14 November 2007

More evidence shows Tucker ahead of Humphries

| GnT
Join the conversation

With the election just around the corner, ABC have informed us of another poll which shows the Greens’ Kerry Tucker could steal the second ACT Senate seat away from the Liberals’ Gary Humphries.

Despite Senator Gaz being relatively popular here, this reflects how much Canberrans are fed up with Howard and his crew. As cranky said in another thread, “Gaz, you may well be a nice bloke, but you keep lousy company.”

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments

My point is it will not be only for 6 months – the greens WILL ave balance of power.

The deal with the labor party is – labor will not win majority in the senate who do we want to have the balance – not libs and the dems are sooooo out of contention so it will have to be the greens.

In return the Greens will sure up the house of reps vote.

Canberra will gain the type of influence it wants if it voted more for the Libs in the reps – just look over the border.

A green balance of power would be an unmitigated disaster for this country as a whole and I believe will result in a massive swing back to the Libs at the next election or they will become more centralist to keep power (just don’t see that happening)

Where have I implied I’ve orchestrated anything? I think you’ve misread my comments.

The fact is that generally ACT senators have no influence: there’s only 2, and they’re swallowed in the parties’ machines. There is a possibility for the next 6 months one can have national influence, provided they don’t subsume to the dominant parties.

You’ve had a lot to say in the last week, most of which has confused me on your understanding of how politics works. It’s not a matter of what should be, or ideal, or fair, if you can’t actually achieve it; it’s a matter of getting a result. Most times you have to do deals with people you dislike. I dislike the Greens, but if voting Green in the ACT will restore Senate oversight of the House AND give an ACT senator some power for 6 months, I’ll do it. If you allow your dislike of Brown or Tasmanian logging or whatever else to affect your tactics and you elect major party senators, then you remove even that small 6 month window of ACT influence before the Senate changes completely in July.

Oh I am so glad that you have the rest of the country worked out so that you can orchestrate a we will let one in and the rest of the country won’t strategy.

While you are at it I would like a Rudd victory but Gillard to lose her seat – can you also take out Albernese, Carr and another left wing space cadet?

At the risk of repeating myself, vote *tactically*, don’t vote to align yourself with one of the tribes. (God, I hate tribalism.) If you vote Green in the Senate, all you are doing is changing ONE senate seat to remove the Libs stranglehold. You’re not putting Bob Brown in power or doing anything. It’s peculiar to the ACT that the Senator takes their seat immediately and not in July. I’m not saying the entire country vote Green, just here in the ACT. Come July, what the rest of the country voted will take effect and our two senators will be relegated back to their usual doorstop position, but in the meantime, We Weilded The Power, Ha Ha.

Elvis Las Canberras12:20 am 16 Nov 07

Yep Kerrie is a bit nuts! I met with her several years back and she had her head in her hands (literally) when discussing some issues about Civic (and it has plenty of issues).

Supposedly forward thinking, she thought that bars with 20 seats should only have 20 people having a drink at them. I mentioned a holiday to Hobart where Knopwoods in Salamanca has 50-100 outside most Friday nights and she said that this would cause too many problems. I suggested she go down for a look (apart from having enjoyed the spectacle, she may have even learned something from her green comrades about blocking, opposing and stopping everything as they seem to be doing a good job of down there at the moment!).

Boomcat – no I am not a 15 year old liberal schmuk, nor am I a 40 – 50 something career public servant that wishes their life way blissfully remembering the Whitlam years as the zenith of their social past. But that just confirms my direspectful comment.

My point stands generations of skills, capital and social institutions will not be swept away with some dwebby training program.

Many people sustained by these industries have been doing it all their lives. Most of our power station infrastructure is coal fired. The reality is that the industrial shift is not simple and simplified solutions put forward by industrial and economic pygmies will not work and will cause more human misery and social dislocation.

You want fries with that order?

PS – that was supposed to have a 🙂 in it to express that I was joking (doubt a young Liberal would vote at all, let alone vote Labor in the Reps)!

thetruth – try actually reading the post before criticising it – I said that the industries were bottom of the economic food chain, not the people working in them.

You might have inferred that from the fact I emphasised the need to retrain those people to ensure their future livelihoods, but given you’re probably some 15 year old young Liberal schmuk that’s probably too much to ask.

Joe Canberran – ALP in the Senate and Reps would probably be as bad as the Coalition has been over the last couple of years. And I am old enough to remember 1975 and an ALP Government with a ruthless Coalition Senate determined to bring them down – never again.

Having some voices in the middle has improved a lot of a legislation, espcially in terms of getting better oversight and accountability. (For example, even if a more balanced Senate had passed WorkChoices, it would probably have made it a better scheme, that didn’t need panicky revisions, a big new bureaucracy and untold millions in political ads). Some of the minor party Senators (a big hand for the retiring Andrew Murray) showed some genuine interest in dull but important things like probity and human rights. The legislation usually gets passed, but some balance is added – for example, although the Democrats mostly supported the GST, they ensured some significant changes. Similar things happened during the Hawke and Keating governments. And they happened with the Greens, and sometimes with Brian Harradine.

the greens are extreme in a forward thinking modern way.
family first are extreme in an 18th century kind of way.

