Political donations, party machines and failing governments all point to the same problem: a democratic system that has become better at protecting power than serving the public.
Thank you for this hugely important summary of the miserable , spineless backwater where this embarrassing version of a
“Labor Party “ has chosen to wallow , doing as little as humanly possible for the public interest while grovelling shamelessly to every corporate and foreign donor in sight . The contempt with which Albanese , Wong , Marles , Watt and Co treat the public is beyond the pale . They now hob nob with billionaires at fund raising dinners , to which no member of the general public would ever be invited .
Can we even imagine Albanese’s mother being invited to such a gathering , no matter how intelligent and important her contribution
may have been ? I doubt it . Every point you make is a condemnation of the “Something Less” for which this government is happy to settle . The Labor Conferences were a total farce , and an insult to dedicated Labor Party members . I remember a friend who had resigned from Labor Party membership years previously, suggesting in fury that he felt like rejoining just so he could resign again .
We are at the nadir of political integrity regarding MPs being elected to SERVE the nation , rather than doing nothing other than
clinging to power however they can, and whatever it takes . No amount of self satisfied smirking from Albanese will alter this fact .
And as we have seen with the electoral system established as it is, if you do not preference one of the major parties and number all the boxes, your ballot is informal and it gets thrown out.
While certain minor parties and independents can win individual seats, single member districts have led us into the two party trap, despite a record low share of the major party vote.
Your book released a couple years back about Fixing Australia’s Democracy talked about proportional representation as one of several steps for reform.
While it’s unlikely to be high on the agenda, in many ways it is the current preferential voting that has led us to this point.
“The objective is, first of all, to change the cost of political failure: to make it more politically costly for governments to ignore renters than property investors; more costly to ignore workers than employers; and more costly to serve donors instead of the public.”
Surely the objective should be to change the mindset that allows for everything to be reduced to economics, whether fiscally or politically. It completely sidesteps personal, professional and community accountability. In what other field, can anyone literally get away with murder, terrorism, theft, dishonesty, performance marker failures, profiteering, secrecy etc etc etc.
linking criminal behaviour to political cost, well… who wouldn’t “risk” nothing by going into politics.
Elections merely change the managers of the state while creating the illusion of choice for voters.
The machinery of government remains intact: taxation, inflation, debt, regulation, and privileges granted to politically connected interests continue regardless of who holds power.
Economic progress requires rejecting the premise that the state should direct resources, redistribute wealth, or plan social outcomes. Wealth is created by individuals acting freely, exchanging voluntarily, and investing secure private property-not by political institutions exercising coercive power.
Again, thanks for such a (typically) comprehensive vivisection, at which, as all too often, for we readers, anger wrestles disappointment into an inertia that keeps shading into disbelieving disorientation.
Thank you for this hugely important summary of the miserable , spineless backwater where this embarrassing version of a
“Labor Party “ has chosen to wallow , doing as little as humanly possible for the public interest while grovelling shamelessly to every corporate and foreign donor in sight . The contempt with which Albanese , Wong , Marles , Watt and Co treat the public is beyond the pale . They now hob nob with billionaires at fund raising dinners , to which no member of the general public would ever be invited .
Can we even imagine Albanese’s mother being invited to such a gathering , no matter how intelligent and important her contribution
may have been ? I doubt it . Every point you make is a condemnation of the “Something Less” for which this government is happy to settle . The Labor Conferences were a total farce , and an insult to dedicated Labor Party members . I remember a friend who had resigned from Labor Party membership years previously, suggesting in fury that he felt like rejoining just so he could resign again .
We are at the nadir of political integrity regarding MPs being elected to SERVE the nation , rather than doing nothing other than
clinging to power however they can, and whatever it takes . No amount of self satisfied smirking from Albanese will alter this fact .
Excellent article, thanks Eddy
Thanks Eddy for this analysis.
And as we have seen with the electoral system established as it is, if you do not preference one of the major parties and number all the boxes, your ballot is informal and it gets thrown out.
While certain minor parties and independents can win individual seats, single member districts have led us into the two party trap, despite a record low share of the major party vote.
Your book released a couple years back about Fixing Australia’s Democracy talked about proportional representation as one of several steps for reform.
While it’s unlikely to be high on the agenda, in many ways it is the current preferential voting that has led us to this point.
Yep, yes, and bang on Eddy.
Australia is a representative democracy... without proper representation.
“The objective is, first of all, to change the cost of political failure: to make it more politically costly for governments to ignore renters than property investors; more costly to ignore workers than employers; and more costly to serve donors instead of the public.”
Surely the objective should be to change the mindset that allows for everything to be reduced to economics, whether fiscally or politically. It completely sidesteps personal, professional and community accountability. In what other field, can anyone literally get away with murder, terrorism, theft, dishonesty, performance marker failures, profiteering, secrecy etc etc etc.
linking criminal behaviour to political cost, well… who wouldn’t “risk” nothing by going into politics.
It’s a low bar.
Elections merely change the managers of the state while creating the illusion of choice for voters.
The machinery of government remains intact: taxation, inflation, debt, regulation, and privileges granted to politically connected interests continue regardless of who holds power.
Economic progress requires rejecting the premise that the state should direct resources, redistribute wealth, or plan social outcomes. Wealth is created by individuals acting freely, exchanging voluntarily, and investing secure private property-not by political institutions exercising coercive power.
The recent passing of changes to CGT/Negative gearing to assist homebuyers shows real reform is possible if the shrill vested interests are ignored.
We know the LNP and One Bation have been captured by the vested interests, so they won't do real reform which benefits the public.
What about Labor and the Greens?
Sadly, Labor's excessive caution seems likely to frustrate other potential reforms.
Meanwhile, British Labor has just made a genuine
reformer in Andy Burman it's leader. Will this inspire Albo to be less cautious?
Again, thanks for such a (typically) comprehensive vivisection, at which, as all too often, for we readers, anger wrestles disappointment into an inertia that keeps shading into disbelieving disorientation.