The Final 2PP Count

For anyone who's wondering why we think a number of journos are educationally challenged, Pollbludger points out some of the more amusing commentary we've been provided with over the last few weeks here.

Essentially, despite a number of political commentators warning that the two-party preferred count isn't finalised (including ABC's Anthony Green), these journalists decided to run with their own fictionalised version of events. Last I checked, their jobs are to report on facts not fiction - they should probably be fired for lack of due diligence.

A number of coalition MPs have also used the 2PP figure like so (though I think Abbott has been careful to always say "it looks like we're winning the 2PP"). And while that is no less erroneous, it's at least to be expected from the opposition.

The Authoritarian Monster raises its Head

I missed this last night - apparently the New Zealand parliament unanimously passed the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill allowing the Governor-General to make Orders-in-Council at the advice of the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, effectively allowing him to repeal or modify any existing law without consulting Parliament, his Government, or even the Cabinet.

While the intention is undoubtedly good, there has nonetheless been a bit of an uproar by online commentators over whether or not New Zealand is now a dictatorship, as the nation's legislation can now be changed at the whim of a single man.

I'd have to agree that removing a lot of obstacles during the rebuilding process is a wonderful idea, but I can't shake the ominous feeling that the disaster has softened the Kiwi opposition to authoritarianism. It's a scary thought that the seeds have now been sown, and all it takes is for someone to step in and harvest them at an opportune time.

Here's the take on the situation from various blogs:

From those more than a little concerned...
Kiwipolitico
Andrew Geddis
No Right Turn
Not PC

To those who voted for it or think it's good...
Greens
Labour
National
Kiwiblog

Aussie Politics - state of play

I really didn't want to make a comment on the election result until things were finalised, but seeing as the end looks like it's still a week away I can't really wait any longer.

Firstly, I gotta say, Aussie media is strongly biased, with News Ltd supporting the Coalition and SMH and the Age backing Labor. Personally I read the right-wing Oz because I like to see what outrageous things are being said about the Left. But you only need to switch to the other website to go from one party about to form government, to the other one having the advantage. No wonder the public are confused.

Secondly, I don't understand the desire that Aussies feel about having to form a government asap. I'd prefer an agreement between the parties that work, and which will hold for a good two to three years rather than something that'll just crash and burn within the year. And look, in New Zealand negotiations often take two weeks or more, and in the Netherlands it's been more than two months and there's still no agreement on who forms government. Patience, Australia, good things take time.

Now on to the Greens. I'm a rusted-on Greens voter, I can't envision voting for anyone else in the forseeable future. And it is because of this that I'm worried for the party as we look ahead to the next election.

With sole balance of power in the senate, it becomes very easy for one of the major parties to blackmail the Greens into voting for bad legislation, or alternatively if they don't cooperate, they can just as easily blame the Greens for inaction. Additionally, with most of the Greens coming from a Labor base, it will only take a small shift to the left by Labor and the Greens vote are at risk of collapsing.

I strongly believe that to maintain a strong status as the third party in the Australian political landscape, the Greens need to appeal to a broader range of voters. The real winning quality of the party is their social and environmental policies, and the pragmatic stance to take would therefore be to appeal to both social liberals and classical liberals.

Yet, the success of the NSW Greens in getting a senator up is that they are very heavily socialist in economic policy. Whilst Bob Brown can win votes from both social and classical liberals, the presence of Lee Rhiannon in the senate has the potential to turn off a lot of classical liberal voters. It's really a double-edged sword. As it is, the Greens already struggle in NSW, and I'm not sure that having a so-called "red-green" in the federal senate is really a good idea.

Don't get me wrong, I'd belong to what is commonly referred to as the red-green faction, that is, I believe in the ideal of anarcho-communism. Yet from a practical vote-winning point of view, I just don't see socialist economic policy appealing to the masses in this day and age. Malcolm Turnbull offhandedly attacked the Greens last month on Q&A with "there is none more pure than the impotent", yet it rings truer than it would first seem. Call it what you will, horse-trading or otherwise, but the Greens can't remain a mainstay in Australian politics if they are not willing to compromise on certain legislation.

We aren't likely to see anarchism nor communism in this country any time soon, and most certainly not a combination of both. In the meantime, I just hope that the Greens will be willing to make some sacrifices to appeal to the Liberal base. There are environmental and social votes to be gained, if only the party would take a break from offering such divisive economic policies...