tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post7555016275182773034..comments2024-03-28T14:16:10.498+11:00Comments on Dr Kevin Bonham: The Anti-Wilkie Denison Billboard StoushKevin Bonhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-87750112929026309742013-08-14T16:51:48.541+10:002013-08-14T16:51:48.541+10:00I'm assuming 75-74-1 is really 74-74-2 with Ka...I'm assuming 75-74-1 is really 74-74-2 with Katter supporting the Coalition, as there is no evidence Katter is remotely likely to lose. Sure, in that specific scenario Wilkie abstaining on confidence and Wilkie voting for Abbott on confidence are the same thing. But the placard doesn't reference a specific scenario (and probably wouldn't be punchy enough if it did.)<br /><br />74-74-2 would be a miserable parliament for Abbott to be PM in. If the Lower House is that close then the Senate will almost certainly be controlled by Labor and the Greens, meaning that Abbott's contentious legislation would be constantly blocked. Abbott would also have to go back on his commitment to not lead a minority government. He'd be looking for an opportunity for a fresh election any time he had a chance of winning it, but would be burdened by the perception of failure to win majority government this time around.<br /><br />Wilkie - if thinking mainly from the perspective of his own political future as assumed - would probably realise propping up such a government was not a path to serious control and was a recipe for a quick election at which Labor would be much more likely to beat him. <br /><br />In 1996 Tasmanian Premier Ray Groom promised he would govern in majority or not at all, and lost his majority. This resulted in Groom resigning as Premier and Liberal Leader and allowing Tony Rundle to take over as Liberal Premier in minority. <br /><br />The same thing could happen federally. The price of a Liberal minority government (in the unlikely case that that's where the numbers end up) could very well be someone other than Abbott leading it.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-13522752169137807992013-08-14T15:40:36.354+10:002013-08-14T15:40:36.354+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18245678215197068908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-79240550191470788792013-08-14T13:24:06.398+10:002013-08-14T13:24:06.398+10:00And quite obviously the opposite occurs in a 74-75...And quite obviously the opposite occurs in a 74-75-1 situation, which cancels that out.<br />intuitivereasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15444634755480881972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-53683293021133222742013-08-14T10:21:26.385+10:002013-08-14T10:21:26.385+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18245678215197068908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-37170869503453332472013-08-14T02:19:56.979+10:002013-08-14T02:19:56.979+10:00That raises the question of whether an abstention ...That raises the question of whether an abstention should count as putting Abbott one seat closer or half a seat closer if it happens. I think the latter is technically more accurate, since an abstention has exactly the same effect as adding half a seat to each side's tally, in which case 1/3*1+1/3*0.5+1/3*0 = 0.5. :)<br /><br /><br /><br />Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-76560721917470356142013-08-13T23:30:46.650+10:002013-08-13T23:30:46.650+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18245678215197068908noreply@blogger.com