retained power in Tasmania, which was to be expected. Tasmanians seem to be somewhat nervous about returning to a Labor/Greens coalition, which was wildly unpopular. This was the first time the Greens found themselves in government in Australia.
The Liberals won the SA state election. This was kind of complicated. Labor had held power there for 16 years, most recently in a minority government. They actually did better at this election (and the liberals worse) than they did at the last; however, SA has a rule about electoral borders that require them to be redrawn after each election, such that the party that would have won the election if it were a state-wide 2-party preferred would win an election with the same results. The electoral borders at the last election actually favoured Labor, even though the liberals got more voters. At this election, it favoured the liberals.
This is actually really sensible, and is a policy that had it roots in the so-called Playmander. The Playmander was a gerrymander (redrawing of electoral boundaries in a way that makes it an unfair election) that basically required the opposition to win in excess of 60% of the vote statewide before they could win the election. Unsurprisingly, Thomas Playford actually holds the record for the longest time in office of any leader of a Westminster government (28 years). In that period he should have lost the election four times.
Finally, Labor managed to retain the seat of Batman, effecting a fairly large swing against the Greens. This was probably an inevitability. Even though batman is becoming more and more progressive, and much more likely to share the Greens’ policy convictions, Ged Kearney was a fantastic progressive candidate who had plenty of runs on the board for progressive politics. On the other hand, Alex Bhatal was dogged by allegations of bullying and the kind of background behaviour synonymous with Labor politics, not the kind and fluffy politics of the Greens.
Interestingly, Richard Di Natale made a last minute push to shore up the pensioners’ vote by saying the Greens would oppose Labor policy to end cash refund on imputation dividends (basically good for poor, bad for rich). This isn’t a good look for the Greens, and serves to highlight that, despite their purported progressive bona fides, they are still fundamentally a party of the wealthy.
Post by: The Special One on March 19, 2018, 12:43:32 am
So if we vote in a conservative government you would expect the media's tone and communication to shift towards that end instead it's left wing dominated.
So I do think it's a valid point imo as an instance of where I think it's not conservative enough.
Post by: Potatohater on March 19, 2018, 12:54:28 am
Well news networks receive funding and reflect the attitudes and values of society as should a repsrenststive government.If your issue is with the level of conservativeness of the ABC (I must admit, I'm confused by your point) well the thing is, content creators have target audiences.
So if we vote in a conservative government you would expect the media's tone and communication to shift towards that end instead it's left wing dominated.
So I do think it's a valid point imo as an instance of where I think it's not conservative enough.
In terms of the ABC they appeal to the left wing and so their content is left wing, and by adjusting that to fit the conservative nature of the parliament is not in thier best interests as they would lose loyal viewers such as myself (man they produce some good content!) and thus I fail to see your point.
Post by: heids on March 19, 2018, 09:17:37 am
Rather, it makes sense for there to be a variety of news channels with their own stances, and everyone can choose which one reflects their own opinions and assists with building their own confirmation biases.
*Random percentage selected. I have less than zero idea of the stats.
Post by: K888 on March 19, 2018, 11:21:16 am
Post by: EEEEEEP on March 19, 2018, 11:23:30 am
Is the sex party still around?
HAHAH, it is around, but they renamed the party to (Reason Party)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-22/sex-party-changes-its-name-to-reason-party/8830106
Post by: The Special One on March 19, 2018, 01:20:48 pm
It would be ridiculous to only have news following the stance of the ruling party. That begins to sound like Orwellian control. We "voted in" the liberals, but that doesn't mean the whole country wants them in... should a solid 50% of people* who dislike their policies have to hear only their views?
Rather, it makes sense for there to be a variety of news channels with their own stances, and everyone can choose which one reflects their own opinions and assists with building their own confirmation biases.
*Random percentage selected. I have less than zero idea of the stats.
That's not what I said.
I said that no matter who's voted in leftist media dominates the networks, this is true and hugely disproportionate to the 50% of people who voted liberal.
