Andrew Wilkie, the new independent member for Denison, who by the way received 13,681 primary votes has issued his 20 point log of claims. It would make even the most radical trade unionist blush.
Given the independents’ insistence of appropriate costing of government policies, it is worth pondering how many billions – yes, I think that is the right ballpark figure for his demands – his log of claims would cost.
The rebuilding of the Royal Hobart Hospital would not be cheap, for instance. Contracting out beds to the private sector in the meantime would involve a bill in the millions. And including dental care in Medicare would add many, many millions to the annual cost of running Medicare.
Then there is requirement that pensions and government benefits be adequate and indexed generously – billions there. Light rail for northern Hobart – several hundreds of millions one would suspect; some sort of transport plan, more millions; and completion of Stage 3 of the National Broadband Network – well, think billions and add a large figure in front of it.
And then there is a conscience vote on gay marriage, limiting pokie bets to $1 and assorted other pot pourri. And of course, there is the adequate office and staffing (at least that can probably be accomodated under the million dollar mark.)
It all reminds me of that P.G. Wodehouse novel where he jots down his immediate aspirations: Sunday, win British open; Monday, get married …. I’m sure you get the drift.
The tragedy, as opposed to the comedy, is that this fellow really means it and had the Labor Party paid more attention to Denison, including installing a more electable candidate, we would not be paying the slightest attention to Denison or the failed independent candidate.
Of course, the same can be said of the National Party; in particular, in the seat of Lyne, where the decision by Mark Vaille to leave parliament early and thereby force an unwelcome by-election, led to the election and now re-election of Rob Oakeshott.
I couldn’t help laughing when, after reading through his list of super-expensive items, that the last one was basically for a bigger office:
Maybe if you get him one with a view, he might forget the others altogether?
Fleeced
31 Aug 10 at 9:48 pm
What about air-conditioning for his pet poddle’s kennel?
Peter Patton
31 Aug 10 at 9:54 pm
Left wingers seem to love hospitals for some reason that i can’t understand.
JC
31 Aug 10 at 9:56 pm
I’m sick of these independents holding the country to ransom. I hope we don’t have to put up with these kinds of demands for the next 3 years.
asf
31 Aug 10 at 10:15 pm
How about, Tasmania has representation in the senate that is commensurate with its size and stature as a state, compared to the other states.
I guess 21 would have been too many.
daddy dave
31 Aug 10 at 10:23 pm
Wilkie agrees.
When he issued the “claims” he also said: “Some of them are really complex and amongst the most contentious national policy issues you could imagine; to build up expectation of being able to solve them all would be madness.” He went on: “Look, I’m not going to get everything I want; they are my starting point and these are negotiations, so don’t expect 22 outcomes.”
Apparently what he really wants is the pokie restriction (probably revenue neutral) and the hospital – about $1.5bn – but the money is going to be spent anyway so this just pulls the date forward a couple of years.
PSC
31 Aug 10 at 10:27 pm
So he’s just yanking our chains?
tal
31 Aug 10 at 10:30 pm
The larger scandal is the pro-Labor Tasmanian gerrymander. Five seats for this geographical dot is ridiculous.
Two, max.
C.L.
31 Aug 10 at 10:31 pm
Lordy CL that’s generous
tal
31 Aug 10 at 10:34 pm
Pretty much an ambit grandstanding claim, Tal, yeah.
Then again…
Fredo Swan and Hulio Gillardez will do anything to stay in power – to keep the junta going – and they blew tens of billions on toilet blocks and tuckshops.
So you never know your luck in the pig city.
Wilkie wants to ban pokie bets bigger than one dollar but he can’t resist the Canberra fruit machine’s jackpot allure.
C.L.
31 Aug 10 at 10:39 pm
We’re gonna need bigger elephants Lad
tal
31 Aug 10 at 10:40 pm
tal you crack me up.
daddy dave
31 Aug 10 at 10:50 pm
In a good way I hope Daddy
tal
31 Aug 10 at 10:56 pm
yes, in a good way.
daddy dave
31 Aug 10 at 10:57 pm
Tougher elephants, Tal.
