Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html en-gb 30 Sun 13 Jul 2014 01:55:33 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=98#comment84 69 AndyPass wrote: "If you put the paid parental leave schemes alongside one another, it is clear that the Coalitions is a better deal for working Mothers. It is no surprise that the Greens support it. One would hope that this might sting Gillard into improving on Labor's scheme. 18 weeks of the minimum wage is pathetic."Annabelle Crabb in her excellent article for the ABC's The Drum, indicates that this support for the Coalition's paid maternity leave by Bob Brown's Green's was nothing more than holding Abbott to a promise he knows Abbott never intended to keep. Full story here:http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/10/3008589.htm?site=thedrum Fri 10 Sep 2010 10:22:25 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=97#comment83 82 nick01 wrote: "Oakshott was always a Labor thug dressed up as an Independent."This story, in a Murdock press no doubt, was released BEFORE Oakshott turned down Julia's offer. So what other knife will the conservatives try to throw, while continuing in their dummy spit camapaign? Fri 10 Sep 2010 10:07:39 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=96#comment82 81 nick01: Both parties have powerful backers trying to influence the decisions that party makes in Government. This is exactly why the masses turned both parties down. We are sick of a small but powerful minority on either side dictating what the two major parties do.With such a hung parliament, and therefore more than the usual 'he said, she said' type of debate going on in Parliament, we will be given a far more broader perspective in relation to any particular bill being debated. As for puppet masters and cronies, that may have swayed public opinion before this election, but not now.Unless you're suggesting these so called masters and cronies will influence the Greens, Oakeshott, Windsor, Wilkie, Katter, the Coalition and Labor enough to sway the way they vote on bills. Fri 10 Sep 2010 10:04:13 GMT+1 nick01 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=95#comment81 Oakshott was always a Labor thug dressed up as an Independent. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/neutral-oakeshott-asked-labor-for-state-cabinet-seat/story-fn59niix-1225916807612 Fri 10 Sep 2010 07:07:44 GMT+1 nick01 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=94#comment80 11pete11 #76Are you really trying to compare what the unions are to Labor to what the Institute of Public Affairs is to the Coalition? Technically there is a comparison but I think it's fairly clear to see that Paul Howes and his union cronies are the puppet masters. Julia seems to be somewhat of a henchman to these faceless backroom thugs. It'll be interesting to see how the tree hugers and the so called 'independents' deal with this ALP/Union relationship. Fri 10 Sep 2010 07:01:58 GMT+1 jjpinni http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=92#comment79 The confused bleating coming from the murdoch press and the elites and currently wealthy here in Oz is rather priceless due to the illumination it provides to the "born to be superior" chunk of our population and a revolting graceless bunch they are. Most of the city population is regarded as a idiot rabble of selfish blind consumers by the bush and in T. Windsor's electorate the number of university graduate farmers is well over 50%. THEY'RE NOT STUPID. Compare the sensible noises that came out of Oakschott and Katter and Windsor with the soundbites and spin control from the majors. As I picked the result on "groundhog day" blog I feel I must remind the good readers that this result IS the will of the people - the two coalitions (lab/green) vs (Lib,Nat,LNP,CLP,WA Nationals) have had a very clear result in the Upper House - rule by Labour and Greens.The result in the lower house was also a clear message with 6 independants elected a new record for Oz. The people have spoken and clearly said the major parties are on notice for executive governance issues and the "Coalition" is not trusted to be reflective and good enough for review of the executive.The only problem seems to exist in the cozy pluralist (actually a version of plutocracy - if you can afford to lobby then of course you can! Everyone can! The food is in the shop, ready for you to buy! Why are you starving you useless bludger?) self-representative special interest lobby whose members really dont know how to deal outside their comfort zone and are now blaming - well - the voters! Priceless BS! Fri 10 Sep 2010 05:16:58 GMT+1 GaucheCaviar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=91#comment78 Thanks to all for a great discussion so far. BBC's online spend is definitely better value for my license fee than some of the rot on TV. To 50 Foow who wrote "While I am at it, who in the wide world of sports is this Bryant guy? . . . . . . (what is with that look on his face in the photo? Is that his "tough" look or did his lunch disagree with him?)That look is the smug satisfaction that he has the best job in the BBC breaking through an attempt to look serious alongside his colleagues with real jobs in Jerusalem, Baghdad and Washington. Struggling with sunburn and hangovers is hardly the stuff that earns Bafta's and Queen's honours, but at least he can write his reports from a sun-drenched cafe by the beach rather than sneaking into a war zone dressed in a burqua.And besides, without his articles we'd miss all this fabulous debate. Thu 09 Sep 2010 20:25:37 GMT+1 Caz http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=90#comment77 The Real Julia Gillard:Julia Gillard was educated at 'Mitcham Demonstration School' in Adelaide. Brad Boyd, Deputy head at this school, claims that this is what made her what she is today. The history of education in Adelaide is interesting, with a very heavy Froebelian influence, and having been constructed in what we call the 'John Adam St Gang' in London (also called the 'Adelphi Planners') who set up colonies in NZ and Canada, as well as Australia and elsewhere. To read more about the influence of the Froebel gifts and the 'architecture of the mind', I suggest people go to the 'lifeinthemixtalk' website: Froebel: http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=15604Gillard: http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=16237John Adam St Gang: http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=3305Considering that Tony Abbott supports a Constitutional Monarchy, we have both Gillard and Abbott as tools of the John Adam St Gang, the network centre of the British Empire, which never went away. Thu 09 Sep 2010 19:55:04 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=89#comment76 75 sydneycynic : Actually you are talking State politics rather than Federal, so I guess we should highlight that for the non Australian readers, before we go on.I lived in the area prior to Neville Wran's election. Prior to him it was consistently and monotonously the Coalition who ran NSW. I watched as the North Shore, up to and including Waitara/Wahroonga, and down as far as the northern aspect of Chatswood got all of the breaks, while Chatswood and Hornsby and all places other than that elitist strip, got left with nothing. I don't know how many accidents we watched at Barker College Corner, top of College Crescent on the Hornsby Waitaria border....sort of.....where trucks would throw their load, including the fuel tanker that spilt its load into the then fire station and the whole corner went up. But the Liberals refused to build a diversionary road system away from Hornsby.It was Labor that built the extension of the F3?....the highway going north...and it was the conservatives on the Upper North Shore that refused to allow its continuance down to Pennant Hills and then on to Parramatta.If enough people in that electorate were to do what I do, and vote for anyone other than Labor or the Coalition, you would get your wish.But don't hold your breath