Apparently according to CH10 news there are lots of Labor members calling for krudd to quit the labor party alltogether and 3 days after the election still no one wants the job.

Rudd was elected by the people of Griffith to represent them on local issues, just as any other MHR is, and those people are entitled to a continuance of that.  If he were to leave now, it would cause a by-election, but if Abbott does not get his way in the Senate, there could be a double dissolution in  a year or so anyway.  Rudd should now just sit on the back bench and shut up, only concerning himself with issues relevant to his own electorate, and then if he wants to leave, just not contest the next election whenever it is.

Rudd should now just sit on the back bench and shut up, only concerning himself with issues relevant to his own electorate, and then if he wants to leave, just not contest the next election whenever it is.

My sentiments exactly - I think those in the Labor Party calling for his removal need to take a Bex and have a good lie down because he'll leave at some stage in the future anyway.  I think even Rudd realises by now that he was part of the problem; just like that Howard/Peacock rivalry in the late 1980's/early 1990's ruined the Liberals chance of getting government off Hawke.  My feeling is that a double-dissolution is likely in the future anyway; it could be within 18 months if Tony can't steer key policy through the upper house but we won't know how it will work until after July 1st 2014.

I know that there's some people here who really hate Tony Windsor with a passion but I think some of his observations about Abbott's behaviour after the 2010 election were fairly pertinent.  On the "Australian Story" program he said Abbott basically lacked the capacity to negotiate properly which is why he ended up not being able to form government.  The same thing happened to Jeff Kennett in 1999; he spent months before the election deriding the independents as nothing but garbage, then suddenly found he had to negotiate with them to form government and couldn't bring himself to do it.

Our new PM will either have to learn the skill of tactful negotiation with our loopy Senate or he'll end up being unable to achieve anything.

My sentiments exactly - I think those in the Labor Party calling for his removal need to take a Bex and have a good lie down because he'll leave at some stage in the future anyway.  I think even Rudd realises by now that he was part of the problem; just like that Howard/Peacock rivalry in the late 1980's/early 1990's ruined the Liberals chance of getting government off Hawke.  My feeling is that a double-dissolution is likely in the future anyway; it could be within 18 months if Tony can't steer key policy through the upper house but we won't know how it will work until after July 1st 2014.

I know that there's some people here who really hate Tony Windsor with a passion but I think some of his observations about Abbott's behaviour after the 2010 election were fairly pertinent.  On the "Australian Story" program he said Abbott basically lacked the capacity to negotiate properly which is why he ended up not being able to form government.  The same thing happened to Jeff Kennett in 1999; he spent months before the election deriding the independents as nothing but garbage, then suddenly found he had to negotiate with them to form government and couldn't bring himself to do it.

Our new PM will either have to learn the skill of tactful negotiation with our loopy Senate or he'll end up being unable to achieve anything.

I think Tony will wait til we get the new senate and repeal the carbon tax, although many in Labor now say Tony does have a mandate to remove the CT that they must respect, so maybe he'll remove it earlier.

Double dissolution triggers will begin to be stored after that, but I don't think Abbott will have much of an issue with the new senate anyway. He's actually a better negotiator than Gillard is. She gave us the 'not under a government I lead' CT to 'secure' the support of the Greens who were NEVER going to ally with the LNP anyway. I also remember her 'expertly negotiating' the mining tax.... Pretty easy to negotiate a new tax when you design it to collect no money....

I think Tony will wait til we get the new senate and repeal the carbon tax, although many in Labor now say Tony does have a mandate to remove the CT that they must respect, so maybe he'll remove it earlier.

Double dissolution triggers will begin to be stored after that, but I don't think Abbott will have much of an issue with the new senate anyway. He's actually a better negotiator than Gillard is. She gave us the 'not under a government I lead' CT to 'secure' the support of the Greens who were NEVER going to ally with the LNP anyway. I also remember her 'expertly negotiating' the mining tax.... Pretty easy to negotiate a new tax when you design it to collect no money....

