Double Dissolution in 2014 - Realistic chance or all hot air?

[ep2018]

Who will stand up in the Liberal party and shoot down Abbott and take leadership. Surely soon.

He is doing irreversible damage to the LNP as a party and needs to be stopped surely.

 

[The Speaker]

Poll result seems pretty straightforward.

 

[Maggie5]

Who will stand up in the Liberal party and shoot down Abbott and take leadership. Surely soon.

He is doing irreversible damage to the LNP as a party and needs to be stopped surely.

I often check Turnbull's blog on his home page and found one comment funny- "where we're you last week, plotting I hope"
http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/m...ry-steps-taken-to-repair-budget#disqus_thread

 

[Bazza37]

The Coalition need 6 extra votes in the new senate. (July 1 2014)
Need to get Clive on board with his 3 votes, Nick Xenophon, Family First & Motor Party.
Considering that Clive bears a grudge against the coalition, Xenophon has labelled the budget TOXIC, Family First rep is dedicated to provide homes to the homeless & the Motor rep is a former union delegate it will be very difficult for the Abbott GOVT to pass any of it's policies.
The Coalition is also getting smashed in the polls so the DD option will never happen.

I think the Coalition will now move towards introducing an increase in the GST.

 

[Bazza37]

Also noticing the Murdoch Press are now producing negative stories against state leaders and senators.

 

[GuruJane]

I just can't see why Labor and Greens won't vote together to reject most of these Budge measures. And if they do, I can't see any reason why Clive Palmer wouldn't join them.

If they don't reject and Abbott gets most of the budget through the senate his authority will be immeasurably restored and Clive will be a pussy cat.

If they do reject, then the Abbott/Hockey budget will be trashed and he'd then look even weaker if he didn't call a DD - al la Rudd 2009.

So either way I think the chances of an election in late 15 or around March 16 are quite high.

 

[Todman]

So either way I think the chances of an election in late 15 or around March 16 are quite high.

Why go to an election in March when you can have a populist budget in May 2016?

 

[GuruJane]

Fair point. In fact, Abbott and Hockey might be in a position to do tax cuts by then. Might already be the plan

 

[Run n Spread]

Look I suppose it is theoretically possible if supply was blocked by the opposition parties and the government dug in. How else would you solve the stale mate?

Realistically to spite all the tough talk and chest thumping they wouldn't have the balls to do it. Impossible to block an entire budget and the parts that are blocked will simply be watered down and a blame game would begin.

Labor have a free kick. They can essentially govern by proxy here and ditch (by opposing in the Senate with the minor parties) the parts of the budget they don't like and in doing so set a strategy themselves. Tell the Libs if they don't like it pull the trigger. They wouldn't so Labor can then take credit for any reforms, along with Gonski, NDIS in addition and actually maybe do a half decent job of selling.

Alternatively they could go soft and let the measures through, against their beliefs and whinge about Big Bad Abbott for the next 3 years hoping they'd fluke a win in 2016. Risky people have the memories of Goldfish, this will all be forgotten by then and with News Ltd cheering them on the Libs would probably get another term.

 

[GuruJane]

Look I suppose it is theoretically possible if supply was blocked by the opposition parties and the government dug in. How else would you solve the stale mate?

Realistically to spite all the tough talk and chest thumping they wouldn't have the balls to do it. Impossible to block an entire budget and the parts that are blocked will simply be watered down and a blame game would begin.

Labor have a free kick. They can essentially govern by proxy here and ditch (by opposing in the Senate with the minor parties) the parts of the budget they don't like and in doing so set a strategy themselves. Tell the Libs if they don't like it pull the trigger. They wouldn't so Labor can then take credit for any reforms, along with Gonski, NDIS in addition and actually maybe do a half decent job of selling.

Alternatively they could go soft and let the measures through, against their beliefs and whinge about Big Bad Abbott for the next 3 years hoping they'd fluke a win in 2016. Risky people have the memories of Goldfish, this will all be forgotten by then and with News Ltd cheering them on the Libs would probably get another term.

OOI - which of these Budget measures would you think Labor would reject and which would they wave through?

1. Medicare co-payment

1a Medicare copayment if concession card holders were exempt and/or payment dropped to $5.

2 Pharmaceutical Benefit increase.

3 Eligibility for age pension raised to 70 years in 2035.

3a Pensions indexed at CPI not average weekly earnings from 2016/17 (ie after next election)

4 Six month waiting period for Newstart for under 30s (One months credit for every year employed))

4a Under 25s to drop back from New Start to Youth Allowance.

5. De-regulation of University fees (which will make elite degrees more expensive and non-elite degrees less expensive).

5a. 20 % of all fee increases to be set aside for scholarships for low income students.

5b Hecs loans to start being paid back at $50K down from 57K per annum.

5c Hecs fees to attract interest of up to 6%.

5d Hecs loans to be extended to TAFE and private colleges.

6. Eligibiity criteria for under 35s claiming disabilkioty support pension to be tightened.

7. Familiy Benefit B means test upper limit $100K not $150K

7a Family Benefit B to stop when child turns 6.
7b If 7a were dropped.

8. Deficity Reduction Levy.

9. Privatise Roytal Mint

10. Cut 16500 from Public Serivce.

11. Fuel excise levy.

 

[Run n Spread]

OOI - which of these Budget measures would you think Labor would reject and which would they wave through?

1. Medicare co-payment

1a Medicare copayment if concession card holders were exempt and/or payment dropped to $5.