waiting for such an election....it won't happen.The conservatives are too entrenched there. Thu 09 Sep 2010 07:14:36 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=88#comment75 73 nick01 wrote: "I think if most people who voted for the greens knew what the greens were about, they would never vote for such an extreme leftist, communist type party."If the Greens follow all of their policies, or if Labor were stupid enough to encourage even half of them, you would get your wish, "they would never vote for such an extreme leftist"...as to the communist bit, they are as much communist as I am one of their disciplines...And there is no comparrison."Also, where are all of the bleeding hearts who complained about Howard securing less Primary vote (42%) than Beazley in 2004?"Assuming you're comparing the Labor party to the Coalition, the answer is in the fact that the Coalition is not a party, as I and others have alluded to in a number of other posts in other places here. "Where are these same people and their opinion now with their beloved ALP on 38% primary, less seats and 2PP?" Labor won outright 72 seats. The Coalition, consisting of a number of small parties, got one seat more. However if you break each party down to.....parties....then the Labor Party won outright. "How will the ALP support any greens recommendations on these issues when they are controlled by the unions who will not allow anything that might leave workers unemployed?"The Labor party is as controlled by Unions as the Liberal Party is controlled by the Institute of Public Affairs. They are supporter networks for both parties, but under laws, they can't interfere in the day to day running of the Government of the day. However, they can lobby.And I wish them well, because they will have to lobby hard with the Independents, then the Greens before they even start on the Coalition or Labor.Obviously there will be some watering down of proposed legislation, by all concerned, and isn't that exactly what we want?It certainly is from my perspective. "And please don't tell me about clean coal or some rubbish, it's a fairytale."I agree with you. I think there's a far better chance we'll get nuclear than we will get clean coal...and I don't expect to see either in my life time. Thu 09 Sep 2010 07:03:23 GMT+1 sydneycynic http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=87#comment74 I'm afraid I can't agree with you 11pete11 about the development in my area. Anyone driving along the Pacific Highway between Chatswood and Wahroonga (the F3 turnoff) are just seeing wall to wall apartment blocks. I personally don't have a problem with this as this area has to cop it's share of the urban sprawl. Anyone who wants to live between the highway and the railroad is welcome to it. My problem is where are all these people going to go when they want to go to work, go to school, or go to hospital. At the moment the State Labor collects all the land fees and taxes and give nothing back. They couldn't care less because they know there's no votes to lose. Thu 09 Sep 2010 06:29:58 GMT+1 nick01 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=85#comment73 This post has been Removed Thu 09 Sep 2010 06:14:09 GMT+1 nick01 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=84#comment72 11pete11, I'm sure the Greens would support that paid parental leave policy of the coalition. It's one of the few policies I do not back the coalition on, it is excessive and unnecessary.I think if most people who voted for the greens knew what the greens were about, they would never vote for such an extreme leftist, communist type party. Does anyone really want these boat people on full benifits with a provided home and a full visa within 2 weeks when we have homeless Australians in the streets. Also, where are all of the bleeding hearts who complained about Howard securing less Primary vote (42%) than Beazley in 2004? Where are these same people and their opinion now with their beloved ALP on 38% primary, less seats and 2PP? Once again, the hypocrisy of the left is astounding. Also 11pete11, another area I think there will be some disagreement with between the greens and the ALP is the carbon tax and mining tax. How will the ALP support any greens recommendations on these issues when they are controlled by the unions who will not allow anything that might leave workers unemployed? And please don't tell me about clean coal or some rubbish, it's a fairytale. Thu 09 Sep 2010 06:12:35 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=83#comment71 70 sydneycynic wrote:"My apologies 11pete11. If I had an independent candidate who had a chance of winning I would vote for him/her also. As previously mentioned, I live in Bradfield and therefore my vote counts for nothing."No need to apologise Sydneycynic, best you do what I did and look to move away from an electorate that got nothing from its Coalition blind loyalists.Road bottle necks, no decent road system from Hornsby to Parramatta, express ways that end because the wealthy refuse to allow development around Wahroonga, Normanhurst, Thornleigh. Nope, I don't have a decent word to utter for that mob, who treat Burns Road as Australia's answer to Downing Street. It pained me to see my old home town destroyed by poor management, and stupid decisions in the name of 'conservative financial management'.At least the farming community produce something worthwhile, as opposed to a street full of over paid doctors, lawyers and car salesmen. Thu 09 Sep 2010 05:41:56 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=82#comment70 69 AndyPass wrote: "If you put the paid parental leave schemes alongside one another, it is clear that the Coalitions is a better deal for working Mothers."Whether it is or not, can it be paid for under the Labor costings. The Coalition costings were a total joke, and they are not in Government. Can the adjustments the Greens want, that will bring it closer to the Coalition model, be affordable?"It is no surprise that the Greens support it. "It must come as a surprise to those die hard Coalition supporters who claimed Labor and the Greens were in bed together. So what is this arrangement, an affair between the Coalition and the Greens or a one night stand?"18 weeks of the minimum wage is pathetic."It may be but its within the budget proposed by them that will bring the balance o payments back to a decent level in three years time."A paid parental schemes is not a tax on big business. It does not tax profits like the mining tax."I'm not one to criticise a person for miss spelling or dropping out words, lord knows I make enough of them myself. However it is a very important point to note that the word 'Super' needs to be added before 'Profit' in your statement. Gives the outcome a totally different meaning."It is normal to expect a wealthy civilised society to offer working women support when they choose start a family."Yes it is, and it has been Labor historically that has given such support in the past. However, in a time of frugal spending, careful balancing of the finances, and desire by Labor to be honest in its forecasting of their spending, it is probably better we all wait three years to see which way the world economy goes, before offering such assistance. Thu 09 Sep 2010 05:21:51 GMT+1 sydneycynic http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=81#comment69 My apologies 11pete11. If I had an independent candidate who had a chance of winning I would vote for him/her also. As previously mentioned, I live in Bradfield and therefore my vote counts for nothing. My blood has however been boiling when I keep hearing about country people bleating about the poor state of their hospitals. As previously stated, I'd love them to do something about the decrepit state of Hornsby Hospital. That's not going to happen and it just adds insult to injury when you hear about independents complaining that the politicians are only interested in pandering to people like me. Also, I think Wilkie was dishonest in asking for a billion dollar hospital and then complaining when his request was met. He said he went for Labor because they were more prudent. This is the same labor who are reported to have given Windsoer and Oakshott 10 billion. In other words, you're damned if you give them money and you're damned if you don't. Thu 09 Sep 2010 05:14:11 GMT+1 Robert-Mugabe http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=80#comment68 65. At 02:18am on 09 Sep 2010, 11pete11 wrote:So much for the Coalition being protectors of the business sector. Will a variation of the mining tax be the next cave in by the Coalition?If you put the paid parental leave schemes alongside one another, it is clear that the Coalitions is a better deal for working Mothers. It is no surprise that the Greens support it. One would hope that this might sting Gillard into improving on Labor's scheme. 