Time to get tough

In a previous life I was a university administrator. The best piece of advice I ever received (from an individual who is now a vice-chancellor) is:

You have to be a bigger bastard than they are.

Absolutely true.

The same holds for politics.

From Niki Savva’s piece in the Australian:

Demiris floated the idea that the party should consider not running in several federal and state inner-city seats, leaving it to Labor and the Greens to slug it out. His proposition was that where this happened, Labor lost. It lost a seat it had held for 90 years to the Greens that night.

If the Liberals had run a candidate, it would have cost up to $40,000, they would have secured about 15 per cent of the vote, their preferences would have gone to Labor and Labor would have won.

Many senior Libs, the younger ones at least, are asking how that could possibly help them, and what difference these days does it make if Greens or Labor wins. A few years ago, when Victorian Libs discussed preferencing Greens ahead of Labor, it sparked heated debate, with ­interventions including John Howard, who argued that the Greens were more destructive than Labor, so Labor should be ahead on the ­ticket.

I have always preferenced the Greens before Labor. At the moment this is an easy choice – the Greens are far behind Labor and cannot yet form government, but they can cannibalise seats in the Parliament. If and when the Greens destroy Labor (and they will) the decision becomes tougher. Right now it’s a free hit.

The problem the Coalition has is that over the past few years I’ve preferenced them second. Not that is matters to them just yet. They still get my overall preferred vote, but they don’t get the funding that goes with a first preference.

The point being that the Coalition need to sharpen up and toughen up.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Time to get tough

  1. Herodotus

    Conservatives have for too long been less inclined to go the killer punch, and when they did (Work Choices) the backlash orchestrated by the unions and complicit media found them wanting.
    There will havento be a lot of toughening up if the recent electoral successes of the ALP and Greens are to be reversed.

  2. entropy

    Smells like a spot of crocodile feeding.

  3. Mak Siccar

    Bring in optional preferential voting – vote for as many or as few candidates as you wish – and don’t give the green-filth anything.

  4. Tel

    Work Choices was not a killer punch though, it had a lot of stupid stuff in it like if an employee was 5 minutes late back from lunch the employer must compulsorily reduce their pay by 4 hours… incentive? If you see you are not going to make it back to the office on time, just go home for the day because there’s no value working the afternoon if you know you won’t get paid.

    I mean, who thinks of that stuff?

  5. ar

    Yeah… just bring in non-compulsory voting.

  6. A Lurker

    Bring in optional preferential voting – vote for as many or as few candidates as you wish – and don’t give the green-filth anything.

    Yeah… just bring in non-compulsory voting.

    Both of those would go long ways to helping to fix democracy in Australia.
    Also a box at the end of the candidate list stating ‘None of the above” would be a useful addition too.

  7. entropy

    Agreed. Non compulsory voting, optional preferential. Make them work for my vote.

  8. entropy

    I mean, who thinks of that stuff?

    Clowns who have never worked in the real world. Or for conspiracy minded, it’s so stupid it might be fifth columnists. One or the other.

  9. alan sivkoff

    and nowthe real reason emerges for NK’s continual savaging of Abbott. She has never been a Liberal voter, but a green in mufti. Won’t Malcolm be impressed with his erstwhile supporter

  10. John Constantine

    We are assured that the black hand of their debacle coagulation is an election winning machine.

    What a brilliant idea Julie Bishop.

  11. entropy

    If the Liberals had run a candidate, it would have cost up to $40,000, they would have secured about 15 per cent of the vote, their preferences would have gone to Labor and Labor would have won.

    How does this change if the libs don’t run in a compulsory voting system?
    Under the current system, those erstwhile lib voters who would have preferenced ALP, just vote ALP. They don’t suddenly start voting green. Those that might vote green strategically probably, like Sinc, already do so.

    The only difference is the party machine saves $40k and avoids the shame of not having enough booth volunteers.

  12. entropy

    One other thing. Sinc has posted approvingly of something the Bittered Sav had to say.

