Gary Humphries will cross the floor for gay marriage, Kate Lundy will not

Spam Box said :

Oh and by the way, I don’t agree with the ALP(Fed) on this one, that’s just how it goes sometimes. I/she joined a party, many of my submisions have got up and many haven’t, I’m sure that similar things(at a much higher level) have happened to her,deal with it.
That’s how a party works(and becomes electable)

Cross the floor and you break the bond, simple as that

Yes, yes, lovely party lines stuff there.
What you neglect to mention is that, prior to this, Lundy got stuck into Humphries good and proper about NOT committing to cross the floor.
What a nice little ALP policy she has to hide behind when she actually needs to do something.
The term ‘Waste of Space’ comes to mind.

Anyway, weren’t Senators supposed to represent the states? If they don’t, then we should abolish the upper house (now there’s an idea!).

Tell her you won’t vote for her. That’s the one thing that scares a politician!

Deckard said :

If you’re expecting anything else, then you’re living in a dream world.

No deckard, not a dream world, just one that is consistent with almost every other democracy, and the ideals of democracy itself. Off the top of my head I cannot think of another single democracy with such strict requirements for it members.

This was probably the single biggest reason why I did not vote for Labor at the last federal election.

I have a lovely image of both major parties sitting on one side, and Humphries and Lundy (along with the Greens, I suppose) sitting together on the other side. It would make a great show to the rest of the country about allowing the ACT to govern themselves.

Wishful thinking I guess.

My comments are directed towards Labor as they seem to really have a problem with democracy being seen to be practiced in Parliament. Rats, dogs and pre selection etc. Makes a good good representative a slave long before they can show their full potential.

Just a thought people if Senators assume they are elected to represent a political party instead of the State or Territory in which they are elected I have an alternative arrangement in mind. The party that they choose to vote for pays for their wages and all office expenses that they incur and leave constituents/taxpayers to be represented for free because as we obviously have no say in how they vote in a division then logically we should not have to pick up the tab.

I believe that Labor has a policy of immediate expulsion for Members who cross the floor.

The Coalition, whilst reserving the right to expel, does not apply it automatically but only after consideration.

It’s par for the course for a member to vote on party lines – especially when you’re in government. It might not seem right, but that’s the way things are. If you’re expecting anything else, then you’re living in a dream world.

Oh and by the way, I don’t agree with the ALP(Fed) on this one, that’s just how it goes sometimes. I/she joined a party, many of my submisions have got up and many haven’t, I’m sure that similar things(at a much higher level) have happened to her,deal with it.
That’s how a party works(and becomes electable)

Cross the floor and you break the bond, simple as that