18 weeks of the minimum wage is pathetic.A paid parental schemes is not a tax on big business. It does not tax profits like the mining tax. It is normal to expect a wealthy civilised society to offer working women support when they choose start a family. Thu 09 Sep 2010 04:59:34 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=78#comment67 66 sydneycynic wrote: "I just wish 11pete11 would stop spreading his own propaganda and admit he is a dyed in the wool labor man."I think you're misinterpreting my opinions and observations as a sign of my voting pattern. I have never voted Labor. This last election I voted for an Independent, who didn't get up, but whom I hope will next time round. She deserves to. Most of what she stands for is better than the idiot the Nationals put up and who got voted in.Previously I voted for the least likely independent/party, until I got to a major party I reluctantly voted for. This has become my standard method of voting now.Previous to this I voted Democrats and at one election I voted for an independent when I lived in the Central West of NSW. Sadly Pete Andren died prior to the 2007 election. I would love to see many of his kind standing. Thu 09 Sep 2010 04:44:34 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=77#comment66 "66. sydneycynic wrote:... there isn't, as far as I know, a politician who tells the truth."Well Tony Abbott did admit to making up numbers in interviews, inadvertently become the world's most truthful politician for a while. Thu 09 Sep 2010 04:27:08 GMT+1 sydneycynic http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=76#comment65 11pete11, likes to describe himself as a "swing voter" and I assume this supposed objectivity is intended to add gravitas to his opinions. 11pete11 should realise that making comments such as he will vote liberal when they start telling the truth undermines his alleged neutral position. I'd like to know whether he voted informal because there isn't, as far as I know, a politician who tells the truth. For example, labor's propaganda about the coalition's intention to reintroduce Work Choices, was the biggest lie going around. I just wish 11pete11 would stop spreading his own propaganda and admit he is a dyed in the wool labor man. Until he does his expectation that others tell the truth is a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black. Thu 09 Sep 2010 03:49:05 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=75#comment64 I wonder how many of the Coalition supporters who regularly visit here, and who pile scorn on the Greens as being an arm of Labor, are aware of this.The Greens' Senator Brown has said his party will back the Coalition on their version of the paid parental leave scheme.The Government scheme, which was due to start early next year, was to be funded by taxpayers.The Coalition scheme will be funded by a levy on big business, and the Greens intend to support that version.So much for the Coalition being protectors of the business sector. Will a variation of the mining tax be the next cave in by the Coalition? Thu 09 Sep 2010 01:18:22 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=74#comment63 54 Greg Warner wrote: "A number of posters in this blog often give it to pete in spades...but I for one respect and admire his sound knowledge, his opinions and his so very demonstrable love for our nation...this exqusite home and people...and potential."Thanks mate. But be careful, or they'll go back to saying we're one in the same person again :) Thu 09 Sep 2010 00:33:15 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=72#comment62 "53. bigotboy wrote:Michael, I'm ( pleasantly ) suprised such reactionary views are allowed on a BBC site .. may I be so bold as to enquire as to the the basis of your concern with women and (male?) non land owners voting ? and why the 5 hectare requirement ?"I was just following your reasoning about concentrating the voting pool. I mean, why stop with people who have Australian grandparents? We should also consider taking it away from anyone who is elligiable but moves aborad for a period of time. I mean, they're not REAL Australians if they do that, eh?As for weoman and land ownership, I'm just harking back to a (better?) time before Ameline Pankhurst when only men who owned a certain area of land could vote. Those were the days, eh? Thu 09 Sep 2010 00:10:55 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=71#comment61 There is an interesting aspect to women in politics, especially those classed as coming from the left. Most of them end up being quite conservative when they get into a position of power.Queensland Premier Anna Bligh is a good example of this. Who would have ever imagined a Labor leader selling off state assets? This is the call of the Coalition, not Labor.Sheryl Kernot is another good example. Initially associated with the centre left of Labor, she ended up being more to the right in both the Democrats as well as Labor.And that also applies to Meg Lees who was a very strong left leaning supporter in the days before she was elected leader to the Democrats.I'm sure other correspondents here can think of other, similar cases.One wonders if Julia won't end up following in their footsteps. Wed 08 Sep 2010 23:41:23 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=70#comment60 60 Florey wrote: "More Abbott distortion of the truth in his concession speech and in some of these postings!"Fully agree with you post. Excellent comment.The day the Coalition elects a truthful leader, with a truthful cabinet, is when they get my vote. Not before. Wed 08 Sep 2010 22:42:22 GMT+1 Florey http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=69#comment59 More Abbott distortion of the truth in his concession speech and in some of these postings! Abbott did NOT win more seats in the Parliament - the coalition had 72 the SAME as Labor. Abbott's 74 come with the support of the WA National (who will sit on the cross benches, and therefore can't be counted in the fold) and Katter. Labour's 76 come with the support of Bandt (Green), Wilkie (Tasmanian independent, Windsor and Oakeshott (NSW independents). Important also to note that through the national swing agains Labor was 5.4%, this went predominantly to the Greens (4%) and only 1.5% to the Coalition. Abbott can't be accurate with even these simple numbers, let alone the gaping holes exposed in his election commitment costings. Wed 08 Sep 2010 22:34:44 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=68#comment58 57 murph73v2 wrote: "LOL! Tony Windsor now admits that he cannot even use a computer."Now you're really clutching at straws. How many National, and possibly Liberal, members competently use computers? Wed 08 Sep 2010 22:16:08 GMT+1 Missy M http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=67#comment57 @11pete11 "And its time the Australian electorate made itself better aware of our politics, by using reputable sources, not the Murdoch propaganda machine."Exactly! I really wish someone could explain that to my mum. Wed 08 Sep 2010 20:59:36 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=65#comment56 LOL! Tony Windsor now admits that he cannot even use a computer. Wed 08 Sep 2010 15:59:08 GMT+1 way_down_under