There's some speculation that with the Government's popularity currently high, interest rates super low, the opposition a bit mediocre (to many) and the global economic s***fight yet to cause havoc here that the ALP might be calling a September election.

This would seem to tie into the moves from the Libs this week to do a quick reshuffle giving them 6 months of new portfolios before any election - and importantly before it is actually called.

Riding on the back of the populist cash bonanza this year and before the recession bites with real teeth coudl see Ruddy locked in for another 3 years quick smart, and not needing to call an election until things have calmed down a bit and maybe on the upturn.

What do you lot reckon?

Also, I just wanted to use harbinger. Its a f***en top word.

Possible, but I'd think it unlikely. Calling an election this early would smack of pure political gamesmanship and iirc, it has backfired previously. I doubt that would happen this time around, but it would seriously impact their popularity and you'd probably see a sizeable swing towards the Coalition.

wat

it's been like a year

well, the liberals are certainly up the s***:

julie bishop getting the arse for doing a poor job, former leader nelson resigning, costello still being interested in leading them (yay turnbull)

the liberals are certainly massively unpopular atm (moreso than usual) so it wouldnt be the worst idea the labor party has ever had (that would be the internet censorship)

i think the earliest an election can be called without a dd is november

The maximum period between elections is therefore 3 years, 140 days, and the minimum approximately a month.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Australia

Senate is fixed term without a DD election though.

September would be almost 2 years - 20 months. Early but hardly indefensible.

last edited by Hogfather at 08:51:11 17/Feb/09

the australian is reporting that costello was offered the job but turned turnbull down :(

Yeh that is gonna make good copy for the ALP. "Second-choice Treasurer" much? :(

actually wouldn't it 3rd choice.

going to election wasn't Costello the preferred treasurer by a fairly healthy margin (over swan)?

An election would be a stupid waste of money.

Both sides of the house need to spend less time scoring points.

whats a dd election

Double Dissolution

whats a dd election

Double dissolution

i really want to find julie bishops catwoman scratch gesture to julia gillard. its a perfect example as to why chicks shouldnt be allowed to be politicions.

i really want to find julie bishops catwoman scratch gesture to julia gillard. its a perfect example as to why chicks shouldnt be allowed to be politicions.

is google really that hard for people to use ?

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=julie+bishop+cat+scratch

An election would be a stupid waste of money.

Both sides of the house need to spend less time scoring points.

Actually, thinking about it more today I think an early election would be a very good idea. A party elected in September would effectively be the custodians of the country through the worst of the difficult times.

We're in a much different climate than when Kevin got elected over a year ago. The electorate voted the last Government out almost out of bordeom with the status quo.

Now that things are much more serious a fresh poll might be in order.

So everytime something changes we should have a new poll ?

You do realize how much these things cost right ?

OH NO
I'm going to have to change my slogan

Kevin 07 gone in 09!

Are you trolling again Obes? Should I just stop responding?

You are vaguelly aware that this is being widely referred to as the greatest financial crisis since the Great f***ing Depresion right? Its hardly an 'every time something changes' event.

that would be awesome-o

OH NO
I'm going to have to change my slogan

Kevin 07 gone in 09!

Damn it! I have to change all my t-shirts and hats. Hahaha. My market is shattered in an instant... :-P

p.s. Haven't sold any...yet...

I'm not trolling, I honestly think it is a stupid idea.

They didn't have an election when either of the great wars happen. There was no election for the great depression. There was no election for the asian finacial crisis. You elect governments for a period time, not for an issue.

And given that there is a finacial crisis do you think it prudent to have an expensive stunt that will only politicize the issue further ?

there's one thing business hates more than a labor government and that is short electoral cycles.

rudd should give himself a chance to f*** things up proper and take the full three years.

as for julie bishop, that was the result of factional infighting, she wasn't doing such a bad job. from a recent episode of 30 rock i remember the following quote: "when one man falls, four are promoted." that's the way it works in politics.

There was no election for the great depression.

Oh really?

James Scullin was elected Prime Minister immediately before the stock market crash that is considered to have marked the start of the Great Depression.

During the election, the sitting Prime Minister failed to retain his seat.

He served from 22 October 1929 to 6 January 1932, a period of two years and six weeks, well short of the standard three year term, and very short of the maximum three years 140 days.

His Government's failure to address the economic fallout as the depression advanced finally resulted in deep divisions and its eventual disintegration. The country was forced to then undertake a poll under very difficult circumsances.

Any of the above seem familiar Obes? I'd much rather poll early than have the Government fly apart because it lacked a clear mandate to navigate the current situation. The cost of an early poll could well be insignificant in the face of the real cost of avoiding one.

last edited by Hogfather at 12:15:13 17/Feb/09

who would the PM be if the liberals won anyway

costello :)

It could be like Melbourne Cup. Maybe a dark horse will come storming down the outside.

Oh really?