I thought I was clear but if I'm not I'll clarify. Conservative govnerment should push for equal representation in news networks between right wing and left wing so we get equal representation from both sides.
My point was they have been voted in many times and haven't done anything of the sort and are content to Lakewood the massive divide.
Not saying that oh shit the liberals are voted in shut down every left leaning news network ASAP. That would be ridiculous of course.
Post by: EEEEEEP on March 19, 2018, 02:01:08 pm
I said that no matter who's voted in leftist media dominates the networks, this is true and hugely disproportionate to the 50% of people who voted liberal.Do you have any proof to back up your statement?
There are left leaning and right leaning media soruces.
Right leaning = Courier mail, Herald Sun, the Australian, News.com.au, the Bolt Report, Fox News, Sky TV, JJJ,2GB
Left leaning = SMH, the Age, the Guardian, the ABC , CHannel 10, SBS, National Media
"Leftist" sources do not dominate mainstream media. Absurd statement.
Post by: The Special One on March 19, 2018, 02:20:26 pm
Do you have any proof to back up your statement?
There are left leaning and right leaning media soruces.
Right leaning = Courier mail, Herald Sun, the Australian, News.com.au, the Bolt Report, Fox News, Sky TV, JJJ,2GB
Left leaning = SMH, the Age, the Guardian, the ABC , CHannel 10, SBS, National Media
"Leftist" sources do not dominate mainstream media. Absurd statement.
Of course I have proof
Conducted between May 2012 and March this year, the University of the Sunshine Coast's representative survey of 605 journalists around Australia found that more than half (51.0%) describe themselves as holding left-of-centre political views, compared with only 12.9% who consider themselves right-of-centre.
What you listed is newspapers, which is nice to know but I was talking about tv news networks being left leaning.
It's a well known fact that News Corp Australia owns just about all of the newspapers in Australia. It’s head is Rupert Murdoch, an Australian-American billionaire. They consistently support the Liberal / National Coalition over the Labor and Green parties.
The Age officially endorsed the conservative coalition at the last Australian election but would you call them right wing?
Far from it with their key writer Clementine Ford being as left leaning as they come.
There are three types of bias when it comes to the media im going to focus on two of them.Personal bias of the journalists which is unavoidable, institutionalised bias which is situational
You've totally ignored personal bias in favour of focusing on institutionalised bias.
For people who only glance at the surface they may think what I said is an absurd statement the rest may think otherwise.
Post by: Joseph41 on May 08, 2018, 08:14:55 pm
Post by: EEEEEEP on May 09, 2018, 07:04:40 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/four-dual-citizen-mps-resign-in-wake-of-high-court-ruling-sparking-byelections-20180509-p4ze89.html
Four dual citizen MPs resign in wake of High Court ruling, sparking byelections
Labor MPs:
- Justine Keay
- Josh Wilson
- Susan Lamb
- Katy Gallagher
Post by: vox nihili on May 10, 2018, 02:06:56 pm
Post by: Mada438 on May 10, 2018, 06:00:20 pm
How quiet have things gone after the budget holy shit.Someone want to fill me in on the highlights please?
Post by: vox nihili on May 10, 2018, 06:55:24 pm
Someone want to fill me in on the highlights please?