http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=64#comment55 Maybe the reality for a lot of voters is that they did not want the Labor Party and they did not want Tony Abbott and hence the result. There are now a lot of "liberal" voters who are disenfranchised and not much prospect of any change for some time. Hopefully the current outcome might result in a decent broadband network and something better than a band aid committee to review climate change. Malcolm Turnbull would get a seat on the proposed climate change review but Tony probably won't be eligible and will be too busy trying to keep the Nationals from getting even more bitter,twisted and irrelevant in the 21st century. Julia is Labor Leader mostly courtesy of those that have given us the NSW Labor government, which is an unmitigated disaster. We can only hope that some sensible decisions are made for the good of the country and not just for the country independants. Only time will tell. Wed 08 Sep 2010 11:14:01 GMT+1 Greg Warner http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=63#comment54 Of course, an alternative headline may have been GILLARD TRIUMPHS.But then again...I have earned my living for the past 40 years as a writer...who am I to blow against the wind?: ) Wed 08 Sep 2010 10:29:18 GMT+1 Greg Warner http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=62#comment53 #37 Camo:Brilliant Camo...I always respect and admire the way you can get across your POV in a simple, blindingly obvious "cameo" (Cameo...Camo?) like that...if I was a Professor in "Entrepeneurship 101"...I'd engrave your words on the door to the lecture room.#16 murph73v2:Tony Windsor for President of the Republic of Australia?At least we are not debating the concept, but rather the candidate : )Bring it on say I.###11pete11:A number of posters in this blog often give it to pete in spades...but I for one respect and admire his sound knowledge, his opinions and his so very demonstrable love for our nation...this exqusite home and people...and potential.And to Nick Bryant...whatever Nick believes or does not believe...I feel we all owe him a great debt, along with the BBC, for providing a forum for a wide range of opinions and...a gorgeous debate.If I use adjectives like "gorgeous", please forgive me...that is my Irish ancestry coming out...read Patrick O'Brian's 20 novel "Master and Commander" epic and you will understand.Whatever our thoughts are on the outcome of the 2010 Federal Election...if you will forgive me for wearing my patriotic heart on my sleeve/post...I for one hope we can "Advance Australia Fair"...whatever the life of this parliament.Some posters may also know of my deep and abiding trust and belief in the Creator, or as Benjamin Franklin called the Supreme Being...Providence.I for one pray that Australia's new Government will provide a new and enhanced level of providence for the people of Australia.And FWIW I quote the words of that eminent socialoligist Neil Young..."Long May You Run". Wed 08 Sep 2010 08:58:52 GMT+1 bigotboy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=61#comment52 48 MichaelI'm ( pleasantly ) suprised such reactionary views are allowed on a BBC site .. may I be so bold as to enquire as to the the basis of your concern with women and (male?) non land owners voting ? and why the 5 hectare requirement ? Wed 08 Sep 2010 08:53:28 GMT+1 _14 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=60#comment51 #44. bigotboy,"May I humbly suggest that only citizens with at least two grandparents born in Australia be entitled to vote ...at least this mob have nowhere else to go and are here for better or worse"By your 'reasoning' (in the broadest sense of the word), you would probably remove the right to vote from nearly half of the population, seeing as how "45 per cent of all Australians were born overseas or have at least one parent who was born overseas" (Department of Immigration and Citizenship). What about someone like me, with two grandparents born in Australia and two born overseas? It seems like a very near thing to me - why not just extend it to anyone with an ancestor who had the nerve to arrive post-Federation and save yourself the trouble?Your on-screen name seems to suit you to a tee. Wed 08 Sep 2010 08:29:50 GMT+1 Robert-Mugabe http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=58#comment50 50. At 08:18am on 08 Sep 2010, Foow wrote:And someone PLEASE tell Ms. Rice to THINK next time before she reacts to a Wallaby victory!Maybe Stephanie Rice got carried away because Australian Rugby victories are so few and far between these days?! Wed 08 Sep 2010 08:20:47 GMT+1 Foow http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=57#comment49 "The BBC's Nick Bryant in Sydney says the election was often compared to a soap opera and ended like the finale of a reality show, with the winner kept a secret until announced live on national television."I am sorry, but what part of the UK election was not a soap opera?While I am at it, who in the wide world of sports is this Bryant guy? I was under the impression that the BBC hired professionals, not some Hooray henry who has some kind of attitude problem (what is with that look on his face in the photo? Is that his "tough" look or did his lunch disagree with him?)For those people with liitle to no education, the Welsh are NOT English in the same wasy New Zealanders are not Australians, or Aussies not Brits.And for those who say that this is not democracy....correct. You do NOT live in a democracy you philistines........... You live in a republic.... (Read your Plato) or maybe Political Systems for Dummies.What part of a close parliament are you not getting?Labour won't be able to completely screw things up with indey's/ greens watching over their shoulders, and the Libs with that close a number of seats... The Libs can only blame themselves for not winning with an outright margin (What WERE you people thinking of giving Abbott a job in the first place? He's about as useful as Gough Whitlam or Bob Hawke!)Australia is most probably the best country in the world, (for those US types who say their country is, you just have to point out that Aussie beer and beaches are better) except for the small problem that a vast majority of you never GO anywhere and see how damn good it is in Aus.So stop whinging (not our best national character) and do YOUR job, which is to watch the pollys and kick them out if they get it too wrong. (Like the original democrat slogan "We'll keep the b's honest.")And someone PLEASE tell Ms. Rice to THINK next time before she reacts to a Wallaby victory! Wed 08 Sep 2010 07:18:23 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=56#comment48 46 exiled wrote: "Which is why 'preferences voting' doesn't work."Oh I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that the Liberals would have got into power if we didn't have preferential voting. Of course Labor would romp in every election if there wasn't such a system, hence why the conservative side of politics introduced it. Wed 08 Sep 2010 06:25:37 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=55#comment47 44. bigotboyMay I humbly suggest that only citizens with at least two grandparents born in Australia be entitled to vote ...and while I'm at it I'd also exclude those who are not both financially and physically independent of their parents..this country seems full of 35 year olds who are going on 19 and their concerns are those of the indulged teenager"And women, don't forget women. Or men who don't own at least 5 hectares of land... Wed 08 Sep 2010 05:42:41 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=54#comment46 This post has been Removed Wed 08 Sep 2010 05:30:17 GMT+1 exiled http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=52#comment45 39. At 03:39am on 08 Sep 2010, 11pete11 wrote:If that is the case, then why don't we have a Coalition Government? Precisely my point. Which is why 'preferences voting' doesn't work. See other blog. Wed 08 Sep 2010 05:02:48 GMT+1 exiled http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=51#comment44 