Labor and Greens alliance, but Wilkie ...

Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Posts
1,810
Likes
2
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Arsenal
#26
The surprise is how closely they've got into bed together. The Greens have done very well out of this, as long as their base doesn't mind them selling out the carbon tax by putting climate change back into committee hell.

You can see some of those requirements are going to be a major thorn in the side of a Gillard government. They've essentially given the Greens a say in everything, and a blanket pass to poke their nose into anything they like.

If they give anywhere near the same amount of discretion to the Independents, the business of government is going to be completely unworkable.
Yes, they've done well out of it, but their position comparative to the ALP is very strong, whereas the ALP's is weak - the ALP must have Green support to form Government, and the Greens also hold the keys to the Senate come July 2011

You're only as good as your bargaining position, and Gillard's position with the Greens is WEAK

Will be interested to see the deal Abbott chucks up with the Independents, if he forms government with them (as is likely)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jo172

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Posts
15,468
Likes
10,385
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
San Antonio, Redbacks
#27
I cant see the Greens (nor any party) blocking supply.
(Although i must say that the born to rule mentality of a Tony Abbott led coalition could well entertain that option).
I'm not sure born to rule is a distinct Liberal party trait these days.

Between Fitzgibbon, Beazley, Crean, Ferguson, Ludwig, Jenkin there seems to be a bit of born to rule ethos on each side of politics.

In a way it's the great disadvantage the factionally unaligned like Rudd have in the Labor party organisation.
 

KUNG FU

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 31, 2006
Posts
6,044
Likes
32
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Norwood
#28
Youd imagine Gillard is fairly confident of forming government to enter into something binding.

One theory is the independents dont want to be seen signing up with the greens at the same time, so that will come later.

could be completely hogwash too
It is conditional upon the formation of a Gillard government. Bandt will sit on the cross benches in an Abbott government.
 

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Posts
23,138
Likes
7,869
Location
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#29
Yes, they've done well out of it, but their position comparative to the ALP is very strong, whereas the ALP's is weak - the ALP must have Green support to form Government, and the Greens also hold the keys to the Senate come July 2011
Is their bargaining position that strong though? The Greens in the Senate is a factor, but it's completely irrelevant to the question of forming government. And Bandt is important but not vital - they could have struck a deal with Wilkie instead and frozen him out.

The Greens aren't like the country independents, who can court both sides - they either sided with Labor or they had no say in government at all. One would have thought that Gillard could have thrown them a few bones and said 'take it or leave it'.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Posts
1,810
Likes
2
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Arsenal
#31
Is their bargaining position that strong though? The Greens in the Senate is a factor, but it's completely irrelevant to the question of forming government. And Bandt is important but not vital - they could have struck a deal with Wilkie instead and frozen him out.

The Greens aren't like the country independents, who can court both sides - they either sided with Labor or they had no say in government at all. One would have thought that Gillard could have thrown them a few bones and said 'take it or leave it'.
To forming stable government, yes - and I'm using "stable government" in the relative sense of the debacle that's about to be inflicted on the Australian community by whoever forms government

The Independents want stable government - Gillard's best bet of that is ensuring a strong relationship between the House & the Senate, and the Independents would have greater faith that any "pork barreling" they want would get through the Senate and Gillard can sell this to them. If Gillard cut the Greens out, her position with the Senate is severely weakened.

But it's a double edged sword - after all the Greens are left and the Ind are conservative.

And on the deal done between the Greens & ALP, while it's big on process and gives the Greens great access to the workings of government, it's not that big on policy, yes there's a climate change committee, but it's not as if they've agreed to a ETS. A cynic could be forgiven for thinking that the deal between Gillard & the Greens is designed to attract the Independents to the extent possible, i.e. relative light on policy but big on process which is of concern to the Ind, ie. they didn't come up with agreements on gay marriage or a set ETS figure

And f*ck, anything that can get this whole "forming stable government thing" over, the better.
 

Last of the Roys

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Posts
3,632
Likes
3,669
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
#34
To forming stable government, yes - and I'm using "stable government" in the relative sense of the debacle that's about to be inflicted on the Australian community by whoever forms government

The Independents want stable government - Gillard's best bet of that is ensuring a strong relationship between the House & the Senate, and the Independents would have greater faith that any "pork barreling" they want would get through the Senate and Gillard can sell this to them. If Gillard cut the Greens out, her position with the Senate is severely weakened.

But it's a double edged sword - after all the Greens are left and the Ind are conservative.

And on the deal done between the Greens & ALP, while it's big on process and gives the Greens great access to the workings of government, it's not that big on policy, yes there's a climate change committee, but it's not as if they've agreed to a ETS. A cynic could be forgiven for thinking that the deal between Gillard & the Greens is designed to attract the Independents to the extent possible, i.e. relative light on policy but big on process which is of concern to the Ind, ie. they didn't come up with agreements on gay marriage or a set ETS figure

And f*ck, anything that can get this whole "forming stable government thing" over, the better.
I think it is a big risk making such a big deal / having a formal agreement with the Greens before the Independents have decided. While people knew the Greens would side with the ALP, this quasi coalition may put the fear of God into the conservative heartland and bring a big conservative backlash in the three mainland Independents' seats.

This could sway things the other way. I would really like to know the reaction to this news in these seats.
 
Top Bottom