Abbott has priorities up his BUTT

[peakhillfm]

Firstly we are told to tighten our belt by the Treasurer,we are then told that the Aged Pension is going to be 'trimmed' to meet the life extension of ALL Aussies,and then the PM goes and spends AUD$12b on some aircraft that will never get off the ground.
This Government are so out of touch that its time that Labor & the Minor Parties 'stopped' supply and forced Rabbitt and the Libs to another election,so that we can dispose of these MORONS.......

[Fairgo]

1. Still a shot for democracy in Australia

Sometimes the veneer is so thin, you can see the corporatists moving beneath the surface of the party. It's going to take a coalition, but there is still a spine in Aussie democracy. Even in some of the liberals voters. Time for Labour to get back to its roots.

[Matilda]

2. It's still possible to block supply,

but there would have to be a much stronger imperative than there is now for the Opposition to get away with it.

Abbott is making a very poor fist of things - so many broken promises, so much good legislation overturned simply because it's Labor legislation, but he's still polling well enough for blocking supply to be enormously risky for Labor. The divisions that caused so much anger in 1975 are still remembered by enough people to be a warning signal to both parties. And Labor itself has been the cause of so much of its own trouble, I think they'll think three times before taking any more risks. It's Labor that now has to project an image of stability in comparison to Abbott's twisting and turning.

And who knows what Clive Palmer would do in such a situation? Nobody can be sure what stand Clive will take on anything; he doesn't know himself from one day to the next. And he's the one who'll have the most power from July – neither party will be able to achieve anything without his support, but given his background, he's far more likely to side with the LNP than with Labor, because it will be in his own best interests.

[Violet_Crumble]

3. Wouldn't there have to be a vote of no confidence first?

On a personal and kind of selfish level, blocking supply would make a really dark time for public servants so much more bleak. They don't get paid if supply's blocked. Though if all the recommendations of the Big Business Wishlist aka the Commission of Audit report are implemented, there's not going to be much of the Public Service left anyway...

Commission of Audit recommends public service job cuts, mergers

Canberra would wear the lion's share of pain based on recommendations from the National Commission of Audit, which suggests ruthless changes to the federal bureaucracy.

But the commission's chairman, Tony Shepherd, said public servants should look past the unpleasantness for the good of Australia.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service/commission-of-audit-recommends-public-service-job-cuts-mergers-20140501-zr2je.html#ixzz30YoxaPju

I suspect no-one who loses their job is going to go "That's okay. I know it's for the good of the country. Tony Shepherd, a CEO who earns more than most people can dream of told me so!'

Patronising prick...

[Matilda]

4. No, the Senate would only have to refuse to pass the money bills,

and the government would be forced to call an election because they'd soon have no money. Either the Oppostion has to successfully pass a no-confidence motion in the Lower House, which could only succeed when there's a hung parliament, OR the Senate can block supply.

But if the Abbott government continues its downward slide, they may well reach the situation we had in 1975, where public opinion was overwhelmingly in favour of the Whitlam government resigning and calling an election because things were in such a shambles. But the people can't make the government resign. When Whitlam refused, that was the signal for Malcolm Fraser to refuse supply. Fraser was in the Upper House blocking supply and Whitlam in the Lower House presiding over repeated motions of confidence in the government. Total lunacy prevailed, but as we know, the G-G stepped in and sacked the government, taking the matter out of Whitlam's hands.

Just goes to show what a mess you get into when you do a deal to allow a media tycoon to dictate policy.