33. At 02:37am on 08 Sep 2010, Andy T wrote:"You cannot SPEND your way out of debt Australia!"Bet your mortgage is more than 5% of your gross annual income.Nope, I don't have a mortgage and we spend within our means. Your model has workers bleating for government aid the minute they lose a job - how well does that work? I do however have children who will be paying for all this spending for their entire careers. Wouldn't have minded so much if there had been any value in the squandered funds. Some people on this blog might do well to consider their blood pressure - shouldn't everyone be entitled to put forth some thoughts without instant denouncement and name-calling from the permanent residents on this blog? Wed 08 Sep 2010 04:59:38 GMT+1 bigotboy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=50#comment43 Well this is the mess you get when every person temporarily in transit passing trough Australia is allowed ...nay told ..to vote May I humbly suggest that only citizens with at least two grandparents born in Australia be entitled to vote ...at least this mob have nowhere else to go and are here for better or worseand while I'm at it I'd also exclude those who are not both financially and physically independent of their parents..this country seems full of 35 year olds who are going on 19 and their concerns are those of the indulged teenager and as for corporal punishment........ Wed 08 Sep 2010 04:51:16 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=49#comment42 42 Nickaus - you are obviously a gentleman and a scholar.I have the luck to work on Collins street in Melbourne and took some pleasure in 'correcting' the many leaflets from both major parties we received unsolicited through the post and dropping them off on my way to work. I sometimes wonder if they took my feedback on board. Wed 08 Sep 2010 03:39:44 GMT+1 nickaus http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=48#comment41 40. I can handle the usual trickle of ballpit scuffling you see but the intense saturation of political ads in the media just before an election really bothers me.Like the 'Do Not Call' Register to stop telemarketers from disturbing me in the evenings trying to peddle stuff, I want a 'Do Not Annoy Me With Political Rubbish' Register to be implemented so I don't have politicians disturbing me trying to tell me how evil x party is and how y party is better.If they want to prove to me that their party is better, I want to see evidence of what they are doing for my local area not be spammed with constant rubbish leaflets and tv commercials that we see Wed 08 Sep 2010 03:05:00 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=47#comment40 29 AndyPass wrote: "I find it incredible that a First World 'Democracy' can allow a system whereby a party that acquires less seats than its main rival, receives less First Preferences, and also receives less Second Preferences, is allowed to form the Government."Are you referring to the Labor Party as 'the party that acquires less seats than its main rival' here?Which party was 'its main rival' who gained more seats? The Liberals? The Nationals? The Liberal Nationals? The National Independents? The Country Liberals?etcWhich party is Labor's main rival?If you are saying the Coalition, they are not a party, as many have pointed out here before. Surely if you make the claim that the Coalition of the above minor conservative parties have the biggest number then can't that same deal be said concerning the Labor party, with a Coalition of Greens and Independents?If not why not?"How odd that after Labor fell behind on the preferences that a sudden bout of amnesia should cloud her thinking."How could Julia have anything to do with the choice of the Independents to support a Labor Government...or are you saying she somehow 'clouded' their judgement with said 'amnesia'?"However, my money's on another election within 12 months, and messrs Oakeshott, Windor and Katter no longer able to hold prospective Governments to ransom."This sound like Liberal politicspeak for 'How dare these backward bushies tell us what to do? Everyone knows these ex Nats were ours, and should have done what we told them. Don't they know we were born to rule?????' Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:55:07 GMT+1 Michael http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=45#comment39 Well thank god that's over. At least now it's fun to watch the sore coalition voters claim 'illegitimacy' while conveniently ignoring the rules.Ah well, back to the usual rubbish coming from Canberra instead of the 'once in three years' rubbish.' Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:46:34 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=44#comment38 28 exiled wrote: "And 'the people' resoundingly rejected Labor whichever way you look at it."If that is the case, then why don't we have a Coalition Government? Because the people turned down both Labor, and the Coalition outright. They gave a mixed vote and we now have a situation where both major parties have got to answer to the Independents in the Reps and the Greens for every move either Labor or the Coalition makes. That is what the people gave us. Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:39:29 GMT+1 longblack69 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=43#comment37 Maybe Nick isn't so upset after all, on a second take i think he's just pouting. Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:39:25 GMT+1 Camo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=42#comment36 I can spend my way out of debt, Exiled, and I'll show you how (without "buying" an asset, too):I have $20,000.I borrow $100,000 to start up a business (this is... DEBT!! Gasp! I must be unable to manage finances!!)I rent my business premises. (This is revenue spending, not capital).I buy some trading stock (revenue).I spend my entire original $20,000 on a shop fitout (some of this is capital, but in name only. It is all depreciable, which is revenue).Hey wait a second.. I started with a $20,000 surplus.. now I have spent it and borrowed more! Stupid labor moron I am.I spend money on advertising (or "spin"... revenue)I have some staff (revenue)I pay for electricity, water, business insurance and maintennance (revenue)Now.. I'm $100k in the hole, I have no assets as a result of this debt, and I used to have $20k positive bank balance. According to coalition analysis, I am now unfit to run a cold water tap, let alone a business or country.But wait..A customer comes in. They buy stuff. Hooray! (revenue.. "tax" for example)My ads start working.. the first customer comes back.. he brings his friends.. I get a wholesale order from another shop who likes my gear.. but the first year is slow and I cant quite cover all my operational costs.. so I finance an overdraft (gaaah! More debt!) to continue trading.The second year.. I cover my overheads plus small additional takings.Ten years from now my supermarket-chain-rival offers to buy me out for $3million.I'm out of debt!!! I bought no capital assets and spent it all on revenue expenses and even borrowed more (and spent that) when it got tight.Every successful business carries some debt... Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:29:56 GMT+1 Robert-Mugabe http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=41#comment35 34. At 02:43am on 08 Sep 2010, seajay23 wrote:I notice several frustrated coalition supporters have made some silly comments about voting outcomes and genreal unfairness;Would you also encourage the death penalty for those lucky individuals unable to spell general properly? :-) Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:22:53 GMT+1 seajay23 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=40#comment34 One thing I do fervently hope the new government brings in; the death penalty for people who spell independents as independants.Why, why, why!!! It is the same number of letters, the E is closer than the A to the D on the keyboard, there really is no reason for this dopey spelling error to continue. And it happens way too frequently on blogs to be simple typing error; these people really do think they have it right.A pendant is something worn around the neck, hence an in-de-pendant must be a face in a cameo, or perhaps an albatross.A pedant of course, is someone like me. Wed 08 Sep 2010 02:01:44 GMT+1 seajay23 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=38#comment33 I notice several frustrated coalition supporters have made some silly comments about voting outcomes and genreal unfairness;First up the 2pp preferred vote has not been finalised but wise heads (see Peter Brent's blog in the Oz) point out that it almost certain Labor will finish ahead in that count. Both Labor and Coalition had 72 seats, the National party candidate in O'Connor (the alleged number 73) will sit on the cross benches.In 1998 the Coalition lost the primary vote and 2pp vote; was there a peep from Coalition supporters then about how unfair it was?We have a Westminster system, we have a legitmate result and I for one look forward to much more open and responsible government; this is the best day for Australian democracy since federation. Wed 08 Sep 2010 01:43:11 GMT+1 Andy T http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=37#comment32 "You cannot SPEND your way out of debt Australia!"Bet your mortgage is more than 5% of your gross annual income.What DEBT & how does CUTTING Australian government debt save jobs and GROW the economy in our current financial position?Some pseudo neoconservative "economists" on here need a reality transplant, or at least remove themselves from their parallel universe. Wed 08 Sep 2010 01:37:19 GMT+1 Andy T http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=36#comment31 To those Liberal Party supporters who are whingeing on here about how unfair things are I have one thing to say: grow up, you didn't get the numbers on the floor of the House of Reps, period. That's the only thing that counts in determining who's going to be the government. The Liberal Party has been there in Labor's situation (less primary & 2 party preferred votes) before too, so don't be historically ignorant and/or hypocrites when the shoe's on the other foot.Abbott (for all his bluster) showed he has no positive vision of the future for Australia, just memories of (and yearnings to return us all to) the past.I for one want am happy to live in the 21st century, not the 1950's. Wed 08 Sep 2010 01:26:50 GMT+1 nickaus http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=35#comment30 Is it just me or is the majority of non-live media about the election put the LNP in such a good light? Some of the stuff that came out of Tony Abbott's mouth during the campaign and afterwards was terrible and was an example of how childish he was acting.Not that I am going all pro-ALP here, but while the negotiations were happening I barely heard a peep out of the Labor ranks, meanwhile the LNP were busy talking themselves up as well as blasting those independants/greens that supported the other side.The fact of the matter is that with the help of the greens and independants, Labor has won the election, there is no ifs or buts, they are going to form government. Sure you can criticise them all you want but I might point out the following, the Liberals would never have got as far as they did without the Nationals. Since they banded together it seems that the Nats are put in the background while the Libs run around believing that they alone deserve to be in power. Indication of this was when the Nats were considering doing what the independants did and negotiate their support. Tbh I wouldn't blame them if they did..... Wed 08 Sep 2010 01:15:07 GMT+1 exiled http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=34#comment29 27. Oakeshott for Speaker? I know you're joshing! This is the man that wanted shorter parliamentary speeches taking 28 minutes to be able to say 'I'm going with Labor'.29. Agree entirely. Gillard would sell her mother to get where she wants to be. How much has this desperate bid to cling to power cost us?You cannot SPEND your way out of debt Australia! Wed 08 Sep 2010 01:07:06 GMT+1 Robert-Mugabe http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=32#comment28 I find it incredible that a First World 'Democracy' can allow a system whereby a party that acquires less seats than its main rival, receives less First Preferences, and also receives less Second Preferences, is allowed to form the Government.I also seem to recall in the early days after the election Gillard stated that the party with the greater share of preferences should be given the chance to govern. How odd that after Labor fell behind on the preferences that a sudden bout of amnesia should cloud her thinking.At least the Coalition can take comfort with the fact that Labor managed to demonstrate 3 years of gross incompetence (in the same vein as their State counterparts) despite holding a very strong mandate to govern from the Australian people. With a flimsy Labor 'majority' Australia risks spending 3 years treading water until Labor or the Coalition can command a mandate. However, my money's on another election within 12 months, and messrs Oakeshott, Windor and Katter no longer able to hold prospective Governments to ransom. Wed 08 Sep 2010 00:53:40 GMT+1 exiled http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=31#comment27 25. They answer to the people, not the other way round.And 'the people' resoundingly rejected Labor whichever way you look at it. Wed 08 Sep 2010 00:17:03 GMT+1 Robert-Mugabe http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=30#comment26 11. At 1:49pm on 07 Sep 2010, Greg Warner wrote:You're right...who will be Speaker?Greg - based on yesterday's 'performance' Rob Oakeshott possesses all the credentials to be the Speaker?! Wed 08 Sep 2010 00:13:28 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=29#comment25 24 Antimodean wrote: "Nick Bryant seems to have confused the meaning of the words "reporter" and "supporter"."So very true, Antimodean. An excellent response to yet another one sided piece from Nick. Wed 08 Sep 2010 00:00:17 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=28#comment24 23 exiled wrote: "13 million Australians did NOT vote for the 3 cowboys yet they held the whole country to ransom."So its alright that the Nationals rarely get anywhere near a majority in their own right, but they have a say in governments every time Coalition gets elected?And who kept reminding us, prior to this decision, that the three 'cowboys' were ex Nationals who would automatically side with the Coalition?The Coalition got it wrong on all counts, and they, and their supporters, need to learn humility. They answer to the people, not the other way round. Tue 07 Sep 2010 23:55:34 GMT+1 Antimodean http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=27#comment23 Nick Bryant seems to have confused the meaning of the words "reporter" and "supporter". He, like the vast majority of the Australian media have barely attempted to conceal their support for the coalition and their constant denigration and negative reporting for anything that showed the ALP in a positive light, even to the point of moving from a generally favourable opinion of all the "three amigos" to condescending and patronising comments aimed at Oakshott and Windsor as soon as they announced their decisions - highlighted by their markedly uncritical reporting of Bob Katter's attention grabbing behaviour and ultimately cowardly decision to side with the coalition despite the frailty of their budgetary claims and obvious hypocrisy. I am glad that I was ineligible, as a new immigrant, to vote, and that I had this chance to assess the Australian political stage and personalities, and the media, without having to consider who I would vote for. It has been an eye opener! Tue 07 Sep 2010 23:41:54 GMT+1 exiled http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=25#comment22 Australians got the government they deserve. Maybe they'll think twice about their 'protest votes' next