Yes really.
They had an election because the government fell to bits. The did not have an election because there was a depression.
If this government fell to bits then it happens.

If everytime something tricky comes up we have an election, why have a government at all ?

Why not just a bunch of public servants and a phone poll service for various issues ?

whats a dd election

its where the government Direct Deposits cash handouts to voters to ensure they remain in power

It's like a baby bonus but on crack.

Costello eh, we could do worse.. like Rudd

Why not just a bunch of public servants and a phone poll service for various issues ?

SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME

They had an election because the government fell to bits. The did not have an election because there was a depression.
If this government fell to bits then it happens.

The Government fell to bits as a direct result of the depression. If a drunk driver runs into a tree, is it because the tree was in the road or because he was drunk?

An election 6-12 months early would add a specific mandate to the management of the extreme issues facing the nation at the moment, and give the electorate a chance to actually vote on these f***ing expensive policies.

This forum is a clear litmus that many people have strong opinions, often at odds with their vote cast before the s*** really hit the fan.

If everytime something tricky comes up we have an election, why have a government at all ?

Why not just a bunch of public servants and a phone poll service for various issues ?

Sigh. Now I'm getting frutsrated. Stop the f***ing hyperbole you humongous, stinky troll.

The Government has the right to call an election early if it sees fit. 50B+ is a massive pile of money spent without the vaguest electoral mandate, probably the biggest ever in Australian history.

Last year's (2004) federal election cost close to $120 million - the most expensive in Australian history.

...

In contrast, the 2001 election cost $67 million to run.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/2004-election-cost-120m/2005/10/10/1128796452889.html

Couldn't find figures on 2007, but if we call it 120M again then its 0.2% of the 50B spent on stimulus packages. Is it worth spending 0.2% of a policy platform to work out if people actually want it spent? I think so.

That's the problem with 50 BILLION its such a big f***ing number its hard to put it into perspective. Its fifty f***ing thousand million. I'd like to have had a voice on whether it should be spent, and 120 million sounds cheap in comparison.

last edited by Hogfather at 13:39:06 17/Feb/09

6 months ago Rudd and Swan were warning the risks of an inflation break out. 6 months ago. Now they can't pump money into the economy fast enough to prevent mass deflation.

These guys seriously have no f***ing clue.

I wish Peter Costello would stop f***ing about and blade Turnball so we can have a decent Oppostion. Not this wishy-washy, limp wristed, slapfest.

Why not just a bunch of public servants and a phone poll service for various issues ?

s/phone poll/focus group/

Never watched Yes Prime Minister/Hollowmen? The ministers are just bumbling figureheads and the public servants are the ones running the show. It wouldn't be funny if it wasn't true. What you've described is how it works already!

Sorry hogfather but you are stupid. The whole point of having terms, is so government can govern with some confidence that have time to implement their plans.

SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME

Possibly. But it unfortunately is not the system our constitution currently supports.

That's the problem with 50 BILLION its such a big f***ing number its hard to put it into perspective. Its fifty f***ing thousand million. I'd like to have had a voice on whether it should be spent, and 120 million sounds cheap in comparison.

And if you don't like that result ? Way to ensure Australia is seen as a stable environemnt to do business.

How bout both sides of politics stop point scoring and start working towards the future of the country ?

Sorry hogfather but you are stupid.

No, you are.

The whole point of having terms, is so government can govern with some confidence that have time to implement their plans.

Where was the plan to spend 6% of GDP on stimulus packagaes? That seems like a pretty huge plan to have missed at the election.

How much of the package was redirected to buy its way through the Senate, because the Government lacked an alectoral mandate?

And if you don't like that result ? Way to ensure Australia is seen as a stable environemnt to do business.

If I don't like the result then that's democracy. Not everyone gets things the way the want it - but we were never asked.

There are lots of opinions about it, as there should be in a rugged democracy. If infi's side is right though, the fiscal damage could take future Governments many terms to unwind.

How bout both sides of politics stop point scoring and start working towards the future of the country ?

Do you understand what Opposition and the two-party system actually mean?

What do you think that the Government has the power to call an early election for?

You go on about (your) reasons why that we have terms of Government, but what reason do we have for being able to call an election as short as one month into a term?

Why doesn't it apply to a once-in-a-century economic event?

And if you don't like that result ? Way to ensure Australia is seen as a stable environemnt to do business.

How bout both sides of politics stop point scoring and start working towards the future of the country ?

Congrats on missing Hogfather's point by such a large margin.

His point is that for such a massive decision the electorate should have a say. How many Labour voters would be against the spending? Noone knows but I'm sure there's a few.

The main problem is that the Gov't believes that haste is the key to the success of the stimulus package. History will prove them right or wrong now - further discussion on that topic is futile.

The main problem is that the Gov't believes that haste is the key to the success of the stimulus package. History will prove them right or wrong now - further discussion on that topic is futile.

