I was going to write a pretty standard number-crunchy thing about prospects for the Tasmanian Senate, given that the Greens have just polled below a Senate quota in state-level polling on the EMRS headline rate for the first time in a very long time. (In short, this is some cause for concern, but probably not a major one at present).
However that can wait a bit because on Thursday we saw something very unusual in Tasmanian politics, when Labor backbench lifer Brenton Best crossed the floor to vote with a Liberal motion of no-confidence in Corrections Minister (and Greens Leader) Nick McKim. It was not just a once-off, with an unrepentant Best on Friday repeating his critique of Nick McKim and extending it to the whole Labor-Green coalition.
While I wasn't watching live at the time, it's quite clear from the footage and also even from the bare bones Votes and Proceedings that there was a party keen for Mr Best to have his say, and it wasn't his own:
ELECTORAL, POLLING AND POLITICAL ANALYSIS, COMMENT AND NEWS FROM THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CLARK. LOOKS LIKE 2026 IS THE YEAR VICTORIA IS FINALLY FREED OF THE CURSE OF GROUP TICKET VOTING! IF USING THIS SITE ON MOBILE YOU CAN SCROLL DOWN AND CLICK "VIEW WEB VERSION" TO SEE THE SIDEBAR FULL OF GOODIES.
Showing posts with label conscience votes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conscience votes. Show all posts
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Saturday, May 18, 2013
Julia Gillard: Same-Sex Marriage Enemy #1
Advance Summary
1. This article addresses comments recently made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard concerning the Coalition's unclear statements on whether it will allow a conscience vote on same-sex marriage.
2. Gillard's comments are misleading in that she takes credit for ensuring a conscience vote on the issue, when in fact she did so in order to avoid all Labor MPs being required to vote for same-sex marriage legislation.
3. For this reason, Gillard's actions removed any chance of same-sex marriage passing last year.
4. Claims that a conscience vote for both sides is the determining factor in a successful push for same-sex marriage are misleading. Comparisons with New Zealand and the UK show that in those cases, the personal support of leaders on both sides, and the overwhelming support of the main centre-left party, were essential.
5. Gillard's own statements on her reasons for opposing same-sex marriage do not stand up to scrutiny.
6. As I find both Gillard's claimed reasons and several other proposed explanations unconvincing, I suspect her motive is connected to internal ALP power plays.
7. Gillard's criticism of the Coalition on this issue, while warranted in isolation, is hypocritical.
1. This article addresses comments recently made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard concerning the Coalition's unclear statements on whether it will allow a conscience vote on same-sex marriage.
2. Gillard's comments are misleading in that she takes credit for ensuring a conscience vote on the issue, when in fact she did so in order to avoid all Labor MPs being required to vote for same-sex marriage legislation.
3. For this reason, Gillard's actions removed any chance of same-sex marriage passing last year.
4. Claims that a conscience vote for both sides is the determining factor in a successful push for same-sex marriage are misleading. Comparisons with New Zealand and the UK show that in those cases, the personal support of leaders on both sides, and the overwhelming support of the main centre-left party, were essential.
5. Gillard's own statements on her reasons for opposing same-sex marriage do not stand up to scrutiny.
6. As I find both Gillard's claimed reasons and several other proposed explanations unconvincing, I suspect her motive is connected to internal ALP power plays.
7. Gillard's criticism of the Coalition on this issue, while warranted in isolation, is hypocritical.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Liberty, Abortion and the "Salamanca Declaration"
Warning: this article may offend some readers.
(Not much pseph in it either; a little bit in the Emily's Voice section mainly.)
It has been, for the most part, an unedifying fortnight in Tasmanian public debate, and I am not about to make it better. I generally dislike writing about abortion-related issues at all, because there are too many people who appear to believe that being emotional on behalf of "unborn babies" trumps not only every opposing philosophical argument, but also the most basic responsibility of understanding the existing legislative situation and understanding what changes are actually being proposed. Admittedly, understanding the existing legislative situation has been too much for not just ranting objectors, but for many doctors as well, and that is exactly one of the reasons why the Lower House has attempted to change it.
Abortion Law Reform: The Vote
Finally late last night, abortion law reform was passed 13-11 by the House of Assembly and is off to the Legislative Council. The bill that was passed has the following key features:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)