This site is great for anyone interested in finding out how reps actually voted on a given issue, rather than what Murdoch wants you to think:
Cheers. I dare say a lot of this will be whatever their party wants them to vote for. Itâs not often an MP will cross the floor. Nonetheless, it is still somewhat useful to see what theyâve voted on.
1 Like
Thereâs some issues where MPs will not turn up in the chamber as a way of getting around that. Not usually on bills that are knife edge.
Tony Abbott famously tried to book it when Craig Thomson decided to vote with the government so he could say he never voted together, for example.
This site (and other similar sites) leave no room for nuance. Labor will vote against a bunch of grandstanding motions from the Greens like the one about Palestine that Payman fell for, and get marked as being against Palestinian independence when the reality is that they have a position more complicated than can be explained inside a green triangle sticker.
1 Like
Whatâs complicated?
Dear Israel,
Stop being cunts.
Love from,
The Australian Labor Party.
Like everything, seems pretty fucking simple to me.
3 Likes
If that doesnât persuade them, I donât know what will!
5 Likes
I can be very persuasive when I want to be.
1 Like
I think this article from the Betoota highlights something relevant.
What are the interests of the journalist class? Fergusson smears a Greens MP but platforms Fascists from the US.
Ok, I think you know my position on ânuanceâ re Palestine already so Iâll leave it. My point was it allows you to check if and when theyâve really
For example, hereâs how Bandt compares with the current Speaker and Treasurer:
1 Like
I donât think I claimed they are constantly voting with the Libs. They should vote with the libs less than the ALP does as the latter are closer to the centre.
No, you claimed they are cunts because they vote against reasonable government policy. That simply isnât true unless your idea of reasonable policy and mine are very very different. Theyâve voted against ALP government policies rarely, and when they conflict with the position they took to the election, such as stronger climate action or breaking our ties with Israel. And even then they comprimised on the major substantive piece of legislation, the Climate Safeguard amendment bill.
I think that there is a huge problem with those two (ALP and Greens) trying to protect their turf or take from the other that is resulting in their reluctance to accommodate when it makes sense. It definitely lies on both sides because they seem more worried about each other than the LNP.
The recent Housing bill is a good example. Good luck getting better next parliament with The Duttmeister. Even if it definitely fell short, and somewhere between the two partiesâ positions would have been an excellent outcome between the timidity of Labor and overreach of the Greens.
From the ALP side, Albo has been increasingly disappointing. Really doubling down on the timidity. I feel that Gillard would have done a much better job getting something done on housing with the Greens even though they had problems, as you do. The loss of her so early in her career is a shame for this country.
Gillard had an amazing record negotiating deals to get legislation passed running a minority government. For some of the crazy shit that was suggested in her time (citizen assembly, anyone?), her negotiating record deserves recognition.
Albaneseâs time in the sun shouldâve been about a decade ago, when Abbott was PM, while his passion and drive were at its peak. And we wouldnât have had the disaster of Shorten as Opposition leader.
As I understand that sequence, and Iâm happy to be corrected, Labour said they were putting the bill forward and it was either take it or leave it. In that scenario as a minor party Iâm not sure what the greens are supposed to do other than say - no we wont vote for that unless you make changes, and this is what we want to see.
The Greens are not the governing party. Labour donât seem willing to compromise in any significant way without being blocked first. All the while ridiculing and demonising them in the press. At one point in the HAFF stuff a labour senator labelled the greens as part of an âaxis of evilâ with the libs.
The situation seems to suit labour because they can appear to be putting forward âsensibleâ (read inadequate) solutions to minimise right wing criticism while blaming the lunatic greens for pushing them to actually move towards whats really needed.
1 Like
The other argument would be that the Greens too often get in the way of any progress being made because the bill being put forward doesnât achieve all the outcomes they are after.
Perfect being the enemy of good and all that.
2 Likes
This, in a nutshell, is a major issue I have with the Greens. The art of negotiating includes the need to compromise. The Greens seem notoriously rigid in their negotiations and give the aura that having nothing is better than having a compromise that can be further negotiated a number of years down the line. Wasnât that a major reason we didnât get an ETS during the Rudd/Gillard years? Itâs fucking nonsense, and frankly they havenât grown up since then.
1 Like
Thatâs exactly what Iâm talking about.
Perfect being the enemy of good - a labour soundbite.
Did HAFF the housing stuff go through? Yes. Was it improved because of changes forced by the Greens? Yes. Is it perfect? Fuck no. So⊠not perfect - better than it was.
Why is the focus on the Greens? Why isnât the focus on Labour bringing deficient bills/policies to the table? Labour have repeated said recently âtake it or leave itâ - where are their negotiating skills? They dont have a senate majority. They need to compromise.
3 Likes
Gutless.
1 Like
Agreed. I just donât understand Laborâs official line on this.
1 Like