I think these winners and losers articles usually do a pretty good job: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-08/federal-budget-2018-winners-losers/9738982
Overall the major thing with this budget is that it's a big spending budget, which you'd expect because this is the last budget before the election. Despite the coalition's years of whining about the state of the economy and their enthusiasm for austerity as a means of reducing the "debt and deficit", they've decided the abandon that thinking and make this a big spending budget. Indeed, as a proportion of GDP, this will be the most a government has spent since Gillard's final year, and more than every other year Labor was in power. There are quite significant tax cuts, and they'll also write into legislation a requirement that we don't tax at a rate of any higher than 23.9% of GDP, which is pure insanity. A lot of the structural problems with the budget that led to all of the deficits were the consequence of decisions like these made by the Howard government, and in part coopted by the early Rudd government. Basically, Howard spent huge amounts on welfare and tax cuts, which Rudd partially adopted. We could afford those then, but then the economy tanked and we couldn't afford them but nobody was willing to say "lol let's raise taxes and cut welfare". This budget will achieve the same. They've been able to pass tax cuts because the economy has picked up and they now have a lot more money than they expected to have. We can afford them now, but if commodity prices tank again and unemployment rises (the opposite of what has produced this situation), we'll start chalking up deficits again :))) Meanwhile there's less money to spend on infrastructure, health and education.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on August 09, 2018, 04:13:42 pm
Quote from: Emma Fealy (opposition) re: safe injecting rooms
If Daniel Andrews really believes drug injecting rooms work then he will surely announce he will open these facilities in the cities of Port Phillip, Melbourne and Brimbanksource
Like, the whole point of a trial is to trial something. I really hate that politicians are attacked for testing something before committing to it fully. What if it didn’t work? Surely it’s better to trial something before wasting more time and money on it.
/rant
Post by: vox nihili on August 09, 2018, 07:25:24 pm
Really hate how all-or-nothing some politicians are
source
Like, the whole point of a trial is to trial something. I really hate that politicians are attacked for testing something before committing to it fully. What if it didn’t work? Surely it’s better to trial something before wasting more time and money on it.
/rant
I fucking love this call. 10/10
Post by: EEEEEEP on August 26, 2018, 05:04:44 pm
Julie Bishop quits! Julie was backstabbed!
(https://i.imgur.com/sFLyrkK.png)
Post by: vox nihili on August 27, 2018, 03:35:53 pm
https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/julie-bishop-considering-all-options-after-failed-leadership-tilt/news-story/46cb855c25cc2e5a299f73bd027bf60a
Julie Bishop quits! Julie was backstabbed!
(https://i.imgur.com/sFLyrkK.png)
Julie Bishop was never going to get up in that ballot. Though a lot of the Libs talked about electability publicly, this whole exercise was more or less about the conservatives trying to capture the party. Julie Bishop (as with Turnbull, Pyne, Payne and Birmingham) is one of the most moderate Liberals and could therefore never expect to have been elected in that ballot. She likely would have lost to Dutton too if Morrison hadn't got up, which is a sad indictment on the party.
Post by: vox nihili on November 27, 2018, 09:24:11 pm
If you weren't aware, the government lost its majority in parliament when they lost the Wentworth byelection. This means that we currently have a hung parliament, although the crossbenchers have been clear in their support on matters of confidence and supply (confidence means that they won't vote against the government to force an early election, supply means that they will not allow the government to run out of money, as nearly happened in 1975).
The government's position got worse today, as one of the Liberal backbenchers, Julia Banks, indicated that she will now sit as an independent. She is actually the second member of the Coalition to do so, after Kevin Hogan did earlier in the year when Malcolm Turnbull was deposed (so it was actually at that point the government lost its majority, but most political commentators have largely ignored his defection for reasons I don't quite understand). Julia Banks sitting on the cross bench now means that the government will have 72 votes on the floor of the House, despite the fact that they started off with 75 (-1 due to the speaker in both cases). 76 votes is needed for a majority, but 75 is also sufficient if the speaker is a government member, as he is in this case.
The crossbench is now largely populated by small l-liberal women. These are people who are economically conservative but socially progressive, who might otherwise belong to the moderate faction of the Liberal party. It could be argued that these are liberals in the Menzies tradition, appealing to the centre and largely comfortable with the social zeitgeist. Not only has the government lost Julia Banks today, but there have been a number of MPs who have spoken out strongly about the trajectory of the liberal party. Kellie O'Dwyer is chief among these, as she got out today and lambasted the party for its creep towards the Right and the way it treats women. She even went so far as to call for the resignation of the Victoria president of the Liberal party (who is a prominent conservative). The President of the Senate also had some harsh words for his party, criticising the party for the creep to the Right and signalling that voters, whilst they might be conservative themselves, do not want to see their own views rammed down others' throats. Jane Hume, a Liberal senator from Victoria, was also very critical of her party on election night, following the same themes. She was particularly strident about the lack of representation of women in the party, which is now embarrassingly low in Victoria in particular (only 3/24 MPs in Victoria will be women...there will be just as many females on the crossbench and nearly quadruple this number in Labor's cabinet alone).