  13. entropy

    And the gripping hand is it increases the gift of electoral dollars, courtesy of the taxpayer, to the other members of the uniparty.

  14. mundi

    If we ever get to the point where the greens form government, you won’t have to worry about voting. There will be nothing left of the country.

  15. herodotus

    Work Choices was not a killer punch though, it had a lot of stupid stuff in it

    And there were a lot of lies told about it.
    It got done down because it would have finished off the union movement, not because of the crap that the union ads ran, and which your example resembles.

  16. Dr Fred Lenin

    Probably a good idea ,let the two branches of the u.n.communist fascist party shred each other to win stand back and let the fur fly ,especially ifbitter lesbian feminazis are involve ,let them discredit and abuse each other in the absence of an eaxtreme right wing enemy of fascism . The voters will get a full view of the bitter anti social psychopaths these parties attract . It won’t happen with the present leaders ,they stick to the left party line . Use the money saved to hire investigators to dig into the past crimes of the enemy . You have to be a nastard to win ,would wot[rk with musso terrorists too ,they like to commit violence but hate being hit back ,the . left are the same

  17. Tel

    And there were a lot of lies told about it.

    Maybe you could avoid that by doing some research… just a suggestion.

    This is straight out of the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005:

    114 Payments not to be made or accepted in relation to periods of industrial action

    (1) This section applies if an employee engaged, or engages, in industrial action (whether or not protected action) in relation to an employer on a day.

    (2) The employer must not make a payment to an employee in relation to:
    (a) if the total duration of the industrial action on that day is less than 4 hours–4 hours of that day; or
    (b) otherwise–the total duration of the industrial action on that day.

    So did this happen in practice? Yes it did.

    http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/union-covers-docked-pay/news-story/bbe416d7d75b3ac6c88f1b5b44d29381

    CFMEU workers at the site held a meeting to discuss concerns that the Czech workers were being misused, when security guards brought in by Ceric stopped communication between Austral employees and the imported labourers.

    The meeting, held in the workers’ lunchtime, went longer than anticipated and Austral responded by docking the union members four hours’ pay, in accordance with the Federal Government’s new industrial relations (IR) legislation.

    Now however you feel about foreign workers is another issue, point is that in a piece of legislation pretending to offer “choice” we saw a provision that imposed civil penalties on any employer who failed to dock pay for the 4 hour period, and also penalties imposed on any worker who asked to be paid for doing any work that afternoon. In other words completely removing any choice on the part of either party.

  18. Tel

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/wages-docked-over-two-minutes/2006/11/25/1164341454711.html

    ABOUT 40 workers at failed carpet maker Feltex’s West Footscray plant have been docked four hours’ pay for returning to work two minutes late from a morning tea-break.

    The workers, members of the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia, had used their 10-minute break to attend a meeting addressed by federal Labor’s industrial relations spokesman, Stephen Smith.

  19. Mother Lode

    Many senior Libs, the younger ones at least, are asking how that could possibly help them

    Who cares what they think? Look at what they have done.

    This is tactics. They should try strategy.

    Something like, oh, I don’t know, policies that people want. Who knows, you might actually be able to win that way.

  20. EvilElvis

    Late from a lunch break…

    Yet your examples are late back from industrial action/union meetings, Tel. Ffs.

  21. Rococo Liberal

    The problem with not running a candidate in a Greeen/Labor marginal is the Senate vote.
    You need to have a local candidate with local helpers handing out HTVs to ensure that you get the 15% vote in that electorate for the Senate. WIthout a cnadidate and some helpers supporting that candidate, the Senate vote for the part ywould be reduced significantly.

  22. candy

    I don’t agree that 15% people in an electorate don’t deserve a candidate, just because it’s only 15%.

    It’s saying – you don’t matter. We are only in this for the winning and money, go live somewhere else.

  23. H B Bear

    I don’t know why you are worrying about this stuff Snic. The Lieborals are passing legislation with the support of the Greenfilth and Liars.

