Howard wins the Senate
October 28th, 2004 at 10:44 pm by David FarrarIt was confirmed today that the Coalition has won 39 out of 76 seats in the Australian Senate, so from 1 July 2005 (when Senators take office) they will be able to pass laws without support from third parties.
Labor has 28 seats, Greens 4, Democrats 2 and Family First 1.
No doubt Goerge W is hoping for a result just as good.
No tag for this post.
October 29th, 2004 at 7:49 am
Howard can now work on some real economic freedom. When the Aussies start to approach the average income of Americans, this could become an empty island or at best just a stepping stone.
Vote:October 29th, 2004 at 8:54 am
Bde B, the Aussie tax rates are 42% for 58,000 to 70,000 and 47% for 70,000 plus.
Much higher than NZ, yet you blather uninformed as though the miserable 38% top rate here is crippling the country.
DF. George Bush allready has a Senate majority, they would need 60 seats to get rule changes so that Federal judges can be approved without taking into account the Democrats.
Vote:Plus the US minimum wage is lower than NZ, why would a majority leave. Unpatriotic whingers like you lot would get short shift in the US.
October 29th, 2004 at 9:45 am
The top tax rate here is 39%
Vote:October 29th, 2004 at 10:18 am
The Aussie results ( finally after 3 weeks) dont look so bad for labour compared to the Sunday after the election.
Vote:While labour had a loss of 8 seats there were 5 gains. The average swing ( in practice this doesnt happen) for Labour to win next time is 4.9%
This isnt too hard, Howard had 5.1% when he won in 1996, and labour had 4.6% in 1998.
The Senate result has been made worse by Labour choosing some wrong preference deals, ie Family First ahead of the Greens .
With Howard keeping most of his cabinet, the tiredness factor will be readily apparent next time.
PS a 4.4% swing will see Howard himself lose his own seat but I cant see him being around next time
October 29th, 2004 at 12:05 pm
I have a feeling Goerge W Buhs is going to be out the window next Tuesday.
Vote:October 29th, 2004 at 3:27 pm
Ztev, your head is in the sand on this – your comments are risible when you look those Aussie Labor MPs who have indicated dissatisfaction and no confidence with Latham and have gone to the backbenches….
Vote:October 29th, 2004 at 5:40 pm
Ztev, et al, there’s two significant things at play here now:
First, the coalition pretty much now has control of the Senate for two terms. That is, an effective draw at the next Senate election still delivers control to the coalition. In the House, while it’s still not impossible for the opposition to win, it once again comes pretty close to a two term majority.
Secondly, the environment for how the opposition can conduct itself has all changed. It must now evolve into something different or perish. Dennis Shanahan in the Australian today explains:
Vote:October 29th, 2004 at 7:28 pm
Something else that won’t easily be forgotten:
“Private wealth rose 18 per cent to a new record high of $5 trillion in the year to June, or $250,000 a head, while debt averaged $19,000 a head.
Stock broker CommSec’s analysis of Treasury and Australian Bureau of Statistics data found wealth doubled in the past seven years and rose almost 120 per cent in the past decade, beating the record set in the late 1980s.
“The gains in wealth over the past decade have not been equalled in at least 40 years,” CommSec chief equities analyst Craig James said.”
Vote:October 30th, 2004 at 9:05 am
Does nobody read my figures : Howard himself got a swing exceeding that Labour needs now. And that was after a long period in opposition, where they went through leaders etc like an Italian government.
Vote:The Senate thing is no big deal, as they say its the first time in 20 years that a majority in the house has had a majority in the senate. (thanks to the preferences of 20,000 Fishermans party in Queensland – thats what you base your projections on ???)
I can see Helen going to the polls as early as possible next year, I dont see any of you using the same arguements about Howards re- election to show a rosy future for labour.
October 30th, 2004 at 11:22 am
Th ALP is deeply in hock to the trade unions which are becoming increasingly irrelevant. The Australian public are rightly suspicious to a party the is both factionalised and controlled by a small pressure group, when delaing with Federal issues.. At the Federal leval there are two big issues economic management and national security. The other issues are state issues where the ALP has a monopoly. NZ is different with both issues being inter-twined. Not too many conclusions here except we are getting pooer which is what the Government wants. Poor people vote Labour.
Vote:October 30th, 2004 at 3:04 pm
From Matt Price in the Australian today (not 6% swing needed):
“A few compelling figures.
The Coalition went into the election protecting 18 seats with margins under 3per cent. It lost four of them, all narrowly. In the rest, sitting Liberal and National members significantly bolstered their positions. Now only two of those 14 Coalition seats are held by under 4 per cent; half of them have buffers greater than 6 per cent.
Another 17 Coalition seats boasted margins of 3 per cent to 7 per cent before October 9. Apart from Makin, where Liberal MP Trish Draper survived a scandal over her private life and travel rorts, Labor made virtually no ground in any of these seats. Most Coalition MPs in this band added 2 per cent to 6 per cent to their margins.
On the other side of the ledger, Labor was protecting 15 seats with margins of less than 4 per cent. It surrendered seven to the Government and lost ground in six others. Natural optimists will argue the ALP endured a modest net loss of three seats. Realists reckon Labor will require a landslide swing of about 6 per cent just to get close in 2007. “
Vote:October 30th, 2004 at 6:06 pm
Ztev,
Vote:if you lived in Aus you obviously didn’t have a very accountant. When I was there I paid no where near 47% tax on any of my income. The ATO still has numerous rebates and allowable expenses for employees, so at worst my tax rate was in the order of 18%. One year I legitimately wrote off 90% of my income. So didn’t have to pay any tax at all, as they have a taxfree threshold.
We are heavily burdened by a money grubbing bunch of theives in NZ. If $7b is not enough proof that we are, then what is?