All of this amounts to the Moderates in the Liberal party finally starting to flex their muscles. This was the case during the Howard years too, where the conservatives controlled the leadership (in Howard and Costello), leaving the moderates emboldened to cause a little bit of trouble from time to time. Now that the conservatives have captured the leadership of the party once again (with Scott Morrison pursuing some breathtakingly stupid policy to show his conservative credentials), the moderates are finally starting to cause some trouble again. Will be interesting developments over time. The reality of the situation is that the moderates have the right of this situation. It is an absolutely horrid lie that the conservatives operate by in saying that the liberal party needs to sure up its base. The moderates have finally started to push back against this lie. Let's see who wins.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on November 30, 2018, 05:59:47 pm
Quote
Resources Minister Matt Canavan said the only thing children would be learn from the protest was how to collect government benefits.Apparently climate science is not science, and learning how to build a mine is science ???
"Walking off school and protesting, you don't learn anything from that," he told Sydney radio station 2GB.
"The best thing you learn about going to a protest is how to join the dole queue. That's what your future life will look like, up in a line asking for a handout, not actually taking charge of your life and getting a real job."
Mr Canavan said he instead supported children learning science.
"I want kids to be at school to learn about how you build a mine, how you do geology, how you drill for oil and gas, which is one of the most remarkable scientific exploits of anywhere in the world that we do," he said.
"These are the type of things excite young children."
source
Post by: appleandbee on November 30, 2018, 08:54:21 pm
source
[/quote]
Regardless of people views on protesting, telling people that doing so is the path to the dole queue is hugely untactful and irresponsible. Canavan's comments about drilling precisely highlighted why climate activism was neccessary.
Post by: jazcstuart on November 30, 2018, 10:12:20 pm
The latest entertainment from our federal politicians
Apparently climate science is not science, and learning how to build a mine is science ???
source
Wow, because only listening to the science you agree with is definitely what science education is about, right?
It's so incredibly frustrating as someone who was involved in this protest, to hear our concerns dismissed just because we are young. I think the point of the protest waa to make our voices heard, because as young people we don't have many other options available to demand action from our politicians (eg. Many people can't vote yet), so to be belittled like this is quite upsetting.
The idea of school is to prepare us for the future and gain greater understanding of the world, but what use is that going to be if our future is riddled with climate disasters and global warming we no longer have control over? Sorry Canavan, but without urgent climate action young people are calling for, our "future life" will not be asking for a handout, it will be standing up for what we believe in and creating real change in the world. By the time we become politicians it will be too late to act on climate change, which will have huge impacts which are unpredictable and potentially catastrophic, and out of our control. This is us "taking charge of our life" now, and demanding change from the ones who have the ability to create it.
Sorry for the rant. This us just something I am incredibly passionate about and it is so frustrating when people, particularly politicians, continue to deny the science and ignore the voices of young people.
Post by: vox nihili on December 01, 2018, 10:26:49 am
The latest entertainment from our federal politiciansApparently climate science is not science, and learning how to build a mine is science ???
source
Honestly, I was thrilled that Canavan made these comments and likewise ScoMo stood up in parliament and chucked a tanty about kids being out of school. Really showed the juxtaposition well: engaged, intelligent young people trying to do something about their future juxtaposed against a dying ideology directed, seemingly, at base stupidity. Fantastic.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on December 17, 2018, 10:45:04 pm
inb4 arguments against criminalisation etc.