time. What a disgraceful sham. 13 million Australians did NOT vote for the 3 cowboys yet they held the whole country to ransom. I hope it's a poison chalice for Julia and I hope Labor choke on it before they get a chance to waste any more of my money on their useless schemes. We'll be paying for her 'bought' result for decades. Tue 07 Sep 2010 23:35:01 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=24#comment21 17 murph73v2 wrote: "Yeah. Mr 17% popularity who polled 43% 2pp is really what the coalition needs..."What the Coalition really needs is honesty, respect for ALL Australians, some decent policies, and for the Liberals and the splinter National parties to stand on their own. Tue 07 Sep 2010 23:29:55 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=23#comment20 Over the past few weeks we have seen a side to politics that I can truly say I have never seen before; politicians that didn't spin, and who answered questions posed to them honestly. And no, they weren't members of either major political party, they were the Independents, and not just the three amigos.This is what the Australian people have been screaming out for, and this is what they will look for next time. Honesty in comment, direct and truthful answers to questions posed to them.Since the decision of August 21st Labor, to their credit, remained pretty quiet and respectful of the position the voters had put them in, getting on with negotiations and discussions with the Independents. The Coalition, on the other hand, have acted despicably over this same period, with their threats, bullying, fear mongering and li...We now know they went to the election knowing they couldn't fulfil their promises, that much of what they promised, would not have happened this term. Had the Independents sided with the Coalition, they would have lost all credibility with the silent majority of Australian voters, because they would have been seen to have cowered to the bullies...a sign of what could have happened had the Coalition formed Government.We need more independents and they need to have a far greater say in our political system.Lets hope this is not a one off election and that this is a sign of what is to come in many more elections in the future. Tue 07 Sep 2010 23:09:51 GMT+1 crabbie old cabbie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=22#comment19 This post has been Removed Tue 07 Sep 2010 22:15:28 GMT+1 Treaclebeak http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=21#comment18 Coalition politicians have never shown any reluctance in the past to take power with fewer votes than the Labor(Howard in 98 was the most recent example)and have often relied on gerrymanders to stay in power.If they want a voting system that reflects the popular vote more accurately they should support proportional representation,otherwise they(and their Murdoch press allies) should stop their hypocritical,self-serving remarks.If the independents' constituents wanted conservative party representatives they would have voted them into Parliament,they didn't.I'm a Labor supporter, so of course the 'two amigos' made the correct decision,even a major disappointment such as the Rudd-Gillard Labor government is better than any possible Coalition administration.What's the big deal about minority governments anyway they're not unusual in the world? There are many examples of successful minority governments-let's wait and see how this one progresses.Perhaps our political commentators will gain some perspective during the term of the next government. Tue 07 Sep 2010 21:33:55 GMT+1 StuPer http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=20#comment17 murph73v2 I live in Rob Oakeshott's electorate, and so I can't speak for the other Independents areas, but here the people voted Rob in not because he was more conservative than the National party, far from it. You have confused conservatism with cynicism, as with most Australians, people here are sick and tired of self serving politicians who promise all and deliver nothing. This is true of the individuals and the parties they serve, we are lucky in this area to have an alternative, a man who has repeatedly shown both at a state level, and now nationally, that he says what he means and he believes what he says - ohh and he also delivers on promises. Main stream politics in Australia had better watch out imo, once the rest of the country (by that I mean the actual voters, not the media or other politicians) get to see Mr Oakeshott in action, I think there may well be a lot of people saying 'why can't we have a representative like that'. You will undoubtedly describe me as naive or worse, however I will add I am 45yrs old, come originally from the UK, and have seen more political football than I care to remember. Rob Oakeshott comes as a breath of fresh air to my politically cynical eyes, and long may he serve. Tue 07 Sep 2010 18:22:47 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=18#comment16 14. At 3:56pm on 07 Sep 2010, reticulate wrote:Also +1 on Turnbull coming back. If anyone can swing the moderates, it's him.===========================Yeah. Mr 17% popularity who polled 43% 2pp is really what the coalition needs...Give up, will ya? Tue 07 Sep 2010 15:56:08 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=17#comment15 "And BTW...Tony Windsor for President of the Republic of Australia!"Good lord. He's a rural socialist, monarchist who wants gun ownership liberalisation and re-introduction of the death penalty. Not exactly a natural ally of the Australian centre-left. I'm thinking that the $10b worth of pork barrelling in rural Australia might have a little more to do with it. Tue 07 Sep 2010 15:54:25 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=16#comment14 This post has been Removed Tue 07 Sep 2010 14:58:45 GMT+1 reticulate http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=15#comment13 Also +1 on Turnbull coming back. If anyone can swing the moderates, it's him. Tue 07 Sep 2010 14:56:29 GMT+1 reticulate http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=14#comment12 The best joke of this entire election has been the Coalition's claim to legitimacy based on a less than 2% national swing that resulted in a hung parliament. The Australian people had their say, and they didn't really care for either option. For further evidence, just look at the swing to the Greens and Independents.While it's been fun to watch Tony Abbott's fan club whip themselves up into a fervour of righteous indignation all day, this is how the Westminster system actually works. For all the rhetoric about 'kingmakers' and 'betraying voters', you can bet Liberal/National supporters wouldn't be making half as much noise if Abbott was in as PM.The truth is, we'll see how it all pans out when the new Senators sit mid next year. The Independent bloc has only really signed on to not prevent Supply (and so not force a double dissolution). This has very little to do with ideology and everything to do with offering stable government. With the Greens practically owning the Senate come next year, Abbott had no chance of offering anything like that. If Coalition supporters want to present a strong case for whoever is in charge next week, maybe they should try less hysterics and more policy. Tue 07 Sep 2010 14:44:07 GMT+1 Greg Warner http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=12#comment11 And BTW...Tony Windsor for President of the Republic of Australia! Tue 07 Sep 2010 13:57:19 GMT+1 Greg Warner http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=11#comment10 #8 11pete11Hi mate...am going to reply to your post in Nick's "Ground Hog Day"...here...time and Nick's blog wait for no man.The song Nick mentioned from "Ground Hog Day"..."I Got You Babe"...perhaps that's what PM Gillard thought when she "got" Windsor and Oakeshott...doesn't matter lah : )You're right...who will be Speaker?I am so thrilled with this result...and I believe the people of Victoria and South Australia and Tasmania will also be thrilled.In my opinion, there was too much focus