They might decide by July that scrapping the carbon tax was a non-core promise?  Tony has already said he's not in a hurry to recall parliament despite the atmosphere of crisis they were emphasising prior to the election.  Also the list of promises was fairly exhaustive and we haven't seen the 'Beasley Black Hole' yet but I'm sure it's lurking out there yet to be discovered...

The way that Tony Windsor told it Abbott was unable to see that the key independents didn't necessarily have to go with him and started telling them what he expected from them before they had said which way they would go.  You could argue that maybe the independents were telling history the way they wanted to see it but I have a feeling that perhaps it was Tony Abbott's personal style that undid his chance at forming government immediately after the election.  I'm only bringing this up because Clive Palmer et al are going to be really tricky customers to deal with; some of our newly-elected senators have already said some very strange things and it's obvious their new-found power could go straight to their brains.  There's a theory that Clive's new party might fly apart at the first sign of trouble - I tend to think there's a good chance that could happen.  If Abbott is really switched on then he might even be able to convince the Greens or Labor to help pass his agenda?

Sadly I agree with you about Gillard and the mining tax, that was a significant opportunity squibbed because they lost their nerve in the face of unrelenting pressure from Gina and Twiggy.

The numbers are there to kill the CT in July, it will go, no rush to recall Parliament, he can't until vote counting is done anyway.

Clive will pose no issues for Tony, he's just a big cuddly Liberal at heart.

Before DD triggers get pushed I think we might see some legislation on Senate voting reform put through, that might even become the DD trigger, but I think they'll want to see it in place first.

The numbers are there to kill the CT in July, it will go, no rush to recall Parliament, he can't until vote counting is done anyway.

Clive will pose no issues for Tony, he's just a big cuddly Liberal at heart.

Before DD triggers get pushed I think we might see some legislation on Senate voting reform put through, that might even become the DD trigger, but I think they'll want to see it in place first.

I'm not sure I agree with you about Clive, he said some very unflattering things about the Liberals last week and he's also kept up the rancour since then.  He's also on the record as having a really deep-seated hatred of Campbell Newman so it will be interesting to see what he has to say under parliamentary privilege about certain things.

I saw on the news this morning that a Labor senator (Nick Champion from SA) has already conceded that they may help Tony pass his legislative agenda; I don't think for a moment this is spontaneous independent thinking - I think Labor have realised that there's nothing to gain by blocking everything Tony puts up and there could be strategic advantage in them being seen to cooperate with him.  Despite the fears of people like 2301, the Senate really does wash it all out in the end and I'm confident now (as you are) that we probably wont need a double dissolution... at least not for the first 18 months or so and especially given that statement by Nick Champion this morning.

Nick Champion is the Federal ALP member for Wakefield, he's not a senator.

The South Australian Labor Senators are Senator Gallacher, Senator McEwen, Senator Wong and Senator Farrell (who presently refreshing the 'Seek' website every 10 seconds hoping something new pops up). Don Farrell made two critical errors on the way, he installed at least two people to (in one case VERY) safe seats and yet failed to have himself re elected. Should have kept one of those safe reps seats for yourself Donny!

Looks like Bill Shorton is going to be the next leader of Labor, yeah not a bad choice i think as he strikes me as a decent bloke.

Looks like Bill Shorton is going to be the next leader of Labor, yeah not a bad choice i think as he strikes me as a decent bloke.

Another union hack.   Didn't Labor just get rid of one.

Just don't turn your back on him when he is holding a knife!

At least he can't stab himself in the back.  )

'a decent bloke'?

Do you reckon, he was behind Gillard, then when she was dumped, he was behind Rudd, then when it all went pear-shaped, he was nowhere to be seen. White rabbit if ever I saw one.

Nick Champion is the Federal ALP member for Wakefield, he's not a senator.