- It already is underground
- If they really think criminalisation just makes things go underground then where's their drug legislation lol
(I actually don't want to turn this into a debate, which is why I'm posting this here) but also:
Quote from: Buzzfeed
Labor senator Louise Pratt, a spokesperson for Rainbow Labor told BuzzFeed News the decision was made based on recommendations from a La Trobe study on conversion therapy, which was released earlier this year, and the party was more strongly committed against conversion therapy than ever.
Quote from: La Trobe
The report recommends adding to existing protections such as the Health Complaints Act 2016 (Vic) by introducing specific legislation to clearly prohibit conversion practices against adults when carried out by health or other professionals, and conversion practices against children undertaken by anyone regardless of their qualification.(source)
I'm not at all convinced that labor's position is based on the report ::)
Edit: Also, while I'm here
Quote
Assistant minister Andrew Broad has quit the frontbench in the wake of a sex scandal that could rock the Morrison government, amid claims he met a "sugar baby" in an overseas hotel.https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/andrew-broad-resigns-from-morrison-ministry-over-bombshell-sex-scandal-allegations-20181217-p50mon.html
Mr Broad has been named in a New Idea magazine feature that says he spent time in Hong Kong with a "blonde beauty" who used the online alias "Sweet Sophia Rose" on a website to connect young women with wealthier older men.
This also serves as a reminder that nothing online is ever really private
Post by: vox nihili on December 18, 2018, 12:03:18 am
Fuck you (federal) labor /rant (or not lol)
inb4 arguments against criminalisation etc.
- It already is underground
- If they really think criminalisation just makes things go underground then where's their drug legislation lol
(I actually don't want to turn this into a debate, which is why I'm posting this here) but also:
(source)
I'm not at all convinced that labor's position is based on the report ::)
Edit: Also, while I'm herehttps://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/andrew-broad-resigns-from-morrison-ministry-over-bombshell-sex-scandal-allegations-20181217-p50mon.html
This also serves as a reminder that nothing online is ever really private
I agree that it should be criminalised personally and think that Labor's response is a fairly craven submission to the Right wing of the party (there's a large faction in the Labor party that is very socially conservative; hence why they've been slow to adopt progressive social reforms around gay marriage, for example).
I'll make a point about the report, though. The report doesn't suggest a criminal penalty for conversion therapy, it suggests a civil penalty (i.e. not criminalisation). Moreover, the recommendation to establish this penalty is one for the state government, not the federal government. The Labor national conference concerns federal policy, not state policy. Criminalisation from a federal perspective would be foolish because of the way the relationship between the states and the Commonwealth are arranged (i.e. states make criminal law for the most part).
Post by: PhoenixxFire on January 10, 2019, 05:27:17 pm
Quote
Liberal MP Ben Morton has spent his summer break rushing to confirm he is not a dual citizen, after he found out his grandfather was born in Ireland.
The discovery, made while going through old family records over Christmas, contradicts his declaration from 2017 that both maternal grandparents were born in the United Kingdom.
A letter from the Irish embassy received this week confirmed that Mr Morton is not an Irish citizen, and Mr Morton has said he has "never been an Irish or British citizen, only ever Australian".
However the new development highlights the uncertainty that still surrounds the Parliament and section 44 of the constitution, which disqualifies dual nationals from being MPs.
Post by: vox nihili on January 20, 2019, 05:14:51 pm
Oh dear.....
Notwithstanding the fact that Peter Dutton is probably ineligible, and in a way that is more problematic than being a dual citizen.