With tatts.
C.L.
31 Aug 10 at 10:58 pm
I am gobsmacked.
In the space of a single week, these pork barrelling rubes have destroyed a generation’s faith in the election process.
We should go back to trial by combat.
Pedro the Ignorant
31 Aug 10 at 11:02 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a single Independent making an ambit claim for more limited government, lower taxes, a more modestly-sized bureaucracy, or is that just crazy talk?
dover_beach
31 Aug 10 at 11:15 pm
Indeps are frankly the worst. They basically just lefties that pretend otherwise and crazier.
JC
31 Aug 10 at 11:18 pm
Pedro, I was gobsmacked at the sheer brass neck of Gillard at the NPC today talking about the need for “continuity.” The absolute, dead-set last thing this country needs is continuity with the Rudd-Gillard-Swan-Arbib-Ludwig train wreck.
What we need is a fresh start.
C.L.
31 Aug 10 at 11:20 pm
Dover, Dover, dream on darl
tal
31 Aug 10 at 11:22 pm
Great line Joe “I’m an Indep and I’m nuts”
tal
31 Aug 10 at 11:23 pm
Most of the national claims are quite reasonable. It’s simply a matter of priorities. Processing asylum seekers on-shore may actually end up saving money. Most of the claims would be achievable if they were accompanied by the requisite political will.
THR
31 Aug 10 at 11:25 pm
Most of the national claims are quite reasonable.
They might be if it was a major party proposing them, not a sole independent, and if he at least acknowledged the bipartisan goal of achieving a surplus in 2012 which his wish-list will wreck.
daddy dave
31 Aug 10 at 11:30 pm
Centrebet now has the coalition well ahead of labor to win the next election (and shorten ahead of gillard to lead labor to it). We should go back to the polls. I can’t imagine the voters in any of these electorates won’t dump them for one of the major parties given the opportunity right now.
Mitch
1 Sep 10 at 12:27 am
Regards the title, it’s “having a lend” or “taking the piss/mick”.
[/pedant]
Ev630
1 Sep 10 at 12:48 am
“The tragedy, as opposed to the comedy, is that this fellow really means it and had the Labor Party paid more attention to Denison, including installing a more electable candidate, we would not be paying the slightest attention to Denison or the failed independent candidate.”
Possibly. But would that be a desireable outcome for labor opponents?
Boris
1 Sep 10 at 2:38 am
Processing asylum seekers onshore will see demand go through the roof. Our legal system would be so clogged with claims, few locals would be able to access the courts for the purposes they were established; to adjudicate disputes between Australians.
If Australia is to increase its humanitarian intake, it is best we do so from refugee camps in our region. Asylum seekers should be directed to regional processing centres.
Peter Patton
1 Sep 10 at 7:32 am
I like the idea of attach a significant end-of-year bonus to MP’s salaries. For each piece of legislation they vote for, that bonus is reduced by 10% (or whatever).
Peter Patton
1 Sep 10 at 7:36 am
The budget for the new Children’s Hospital in Melbourne is about a billion. The Greens’ cost estimate for Denticare is $4.3 billion, so probably double that.
Pretty soon we’ll be talking serious money.
MAGB
1 Sep 10 at 9:39 am
The other point that I failed to make was that most of Wilkie’s list would appropriately be met by state governments (assuming the case for any of these wishes, that is) – more confusion about federalism. The issue of dollar bets on the pokies is a state issue and could be overridden by the Commonwealth only be exotic and egregious means.
Judith Sloan
1 Sep 10 at 10:33 am
It’s Official!
The new PM is Julia Gillard. ASnd the gov’t is a formal Greens/ALP alliance!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/01/2999219.htm
Peter Patton
1 Sep 10 at 11:19 am
Looks like Wilkie might abstain in any vote of confidence. If he does, then Abbott doesn’t need Oakeshott.
daddy dave
1 Sep 10 at 12:07 pm
I thought that’s how it would would work out, Dad. That allows that little pansy to go labor/Green alliance and Abbott doesn’t need that little mary, which is a good thing.
JC
1 Sep 10 at 12:11 pm