Oh right, I only saw the news story briefly on telly and I just assumed he was a senator because that's what he was talking about! Wakefield is a really safe seat isn't it?

Turnbull is really in the wrong party, he is more left than most in the Labor Party.  
He still follows the Labor line on global warming and is totally out of step with the rest of the party.

Don't have any illusions about Mr T. and his being (currently & recently) a Lib. He's just killing time until he can have another crack at being the first President of the Republic of Australia.

Looks like Bill Shorton is going to be the next leader of Labor, yeah not a bad choice i think as he strikes me as a decent bloke.

You shouldn't have any illusion about this creep either. Both Donald & TheBlacksmith have summed him up pretty well; for mine, if he gets to be leader, the ALP will continue its implosionary disappearing act up its own asrehole.

If Albanese gets the gig though, I think there's a vague chance that the ALP might one day again be an electable commodity....maybe.

Oh right, I only saw the news story briefly on telly and I just assumed he was a senator because that's what he was talking about! Wakefield is a really safe seat isn't it?

It nearly was, but not anymore, I saw figures that gave a 7% swing against the incumbent, at the next election it will be regarded as marginal or on a knife edge. Traditionally it's been a blue area, it only turned red in the Rudd era, looks as though it's on it's way back.

It nearly was, but not anymore, I saw figures that gave a 7% swing against the incumbent, at the next election it will be regarded as marginal or on a knife edge. Traditionally it's been a blue area, it only turned red in the Rudd era, looks as though it's on it's way back.

Will still have another 7% to go at the next election blue blood

Will still have another 7% to go at the next election blue blood

Er, no, the AEC currently state ALP holding on 2PP 53.7% So it's less than 4% at the next election. Depending on what school of thought you follow, safe seats have a 2PP exceeding 62% of the vote turn out. Which is why it nearly was a safe seat because it was formerly held on 61.95 post 2010 election. Which on reflection is a swing against the ALP of 8+% this election.

I'm not sure I agree with you about Clive, he said some very unflattering things about the Liberals last week and he's also kept up the rancour since then.  He's also on the record as having a really deep-seated hatred of Campbell Newman so it will be interesting to see what he has to say under parliamentary privilege about certain things.

Clive has never required Parliamentary privilege to tell us what he thinks in the past, he wasn't elected when he informed us about Wendy Deng... Which is a good thing for him, because my pals tied to the AEC tell me that Palmer is now line ball for Fairfax. I see Palmer himself has said he won't win on the basis of the postals and pre polls, but his numbers are a bit off, it seems more like 53% is heading to Ted O'Brian and that if consistent will go very close to dead heat or narrow LNP win.

Palmer has now gone public with a bat and ball attitude to it all, saying his senators will block all legislation on the basis of his 'rigged' voting claims. That might being a Double D play back into action, which will probably see Palmer not even run close in Fairfax and possibly not get a senate spot either.

That said, his voting reform claims I think are very valid, and we might just get them.

Palmer has now gone public with a bat and ball attitude to it all, saying his senators will block all legislation on the basis of his 'rigged' voting claims.

Many very rich men have had a habit of making stupid public pronouncements; Palmer is another.  "Rigged voting" won't cost him anything. Wendi Deng's alleged spying might find him in court, but even if he loses a defamation case, why would he care? Any payout would only be petty cash to him. I do hope he has enough left to build Titanic II.

Clive has never required Parliamentary privilege to tell us what he thinks in the past, he wasn't elected when he informed us about Wendy Deng... Which is a good thing for him, because my pals tied to the AEC tell me that Palmer is now line ball for Fairfax.
........

Yeah I heard this morning that he's probably not going to get over the line in Fairfax either, which leaves him the party leader without a seat in parliament - all the more likely that his senators might defect and either go independent or with another party.

And yes, absolutely right, he's never needed parliamentary privilege to say the way out things that he's said before but wow, he probably should!  The Wendy Deng thing was completely out there and likely not the real cause for the break-up of her relationship with Rupert - I've heard she became a bit too familiar to some of the other rich and powerfuls in Rupert's circles causing him no end of grief.  