But honestly though, this article just makes me question whether I'm a dual citizen.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on January 20, 2019, 11:34:00 pm
But honestly though, this article just makes me question whether I'm a dual citizen.Back when this whole thing started I wondered how anyone could not know that they're a dual citizen, but it turns out that my grandpa was born in England and my dad is a dual citizen (claimed it by descent) and I had no idea until last month
Post by: vox nihili on February 20, 2019, 11:41:26 pm
-Medevac bill past after the government said it would be the worst thing ever (it's not)
-govt then lies about the fact medevac will be a pull factor for refugees (it won't)
-PM deliberately encourages boats to come to Australia by preaching about "borders being open" (they're not)
-govt claims medevac bill will see rapists and paedophiles come to Australia in their thousands (they won't)
-govt reopens Christmas island detention centre at a cost of 0.5 billion dollars
-PM says he can't give as much funding as he would like to North Queensland flood victims because he had to reopen Christmas island
-Christmas island is designated as the site to which medical transfers will take place, despite having no specialist medical facilities and being 7,000 kilometres from Nauru (Brisbane is less than half this distance)
-Dept of public prosecutions reveals they didn't prosecute members of Michaelia Cash's office after they leaked confidential details about an AFP raid to the media because she and the justice minister wouldn't provide witness statements
-Cash says she provided a witness statement (she didn't)
-Peter Dutton attacks the media for reporting facts
-the home affairs office puts a half a billion dollar contract out to tender but only allows one company to go for it (Palladin)
-it's revealed that Palladin is registered to a beach shack on Kangaroo island
-the beach shack has no telephone
-nor mail
-Peter Dutton claims not to know anything about the contract (probably true)
-the home affairs dept fails to answer questions about Palladin
-govt prevents the passage of a bill to hold a royal commission into disability care, and then decides to undo that the next week
-Matthias Cormann (the finance minister) books $3000 bucks worth of flights to Singapore and doesn't pay for them
-he claims "not to have noticed"
-he later claims that he booked the flights directly through the CEO
-soon after the flights were paid for Sen Cormann, the travel agent wins a multi-million dollar contract with the government
-at significant expense, the travel agent is designated as the only one the Australian government can use
-Joe Hockey, the ambassador to the US and former treasurer, asks his staff to meet with the CEO of the travel company to try to secure the government contract for them
-it's later revealed he's also good mates with the travel agent
-the government persists in its campaign against Labor's franking credit changes claiming that it hits pensioners (it doesn't) and will ruin self-funded retirees (it won't)...trying hard to conflate this change with pensioners, most of their statements deliberately false
One. fucking. week.
EDIT: I forgot all the Tim Wilson stuff and literally cannot be fucked going through even more shit that has happened. Long story short, someone spent a whole heap of taxpayer money soliciting donations for the liberal party and probably gave his cousin people's personal details collected by a parliamentary committee so that he could flog his product to them
Post by: vox nihili on March 01, 2019, 04:23:50 pm
Steve Ciobo is a conservative shit-kicker within the Liberal party and, imo, good riddance.
The retirement of Pyne doesn't bode well for the Libs though. As much as he's made a habit out of being a shit stirrer and at times plumbing the depths of soulless political rhetoric, Pyne is actually one of the most moderate voices within the Liberal party. His retirement, along with those of Bishop, and to a lesser extent, O'Dwyer mean that many of the strongest moderates within the party have now departed. Add to that list Malcolm Turnbull. The march to the Right within the Liberal party continues apace.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on May 16, 2019, 08:00:45 pm
Quote
"From now on, every time the government makes a decision we will ask ourselves: what does this decision mean for climate change, for emissions, and for the climate crisis we need to avert? If it is not consistent with reducing emissions, then we need to think again. "
The motion also condemned the federal government for its "continued failure to enact effective climate change policy".
It isn't really anything more than a statement, but it's still really cool :)
Post by: Joseph41 on May 20, 2019, 07:15:28 pm
Post by: Jimmmy on January 03, 2020, 06:28:23 pm
The fires are worsening, Victoria is in a state of emergency, the acreage lost already quadruples that lost in other large-scale fire emergencies around the world, so bad that many internationals are hearing as the first news story at night is that of 'all of Australia being on fire'. ScoMo has tonight been seen forcibly taking people's hands to shake them, mentioning how a firefighter who wasn't rapt to see him 'must be tired', when in fact he'd just lost his house, and been attacked from all directions.
