Opinion 
 Blogs 
 The week observed  
 The political shake up gathers steam 

The political shake up gathers steam

A major shake up of the political landscape in Australia is gathering steam, with the weekend's election results set to have major ramifications at both State and Federal level for all parties.

For those of you who follow this column regularly, you will recall that I have written on a couple of occasions about the forecasts of social researcher Hugh Mackay. He predicted last year, before the Federal election, that not only would Howard lose, but that a string of State Labor governments would fall soon after.

Mackay put it down to a sudden re-engagement of society in political matters after a period of "dreamy disengagement" during the good economic times of the past decade.

Mackay's prognosis rings more true as each election passes, with incumbents - be they entire government's or parties which have comfortably held a seat for a long time - copping a backlash at nearly all elections held since November's fall of the Howard Government.

But what will result of this shake up of the political landscape and what will it mean for the bush?

For a start, many rural people who are fed up with what they describe as "State Labor's anti-farmer policies", will be overjoyed at the prospect of change. Think native vegetation laws in Queensland and NSW, water in Victoria and SA, and regional infrastructure in WA.

But of course, change is only as good as what replaces the current situation.

The end of the ideology wars that defined Australian politics means that the battle between parties now seems to be a fight over which side has the best team in place to manage the State. In that respect the great weakness of the Coalition opposition in each State - and now Federally - has been their ability to govern themselves.

But in the case of NSW the State Government has become so dysfunctional that not even this argument is likely to save Labor. Indeed, it has not stopped major swings against Labor in both WA and the Northern Territory, where the argument was used as part of Labor's campaign.

At a Federal level this voter volatility should be cause for serious concern. Despite its stunning victory last year, the Rudd Government needs only a swing of couple of percent against it to be out on its ear. If this week's FarmOnline poll is anything to go by, the honeymoon is certainly over for Mr Rudd in rural areas.

All that remains to happen now is for the Coalition to get its house in order, starting with the replacement of Brendan Nelson as Liberal Leader.

Which brings us to the problem of the Federal Nationals - should they follow Queensland's lead, merge with the Liberals and end the death by 1000 cuts? Or should they follow WA's stance and sever the Coalition, and make a stand for their core values?

It's an impossible task Nationals Leader Warren Truss faces in trying to unite a party on either option, when at State level the Nationals have either merged (Qld), gone solo (WA), are partners in a coalition with the Liberals (NSW and Vic), or sit in cabinet in a Labor Government (SA).

Whichever way Truss and co. go, it is clear that the political shake up currently occurring will extend well beyond the choice of Labor vs Coalition at the next round of State elections.

What do you think?

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

Comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Seems to me the best "shake up" would be to save a lot of time money and duplication by abolishing state politics altogether and boost up local government.
Posted by observer on 10/09/2008 2:15:05 PM
When people really wake up they will realise that the native vegetation laws and water separation from the title deeds are nothing more than a TRICKY covert NATIONALISATION of the freehold system.

The governments couldn't afford to "acquire" these external interests from our freehold land so they collaborated on the cheap to impose a perceived mandatory land use Regulation without "just terms". Because it was at no apparent cost to the taxpayers, voters were fooled by the green propaganda and supported the "locking up of freehold land" because they believe farmers are raping the land and don't see us as actually "in turning the soil" producing food, clothing and shelter.

Can't help wonder. How will the urban freehold ratepayers react when similar legislation is soon brought down [already on the drawing boards] which will REGULATE all the existing vacant bedroom spaces in their homes.

The concept here, is with all the homeless and documented absence of rental accommodation adding to the statistics, the existing built infrastructure should be made available in order to take up the slack without adding to the urban sprawl and to prevent removing even more green-belts from the environment.

Posted by June on 11/09/2008 6:34:40 AM

Post A Comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Michael Thomson is the Editor of FarmOnline. He has previously worked as the Canberra Parliamentary Press Gallery correspondent for the Rural Press group of agricultural newspapers, and as a senior reporter with Queensland Country Life.

Q: If a Federal election was held next weekend, for which party would you vote?

Labor
(12.2%)

Liberal
(38.2%)

Nationals
(27.5%)

Greens
(8.6%)

Family First
(1.7%)

Independent
(7.3%)

Undecided/Other
(4.5%)

Total Votes: 1040
Poll Date: 7/09/2008

21/11/2008 | AWI's new board can only succeed in old battles by fighting in new ways.
QCL Subscriptions
 
QCL Rate Card
 
Rural Bookshop
 
Horse Deals Australia
 
QCL - Mail Order Cataloge
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...