Here in Victoria, I've been watching the race for Indi with a lot of amusement - Sophie Mirabella was evidently quite popular in Canberra and in her own party but apparently not personally popular in her own electorate.  There was also a protracted and very public legal battle with the family of her ex-boyfriend over his will... it didn't seem to paint her in the best light.  She's been progressively whittling down her majority for some years in that seat to the point now where it looks like she's going to lose to an independent - salutatory lesson for others in safe seats I guess.

Many very rich men have had a habit of making stupid public pronouncements; Palmer is another.  "Rigged voting" won't cost him anything. Wendi Deng's alleged spying might find him in court, but even if he loses a defamation case, why would he care? Any payout would only be petty cash to him. I do hope he has enough left to build Titanic II.

I read something I think yesterday, a quote that said something like 'While the Labor Party was busy rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, Clive Palmer was busy parking his Titanic II on Lake Burley Griffin'. As far fetched as the idea seems, I secretly would like to see him build a replica of the Titanic, a nutty idea for sure, but damn it'd be good to see if he comes through!

One of the biggest fears of any party is going to a Double D, they are always worried as to how it's going to look and work in the electorates. Even when Howard had his epic majority of 100 to 49 seats or whatever it was he was never keen on going to DD, he stored many triggers, but never pulled them. If the LNP can spin Palmer's bat and ball as 'the reason' for a DD and have the electorate on board we might see it happen, but I doubt if the LNP will want to have themselves seen as the cause of needing to go back to the polls again, it's just not a good look.

Agreed, by being seen to cooperate on the removal of the carbon tax the Labor Party can absolve themselves of at least some of the responsibility if the double dissolution trigger is eventually pulled.  Abbott's no fool, he won't want to drag people back to the polls too soon - everyone I've spoken to in the last week (even people who normally love talking politics) is heartily sick of the whole thing for the time being.  If Tony does decide to push the button it will either be because he genuinely can't make parliament work or because he feels the timing and climate will be right to gain some advantage from it.  Probably both.

Many very rich men have had a habit of making stupid public pronouncements; Palmer is another. "Rigged voting" won't cost him anything. Wendi Deng's alleged spying might find him in court, but even if he loses a defamation case, why would he care? Any payout would only be petty cash to him. I do hope he has enough left to build Titanic II.

I hope he gets around to building it too but it won't be anything like the original - there will have to be more lifeboats for a start!  He's also planning on filling it up with pokies and a casino so it will pay it's way.  Again, I don't recall any mention of pokies on the first Titanic.

I really don't know why he made that outrageous allegation about Wendi Deng, even when he said it on the radio he seemed to think it was just an internet rumour himself so why on earth he repeated it is beyond me.  I think at that stage he was just upset because The Australian had just run a very unflattering piece about him and he was venting his spleen at the Murdoch press but he should have just stuck to that instead of getting personal.

I hope he gets around to building it too but it won't be anything like the original - there will have to be more lifeboats for a start!  He's also planning on filling it up with pokies and a casino so it will pay it's way.  Again, I don't recall any mention of pokies on the first Titanic.

If he fills it with a casino, then I would not care less about it. There are already in existence countless super-cruisers that are nothing more than floating casinos, and the experience on board them is boring unless you gamble.

There are already in existence countless super-cruisers that are nothing more than floating casinos, and the experience on board them is boring unless you gamble.

Exactly, and if all you want to is gamble, why spend money on a cruise ticket? Just stroll down to the local Casino.

Exactly, and if all you want to is gamble, why spend money on a cruise ticket? Just stroll down to the local Casino.

True, but their target market is not us, but the Asian people who are not permitted to gamble in their own countries. Superstar cruises load up their ships in Singapore with Asian gamblers who go into the on-board casino and do not emerge till the voyage is over.