Real Shadow Government?

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Posts
23,138
Likes
7,869
Location
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #1
I thought this was pretty interesting:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/abbott-offered-a-slice-of-power-20100908-151cf.html

THE Greens and the independents have offered Tony Abbott the opportunity to help govern from opposition, saying they would pass any policies with which they agreed, including paid parental leave, whether Labor liked it or not.

As the political establishment comes to grips with the concept of minority government, the Greens leader Bob Brown said the Parliament belonged to everybody, not just the government.
Granted there's probably few things that the Liberals would be interested in passing that the Greens would accept, but it's an interesting idea. Not having responsibility for Treasury could be quite liberating - they could pass some extremely generous social security programmes and screw up Labor's promise to get the budget back into surplus. :D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,402
Likes
8,339
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#2
Hm, I was just thinking that a Gillard govt meant we dodged the bullet of Abbott's ridiculous maternity leave scheme.

Looks like we could have the worst from both sides now.

Lucky us.
 

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Posts
23,138
Likes
7,869
Location
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #3
In all seriousness, I would think (hope?) that the Coalition won't take too much advantage of this. The Greens would be unlikely to approve anything except more spending, and there's little political capital to be gained from that whilst in Opposition.
 

bombermick

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
9,737
Likes
1,170
Location
Vermont South
AFL Club
Essendon
#4
Can't the government simply refuse to vote on any private member's bills? I know part of the agreement with The Greens and independents included a right a vote on private member's bills, but surely the government will shut it down if it's something they really don't like.
 

Eagle87

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Posts
19,942
Likes
4,066
Location
Bangkok
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Subi, Celtics, Pats, Sox
#5
Can't the government simply refuse to vote on any private member's bills? I know part of the agreement with The Greens and independents included a right a vote on private member's bills, but surely the government will shut it down if it's something they really don't like.
But they are only the "government" based on those 4 votes. If those 4 don't support them, can they refuse anything at all?
 

Clay Davis

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
19,993
Likes
1,821
Location
ge
AFL Club
Fremantle
#6
What would be the point? So much of the populace would be too dumb to associate anything done in parliament as being by anyone but the government, meaning the Labor party. The Libs would be better sticking to their attack mode, not being Cyrano de Bergerac.
 

holybishop

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
2,081
Likes
1,363
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
GC Suns, Western Warriors/Scorchers
#8
But they are only the "government" based on those 4 votes. If those 4 don't support them, can they refuse anything at all?
Legislation only needs the majority of votes to pass through the lower house. If the Coalition, the Independents and the Greens vote for a private members bill, then the legislation will have the majority and will pass to the Senate, regardless of whether Labor supported the bill.

The interesting and confusing aspect of it all is whether does an act imply that the government has lost the confidence of the house, and will the GG be forced to act. Another constitutional crisis here we come
 

ralphmalph

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Posts
1,826
Likes
473
Location
milwaukee
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Carlton
#9
Legislation only needs the majority of votes to pass through the lower house. If the Coalition, the Independents and the Greens vote for a private members bill, then the legislation will have the majority and will pass to the Senate, regardless of whether Labor supported the bill.
this article adds something - suggests that opposition cannot initiate money bills, therefore you can't govern from opposition.

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/09/12/governing-from-opposition/

No proposal for the appropriation of any public moneys shall be made unless the purpose of the appropriation has in the same session been recommended to the House by message of the Governor-General, but a bill, except an Appropriation or Supply Bill, which requires the Governor-General’s recommendation may be brought in by a Minister and proceeded with before the message is announced. No amendment of such proposal shall be moved which would increase, or extend the objects and purposes or alter the destination of, the appropriation so recommended unless a further message is received.
 

evo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Posts
27,395
Likes
16,956
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
#10
Hm, I was just thinking that a Gillard govt meant we dodged the bullet of Abbott's ridiculous maternity leave scheme.

Looks like we could have the worst from both sides now.

Lucky us.
Bob Brown was getting a little concerned there wasn't enough middle class welfare being thrown around.

Now all parties get to put pork on the fork!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

holybishop

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
2,081
Likes
1,363
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
GC Suns, Western Warriors/Scorchers
#12

Ice-Wolf

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Posts
13,669
Likes
10,305
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Anaheim Ducks, PSV Eindhoven
#13
It rules out Abbott's paid parental scheme, but non-appropriation bills are fair game, such as that anti-whaling private members bill that was co-sponsored by a Greens Senator and a Liberal Senator in February, or same sex marriage.
So they can only pass bills that don't cost and money.

So pretty much just social justice issues.
 

holybishop

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
2,081
Likes
1,363
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
GC Suns, Western Warriors/Scorchers
#14
So they can only pass bills that don't cost and money.

So pretty much just social justice issues.
Tax reform (ie new taxes or abolishing taxes) I think is alright, and also the independents can on principle vote against any of the government appropriation bills, and if defeated in the lower house it will be seen as a vote of no confidence.
 

pazza

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
31,476
Likes
5,414
Location
Hoppers Crossing
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool
#15
Wasn't the agreement by all that the money bills would pass...but, no-confidence motions without merit would not?

Basically it is trying to achieve bi-partisanship on legislation. Good luck.
 

holybishop

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
2,081
Likes
1,363
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
GC Suns, Western Warriors/Scorchers
#16
That is the agreement with the independents, that all appropriation bills will pass. But if they were to block one, then it will be equal to a no confidence motion.
 
Top Bottom