Do we think this criticism is justified? I notice the NSW Premier hasn't received quite as much attention, but maybe that's because I'm in Victoria. In any case, what do we think ScoMo can do to symbolise strength and support in those fire-affected areas, and help out the people who we need to support in this time of natural disaster?
Post by: vox nihili on January 04, 2020, 03:21:33 pm
George Bush probably stands out as the most obvious example of someone responding really poorly to a disaster. Hurricane Katrina absolutely decimated his ratings, as he refused to come back from holidays initially and then was a little weird when he went and toured the disaster affected areas. Naturally, this has some nice parallels to Scott Morrison today. I'm genuinely amazed by just how shocking he has been touring the fire affected areas. The last day for him has been particularly disastrous, as it's probably revealed what everyone knows: the politicians are there for the photo op. The basic lack of empathy he's shown has resonated really strongly and has provided the emotional energy to take up the cause against his government's policy inertia on the issue of climate change.
From a policy perspective, disaster response is largely led by the states. NSW has been rightly criticised for some of its response, not least the fact that the Emergency Services minister refused to come back from an overseas holiday (probably a 50/50 chance he'll be forced to resign). Victoria's response for the most part has run well in the media and probably has been good. There were wholesale changes made to Victoria's disaster response after Black Saturday that have set the state up really well for a disaster of this scale. The merger of the metropolitan and rural fire services only happened recently and could have been a particular weak point, but that also appears to have worked well by streamlining services.
Post by: caffinatedloz on March 23, 2020, 01:22:11 pm
I honestly don't know how he can still call himself our leader as he angrily declares that "all children should be at school" but tries to subtly edge around the question of whether or not his own are. He's still saying that schools shouldn't shut (and there are a lot of reasons that he might take this position), but since it looks like his own kids are not physically going to school at the minute, it seems preposterous to expect other Australians to.
Post by: PhoenixxFire on March 23, 2020, 01:28:36 pm
I can't believe I just defended scomo.
Post by: vox nihili on March 28, 2020, 11:51:49 pm
School closures are generally seen as unhelpful; however, one Australian modelling study predicted that one side effect of school closures would be that people are forced to stay at home to look after their kids and therefore spend less time in the community spreading covid.
Overall, Covid will probably see a big bounce to the government polls wise. Superficially they look like they're dealing with the crisis. In reality though, they genuinely appear to be struggling. Morrison in particular just doesn't appear to grasp the details of what he's doing in most of his press conferences, has done a dreadful job of public health communication and really seems to be grappling with this idea that the primary issue is the economic fallout, rather than the virus.
Post by: JerryMouse2019 on May 04, 2020, 08:21:44 pm
Is it also possible that the LNP and the ALP will cease to exist due to these new political parties?
Post by: a weaponized ikea chair on August 11, 2020, 08:06:51 pm
Is it possible that in the future we will see the rise of new political parties that reflect the views of the current younger generation?1. Yes
Is it also possible that the LNP and the ALP will cease to exist due to these new political parties?
2. No. They are too rooted in parliament they won't go away.
Post by: keltingmeith on August 13, 2020, 12:39:41 pm
1. Yes
I somewhat disagree, because I wouldn't even say "in the future" - the Greens are becoming more and more the vote of choice for people that would usually vote Labor. There's still differences, but it's now at the point that Liberal would be guaranteed victories every election if we did a first-past-the-post system of voting. A more interesting question is, do we think we'll ever move past a two-party-preferred system - to which I think that no, we won't.
2. No. They are too rooted in parliament they won't go away.
See above - I think that one day, they will go away. But I think that we will always see essentially one party trying to protect the views of the conservative, and another more interested in progressivism - where they'll stand on different issues, though, I'm not sure, and even saying that Liberal=conservative and Labor=progressive is already a very big simplification of the system we currently have, so