    Get with the program.

  24. littledozer

    The problem with not running a candidate in a Greeen/Labor marginal is the Senate vote.
    You need to have a local candidate with local helpers handing out HTVs to ensure that you get the 15% vote in that electorate for the Senate. WIthout a candidate and some helpers supporting that candidate, the Senate vote for the part ywould be reduced significantly.

    Not really. In the State the boundary changes have made it a mathematical certainty that the LP can only get 1 quota. At a Federal level the vast majority of centre right voters can make up their own minds for the upper house and do. As Savva points out its only around 15-18% primary and the upper house vote is significantly less than that. Of course this is for Batman/Northcote as have looked at those numbers closely over a number of elections. Overall what Nick says makes sense to me.

  25. littledozer

    I don’t agree that 15% people in an electorate don’t deserve a candidate, just because it’s only 15%.

    It’s saying – you don’t matter. We are only in this for the winning and money, go live somewhere else.

    It’s resource allocation. You do realise the Libs have very few resources (donations) atm. Labor spent over 500k defending and losing Northcote. These days I’m with HB/Balderick/MV, but it would be completely stupid to spend money to help Labor defend their patch just so you can make the 15% feel righteous.

  26. Tim Neilson

    Many senior Libs, the younger ones at least, are asking how that could possibly help them, and what difference these days does it make if Greens or Labor wins.

    Many conservatives and libertarians, the sane ones at least, are asking how the Coalition running candidates could possibly help them, and what difference these days does it make if the Coalition, Greens or Labor wins.

  27. Boambee John

    I mean, who thinks of that stuff?

    Probably an industrial relations public servant helping the bruvvas by a bit of sabotage. The relevant minister probably never knew about the clause because their office staff were too idle to read the draft Bill.

  28. herodotus

    Right, so they weren’t just late back from lunch, but from stop work meetings. Workers and unions should be penalised for their often vexatious “stop work meetings”.
    The first instance involved the CFMEU, who should have been deregistered long ago.
    Feltex: The company experienced declining sales and profits for a number of years due to market contraction for carpet products, increasing pressure from imports, inefficient manufacturing operations and a high level of senior management turnover. Restructuring attempts were ultimately unsuccessful due to the Group’s high debt levels and financial inability to meet redundancy costs associated with long-serving employees.
    McGrathNicol were appointed as Receivers and Managers over the Feltex Group in September 2006.

    Yes, all they needed was Fair Work Australia, and union oversighting to survive. The company was already in receivership when this event took place. It smells like something that Stephen Smith, the union and the Age newspaper were delighted to make happen in 2006. I note that the company management were by that time the new owners, Godfrey Hirst, and that the meeting was not approved by either managers or receivers. The event and the article are part of the campaign. It worked.

  29. A Lurker

    It’s resource allocation. You do realise the Libs have very few resources (donations) atm.

    Well, whose fault is it that the Libs are losing/have lost the base.

  30. herodotus

    For anyone wanting a blow-by-blow description of the way Work Choices was introduced and the way the unions fought it in the lead up the the 2007 election, using some very good pollsters and publicity consultants, there’s a pdf file here at the Australia & New Zealand School of Government.

  31. Rabz

    The Lieborals are passing legislation with the support of the Greenfilth and Liars.

    Yet another example of when three far left parties are barely enough.

    Oh wait, look over there – some agrarian socialists!

  32. littledozer

    Well, whose fault is it that the Libs are losing/have lost the base.

    It’s their own fault but this is dead red areas we are discussing here with Greens on the march. The Libs could bat a 100 on policy and the economy and still poll 15-22% in this area.

  33. Damienski

    Slightly off-topic, but the government in Australia’s Western Third is reviewing its’ Local Government Act. The Act was last reviewed in 1995 and is a mess.

    One of the matters under consideration to improve community involvement in local government is…..
    compulsory voting. What could possibly go wrong?

Comments are closed.