in this...or should I say that election in NSW and Queensland.The key to wining elections in Australia is to have a record and vision that appeals to ALL states and Territories...perhaps international visitors to this blog do not realise how "different" and parochial Australia's States are.Then you get the divide between the city and the bush...as we have seen and heard in the "Independents" widely reported "deliberations".Bottomline...to govern in Australia you need a NATIONAL vision.That's why I also say that if the Liberal party is serious about governing Australia, they need to focus on winning a majority of Liberal Party voters...the conjoined twin aspect of the LP and the NP is an anachronism.Even if I wanted to vote Liberal...I wouldn't because I do not want that vote to support (word meaning "funny" people in circus...plural) like Joyce on the front bench of the Government of Australia.Note well...Tuckey and Minchin, the key anti-climate change sceptics and key "knifers" of Turnbull are now gone.Surely if the Liberal party is to have any hope of regaining Government, they should bring back Turnbull.Now that would be an interesting stoush. Tue 07 Sep 2010 12:49:12 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=10#comment9 This post has been Removed Tue 07 Sep 2010 12:42:00 GMT+1 bigotboy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=9#comment8 7 Mr WoofAbbott may well be a "pommy lover " ...although I suspect that would be mainly in the historical sense... and have legally been born a British subject ( under the then applicable UK law as he was born in the UK ) it is more pertinent that he was born of Australian parents and thus has been an Australian citizen since birthOf course all current Federal MPs are Australian citizens and only Australian citizens as Australian citizens with other citizenship(s) are constitutionally ineligible from being elected to Parliament so both Gillard and Abbott may both have been born poms but are now both ex poms Tue 07 Sep 2010 11:51:07 GMT+1 11pete11 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=8#comment7 Well what do you know. All that huffing and puffing the Coalition went on with about how they were 'born to rule', and three of their ex party members toppled them. And though Bob Katter sided with the Coalition, he heaped praise on Kevin Rudd and Labor.These Independents weren't like the electorate who only bother to find out about politics via Sixty Minutes, Today Tonight or ACA. These guys were in the pit day in and day out, dealing daily with both the Coalition and Labor. If the Coalition was the best 'party to rule' then the Independents' decision would have been made at least a week ago. It is time the Coalition took a good, long and hard look at itself. And its time the Australian electorate made itself better aware of our politics, by using reputable sources, not the Murdock propaganda machine. Tue 07 Sep 2010 11:38:18 GMT+1 Mr Woof http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=7#comment6 They are both different flavours of pom - she is Welsh and he is from England, Last welsh politician I can think of was the Welsh windbag - Kinnock.Head of state is a pom, Both PM candidates are from Pommieland, their flag is on oursTime for a republic. Havent heard enough from Turnbull recently Tue 07 Sep 2010 11:08:15 GMT+1 Greg Warner http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=5#comment5 Windsor, Oakeshott and Katter's decisions are exactly as I predicted in Nick's previous blog...they want to be RELEVANT in their electorates in the next election.This is a great day for Australia.Bring on the Republic Referendum.Start to fight back against man-made adverse climate change.Good on you Julia!Go for it Ma'am... Tue 07 Sep 2010 11:04:48 GMT+1 Ugly BWOOCE http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=4#comment4 Stone the flammin crows, mate. What an abso-flippin-lute disgrace – he nods - the stinkin agrarian commos of the outback have let John Howard’s love child an his dream team down. Big time.I mean, let's get real here, a pommie sheila as Prime Minister of Australia? It's jest not in the flammin script, is it? It's like a chunder stain on the moral fabric of this great nation. It's a bloomin disgrace, I tell yers.Goin 4ward, us super stars of management will have 2 systemtically address tha demented behaviours of a drongo electorate – includin puttin the entire treacherous population on performance management regimes, moi an moi incredibly important mates can’t be ruling anything 123% out at this point in time – we’ll do whatever it takes 2 ensure that bloomin pom Gillard an her ALP tiny-brains are never, ever, bloomin elected again. Not even to run the Black Stump Council, OK? Tue 07 Sep 2010 10:47:26 GMT+1 Jimbo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=3#comment3 Ahh, but you see, you can use statistics to prove anything. The single party with the greatest number of seats and the lead in the two-party preferred voting is the Labor Party. Remember, the coalition are 4 or 5 different parties (depending on how you count WA Nationals). The party with the biggest swing were the Greens. Surely that indicates the electorate is moving to the left, and the Labor/Greens arrangement deserve to be in power. Tue 07 Sep 2010 10:41:16 GMT+1 Cainsy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=2#comment2 Well, I put this on the last blog and it'll do here too. At last a result! Perhaps I will get a citizenship certificate at the ceremony tomorrow. The local council said they were short of a federal minister to sign it. Any bets on how long this set-up will last? Tue 07 Sep 2010 10:06:10 GMT+1 Rex Mundi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=1#comment1 Coalition won more seats, more of the primary vote and the two party preferred vote. These two idiots, Oakeshott and Windsor, represent two of the most conservative electorates in the country, they were voted in because their constituencies perceived that the National Party wasn't conservative enough. And now they've backed the second most left wing government in Australia's history. They'll go down in history for what they are. A pair of power hungry fools. Oakeshott will get belted at the next election which, incidentally, will most likely be held within a year.Just to give you an idea of the motivation behind the thinking of these two fools, the quote of the day came from Windsor which went something along the lines of:"We’re going with the side less likely to go back to the polls, theLiberals would go back because they would be more likely to win..."Stuff your constituents, stuff the majority, hey Tony? Don't want any upset at the next family BBQ with you and your cousin, Bruce Hawker.The nouvo-leftoid coalition of Australia now has the likes of Bandt, a communist, on one wing and Windsor, a pro-guns, pro-death penalty rural socialist on the other wing. Good luck to Gillard trying to fly a plane with a wingspan of about 35 miles. Tue 07 Sep 2010 09:50:31 GMT+1 Clang99 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2010/09/gillard_sneaks_home.html?page=0#comment0 Nick, I think the most intriguing issue to come out of today's events, which you don't mention, is the one of legitimacy. While the Coalition has won the most seats in their own right, the largest number of primary votes, and, by a tiny amount and possibly not permanently, the largest number of two-party-preferred votes, and while the only clear message to come from the electorate - via swings to both left and right - was a dislike of the Labor government, somehow we have been given another Labor government. The most astounding element in all of this, I think, is Windsor's assertion that he chose to side with Labor because he believed the Coalition would win any election that might be held and that this made them unstable. Peter Hartcher nailed Windsor's position in his column this afternoon: "On his own confession, Windsor is prepared to deny the Australian people the government of their choice." Tue 07 Sep 2010 09:48:44 GMT+1