Do you want to pay for Zed's Senate run? [With poll]

chewy14 said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

How is that different to when any other member of any other parliament announces they won’t be standing for re-election?

It’s wholly part of our system.

I certainly didn’t say it was any different to members of other parliaments who resign, I responded to Enrique’s suggestion that Zed would still be held accountable, which he won’t be.

On the matter of resignation. There is certainly a difference between announcing you are leaving part way through a term (epecially barely into said term) and announcing that you don’t plan to stand for re-election.

I certainly don’t expected politicians to serve interminably until they either die or are voted out, but I do certainly have an expectation that when they put themselves forward for election, they have an intention of representing their constituents for the life of the parliament.

And to go on dungfungus’ comment about Zed not calling the federal election, that is a bit disingenuous as it was clearly known long ago that the election would be sometime before November 2013 and there were plenty of branches of the majors seeting pre-selection processes into motion before Gillard’s announcement of the Septemeber 14 date.

Can’t wait for him to move along, he must have the most boring CV after his time in the LA.
Achievements:…..
(Apart from scaring old people into voting for him with that triple the rates cr@p)

MTK said :

The biggest issue is the primacy of sheer political amibition. Plenty of people (including elected representatives) moonlight with second jobs and job applications.

Elected Liberal knifing elected Liberal is far more unbecoming.

Opportunities for election to the Senate in the ACT only comes concurrent with a Federal election.
Zed didn’t call the Federal election; the Prime Minister did.

Ghettosmurf87 said :

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

How is that different to when any other member of any other parliament announces they won’t be standing for re-election?

It’s wholly part of our system.

dungfungus said :

johnboy said :

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

Correct; and he is elected to The Senate he will still remain an elected representative for the ACT so the outcome is the same.

But who pays for Assembly salaries and for Senate salaries? While it all comes out of our taxes somehow, if one is from ACT Govt and one from Federal revenue, it may be that the ACT Govt could use that money elsewhere on ACT-specific projects? A bit trivial, but technically different.

enrique said :

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Sure, if he really did end up getting too distracted to carry out is ACT LA role properly then questions should be asked but if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?

Assumes he’s ever been effective in his job.

enrique said :

Having a poll like this is dangerous territory… how would you feel if you were fired the second you made your intentions known that you were going to move on from your own job…? Worse, if people didn’t feel comfortable making their intentions about moving on known (especially in high profile leadership roles) then we end up with chaos all the time as people made shock announcements and then left things in disarray the very next day.

Seen it done. Say you’ve got a new job and two security guards appear at your desk, tell you to clean it out, and escort you out the door.

Leon said :

enrique said :

…if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?.

Spot on!

I think the problem is the word ‘effective’, but that may be subjective! I can’t think of much they have done post-election…. Then again, that could cover the majority of the assembly! 🙂

johnboy said :

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

Correct; and he is elected to The Senate he will still remain an elected representative for the ACT so the outcome is the same.

enrique said :

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Except that as an elected representative, he is only held accountable at the next ACT election. Something he won’t be going to, seeing as he intends to run for the Senate in 7 months time.

He went to the ACT election, as a Liberal member, stating that he wanted to represent the people of his electorate. They voted him in to do just that. The period he is elected for is until the next ACT election.

To publicly state, just over three months after being elected, that you will not be seeing out your term but that you are happy to be remunerated anyway is pretty damn disrespectful.

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

We’ll still be paying for him either way, whether he stays on London Circuit or moves up to the red chamber on Capital Hill

Surely this isn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened?
In NSW, people go from local government to the state legislatures regularly. In fact, I think my local state member (Barilaro) is wearing two hats as we speak because he stayed on the council.

In the ACT, I guess there are rules and if they say Zed can stay then so be it.
If you don’t like that then speak to the people that make the rules.

enrique said :

…if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?.

Spot on!

Too soon after being elected to fulfill a MLA role. Definitely gives the impression he is not focused on the ACT and more on letting his ambition run away with him ….

The biggest issue is the primacy of sheer political amibition. Plenty of people (including elected representatives) moonlight with second jobs and job applications.

Elected Liberal knifing elected Liberal is far more unbecoming.

If Zed does head off to the Senate, am I right in thinking that the fourth placed Lib for Brindabella will become a MLA? That would be big, bad Val Jeffrey.

Well until the elections actually called I don’t see why there would be a problem.

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Sure, if he really did end up getting too distracted to carry out is ACT LA role properly then questions should be asked but if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?

Having a poll like this is dangerous territory… how would you feel if you were fired the second you made your intentions known that you were going to move on from your own job…? Worse, if people didn’t feel comfortable making their intentions about moving on known (especially in high profile leadership roles) then we end up with chaos all the time as people made shock announcements and then left things in disarray the very next day.