2 Pharmaceutical Benefit increase.

3 Eligibility for age pension raised to 70 years in 2035.

3a Pensions indexed at CPI not average weekly earnings from 2016/17 (ie after next election)

4 Six month waiting period for Newstart for under 30s (One months credit for every year employed))

4a Under 25s to drop back from New Start to Youth Allowance.

5. De-regulation of University fees (which will make elite degrees more expensive and non-elite degrees less expensive).

5a. 20 % of all fee increases to be set aside for scholarships for low income students.

5b Hecs loans to start being paid back at $50K down from 57K per annum.

5c Hecs fees to attract interest of up to 6%.

5d Hecs loans to be extended to TAFE and private colleges.

6. Eligibiity criteria for under 35s claiming disabilkioty support pension to be tightened.

7. Familiy Benefit B means test upper limit $100K not $150K

7a Family Benefit B to stop when child turns 6.
7b If 7a were dropped.

8. Deficity Reduction Levy.

9. Privatise Roytal Mint

10. Cut 16500 from Public Serivce.

1. No

2. Maybe waive thorugh

3. Pass

4 No

5 Don't know

5a Pass

5 b Pass

5 c No

5d No

6 & 7 Yes

8 Yes

9& 10 No

11 Don't know. Probably pass and hand ball off as some Climate Change measure.

 

[GuruJane]

Thanks for that - I forgot to put in fuel excise levy - I presume you'd see Labor saying No to that?

In which case you'd see a Labor No to medicare payment (whether or not amended); six months waiting period for Newstart under 30s, Hecs fees extended to Tafes/private colleges/interest of up to 6 % on Hecs loans; privatising royal mint; redundancy for 16500 public servants; fuel excise levy?

I would agree to all of these but - going by Shorten rantings about liars up to now - I would add a Labor No to: pension eligibility age to 70; deregulation of university fees; and family tax benefit to stop when child turns 6.

And am not sure they'd even pass the deficit levy - how could they waive through any measures that they are saying now were Tony Abbott lies before the election? That means just about all these measures. I bet Clive Palmer will be opposing them all and won't even negotiate.

 

[ralphmalph]

And am not sure they'd even pass the deficit levy - how could they waive through any measures that they are saying now were Tony Abbott lies before the election? .

Penny Wong said they won't stand in the way of the high income earners tax.

 

[GuruJane]

In that case one would expect Clive to use that as a point of differentiation between PUP and Labor. Reckon Clive will stick up for all interest groups who have been "lied" to.

 

[Crawb]

No, it won't happen - sadly. Will only happen if Abbott's ego completely blinds him into making an incredibly stupid move. Whilst his ego is huge, it won't do that.

 

[samFFC]

Who will stand up in the Liberal party and shoot down Abbott and take leadership. Surely soon.

He is doing irreversible damage to the LNP as a party and needs to be stopped surely.

Worse than Pyne? Brandis? Dutton? Even Hockey has put in some shockers from Budget night onwards!

And previously Morrison?

 

[samFFC]

Antony Green, as always, is the voice of reason:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2014/05/an-early-double-dissolution-dont-hold-your-breathe.html

 

[AM]

It's hilarious how you keep trying to push the budget fallout on to Labor!

Nah! It's really, really sad. Not only the nonsense written here but more because that she is most likely one of the people who put the Abbott/Hockey duo into power.

 

[QuietB]

Fair point. In fact, Abbott and Hockey might be in a position to do tax cuts by then. Might already be the plan

Tax cuts are what created this problem.

 

[Todman]

Tax cuts are what created this problem.

Unrestraint increases in Government spending caused the problem.

 

[QuietB]

Unrestraint increases in Government spending caused the problem.

Yes a spike in expenses caused the new debt. But so much of the commentary has been that average expenses (excluding the stimulus which was a once off) has been steady while tax receipts have plummeted. The problem is not spending, it is income.

Now there are two ways to fix that, cut the s**t out of spending or get income back up. The current government has not cut the s**t out of spending, they have simply targeted a few ideological crusades and then spent the savings and then some on other programs.

If they simply put tax rates back to pre-Howard tax cut rates the problem would be solved. If they actually attacked some of the real rorts, negative gearing, superannuation, etc. then the problem would be solved and then some.

They have done neither.

 

[sherb]

Yes a spike in expenses caused the new debt. But so much of the commentary has been that average expenses (excluding the stimulus which was a once off) has been steady while tax receipts have plummeted. The problem is not spending, it is income.

Now there are two ways to fix that, cut the s**t out of spending or get income back up. The current government has not cut the s**t out of spending, they have simply targeted a few ideological crusades and then spent the savings and then some on other programs.

If they simply put tax rates back to pre-Howard tax cut rates the problem would be solved. If they actually attacked some of the real rorts, negative gearing, superannuation, etc. then the problem would be solved and then some.

They have done neither.

Here's a suggestion:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...d-short-26b-on-tax-report-20140528-394rm.html

 

[Slax]

Tax cuts are what created this problem.

As I've said before the Howard years were terrible for Australia, its just that they were hidden by the biggest economic boom period since the post war WWII era. History is already beginning to show Howard and Costello as a team that lack any vision for Australia and were a poor government.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Howard and Costello's wanton waste of an economic boomtime has been obvious for years now.

It is simply that this doesn't get much coverage by News or 7/9/10.

Doesn't help that the Rudd/Gillard governments were a fiscal rabble.

 

[little graham]

Be no double dissolution because half these feckers protesting tonight in Melbourne will vote for Palmer,the other half SHY.

.

I shudder to think who would be the biggest loser., but both need to go on it.