Not necessarily. It takes a while to spend 42B, "only" 10 of it is rolling out in cash payments early this year. A September poll could well allow a new Liberal Government the opportunity to roll back many of the package's initiatives, or translate them into tax breaks for individuals and business (their preferred model).

What's futile though is considering the likelihood of a Liberal Government in September. What a poll at the end of this year would likely provide is a stronger mandate for the Government to implement its plans to ride out any recession. In the face of a strong mandate, the Opposition would have less room to move and would need to act more in a more bi-partisan fashion regarding these plans.

It would also give us solid coverage over the rest of the expected downturn. Early 2011 will be smack in the middle of the worst of it and we'lll likely get a knee-jerk result which is hardly in the best interests of the country.

last edited by Hogfather at 14:09:10 17/Feb/09

So infi 6months ago, where was Costello or some liberal warning of impending doom ?.

Sounds like they didn't have a clue.
Out of interesting how many years ago do you think the problems underlying the crisis occured ? How many years in advance would you have to prepare ? Say would 11 have been enough ?

PETER COSTELLO: Yes, this is it. I said before the election that there would be a financial tsunami. I thought the fallout from the subprime markets would send ripples, and that's why I described it as a tsunami, from the United States out throughout the world. I was widely attacked for saying that, people said I was scaremongering, I said economic management would be critical to dealing with this.

From Lateline on 23 September 2008.

Costello had been warning all of last year and even before the election that a massive financial collapse was just around the corner. Check the Google news archives on his commentary.

Nonetheless, Swan continued to warn of inflationary break outs and how we needed to kill the inflation monster with rate rises.

This to me says two things. One, the RBA has no idea how to manage monetary policy and completely misread the data. Two, Swan hasn't got an economic bone in his body and just does whatever Treasury and RBA tell him.

It is the RBA who has now had to undergo a massive backflip by undoing its own rate rises and the government one minute urging a 1.5% GDP surplus and the next thing a $35b deficit.

These guys are just flailing about with no real strategy at all. Total reactionary politics. Costello had planning and foresight and strategy. These guys just know spin and news bites.

last edited by infi at 14:31:53 17/Feb/09

*snap*

from that same interview

No, I don't think there's any suggestion, I think we ought to be clear about this, a major financial institutions in Australia are going to fail. I think we'll be fear about this.

"a ... institutions" huh ?

"I think we'll be fear about this." huh ?

yup, very clear.

On his 08 budget "doing everything it could to cut tax."
ie. He didn't see the need for a big surplus for impending doom.

Want foresight, Keating in 2003...

The wave we are currently living through has been driven by, the third wave, has been driven by– in the ‘80s – low terms of trade which was a subsidy from the developing world to the developed world, and in the ‘90s by telecommunications and micro-processing. By all reckoning, if the past is to be any guide, this wave should run until about 2007 or 2008.

and

Where the last wave ended with an exogenous shock, from the inflationary OPEC pricing of the early 1970s, and the one before that with the Depression in 1929, this one may actually go down for endogenous reasons as we struggle to maintain workforce growth in countries like our own. At any rate, we’ve probably got half a dozen years left in this cycle before more negative economic forces materialise.

and

Let me conclude then, by returning to the positive things. There are, I believe, half a dozen quite productive years left in the international economy and it might be longer if the North Asians can keep their act together. But unless the current American administration returns to a more liberal notion of internationalism we will overlay these positive economic prospects with geo-strategic uncertainty of a kind that is debilitating and broadly unnecessary

Where the last wave ended with an exogenous shock, from the inflationary OPEC pricing of the early 1970s, and the one before that with the Depression in 1929, this one may actually go down for endogenous reasons as we struggle to maintain workforce growth in countries like our own. At any rate, we’ve probably got half a dozen years left in this cycle before more negative economic forces materialise.

Hes wrong here. It was completely 100% external. So he was wrong. He also implies it would be inflationary in nature. So he was wrong. So basically he was right in predicting the year, sort of.

He's not exactly Nostradamus. Actually, I guess he is.

I gotta congratualte you infi for once you actually made some valid point and backed them up with facts.
Congrats.

As I once said (I think on this forum), I have no real problem with Peter Costello, but one man does not make a party. This is where the Liberal Party both State and Federal has a weakness, talent.

I don't consider Costello the guru of Economics or being a wonderous Treasurer, anyone can look good during the boom times. What I do like about him is his modernistic view of what Liberalism stands for. Now, I'm sure you know which party I vote for but it doesn't mean I can't admire individuals from the other side. To be honest I have liked John Gorton ever since he was Prime Minister for the short period he was before being shafted by Billy McMahom (hopeless git he was). I also had immense respect for Neville Bonner. Outside that though I really find it hard to like any of the Liberal Pollies except for the respect I have for Peter Costello. What I didn't like about Peter Costello was his weakness towards Howard. He should have gone for the Leadership and kicked the old bastards nuts while doing so.

Alas the problem with the Liberals is not whether Peter Costello is leader it's all the rest of them that's the problem.