Joe Canberran6:07 pm 15 Nov 07

Go the Dems!

But as for a “sensible review function” don’t you think that will happen anyway when we have a Rudd govt and a Lib senate or would you prefer a labor senate/reps combo?

I’ll probably go for the Greens in the Senate, or maybe the Democrats first to encourage them to stay alive a bit longer. I will Put Humphries Last, mostly to try to get the Senate back to a sensible review function and, incidentally, to ditch a passenger from the legislature.

I totally agree with Catey

A split vote acknowledges that we are voting for a real me – too – If Garrett was right and they do attempt to change after the election then someone will stop them.

I worry about the possibility of a secret deal between the greens and labor.

So for me Labor in the reps, lib in the senate

you seriously think bob browne and co are less extreme than family first?
the democrats at least were willing to discuss on issues and negotiated on things with the govt of the day to achieve outcomes that balanced the needs of a wider sector of the community. look at the Greens’ record in the senate and what negotiating Bob Browne has actually done. Labor and the Coalition are more likely to negotiate to produce outcomes – the greens just disagree without consultation. if labor’s going to take the House, its a much safer bet to have a coalition senate that will negotiate with labor to achieve real outcomes, particularly since labor has adopted much of coalition policy this time around and in areas where they differ, they can negotiate passage by a few concessions to placate other parts of the community whose views may differ.

Bottom of the food chain – very disrespectful way of discribing people and their livihood.

What reaction would I get if I described sudanese as bottom of the food chain with no future, or Seiv x passengers as doing them a favour.

I know lets retrain them in democracy and send them back – bloody chardonny socialist that bleat about one side making things simplistic and them do exactally the same to be politically expedient

Family First are vote swapping with Pauline Hansen – nuff said.

LOL…and the Greens aren’t “wierdos”.

timber mills and coal fired power stations are the very bottom of the economic food chain. They have no future. The Greens and the Dems are the only ones with enough guts to stand up and say so, the major parties don’t have the electoral fortitude.

Does anyone seriously think pumping out woodchips has a place in Australia’s economic future? How about retraining these people to be tradespeople, service industry workers etc?

A realistic economic option without decimating old growth forests.

Family first are serious wierdos.

And I wish someone would do something about the loggin families in Tasmania. can’t we re-train them to be carpenters or something. Do we have to log every last tree so these ‘traditional foresters’ have some work?

I don’t mind Bob Brown.

Absent Diane10:57 am 15 Nov 07

unfortunately there seems to be a serious lack of suitable candidates on both sides of the fence.

Absent Diane10:50 am 15 Nov 07

yep jemmy is right. you need them there to break the power.

A vote for family first is a vote for your own stupidity.

You lot rabbiting on about the Greens being the devil incarnate should take a cold shower and look at the big picture. Think of the interests of the country as whole.

The Greens won’t have the power to do diddly-squat in introducing legislation, but what they will do is break the stranglehold on the Senate. I’ll be voting Green just for that. If the Liberals get back, the Greens will keep them in check (I’m assuming the Libs don’t increase in the Senate, which I think is a fair assumption). If Labor wins, the Greens will hold balance of power only until July when the new Labor senators take their seats.

Think of it as an insurance policy. If the Libs do manage to pull off a win, the very last thing this country needs is 4 more years of a subservient Senate. Voting Greens will ensure that doesn’t happen.

Yeah but a vote for the greens is a vote for the greens.

Talk about printing money!!!! They want unions at every table, pulling out of bilateral trade agreements, immediate pull out of Iraq (which what ever side of the war you were on would clearly result in a death toll of Rwandan proportions), regardless of the intentions of there environmental policies they would have a massively determental impact on working families in the timber industry in Tasmania and the mining industry in the coal belts of nsw and qld.

Talk about nut -jobs – the greens will either become more centralist to keep power (ie they are now lying to the Australian public) or they will act like the radicals they are and cause massive damage (ie they are not lying).

At the end of the day the only real alternatives are our old friends the Dems (at least they have a history of constructive balance of power usage), Labor or Liberal. I fear if we give labor the senate they will shoot themselves in the foot like the libs did with unfettered power, the dems vote will not be high enough and it will end up with labor (see previous problem), the libs will be obstructionist – but we should learn from giving senate to the government of the day.

I think I am coming down as a split vote – Labor in the reps and Liberal in the senate.

While we all care about environmental issues these days and I can appreciate the Greens starting from that standpoint, what about their positions on wider issues? as Thumper said, do people seriously want Bob Browne having that sort of responsibility? of course you want minor parties represented so that the issues of the few don’t just get squashed by the views of the many, but at the same time do we want the views of a few dictating the terms and knocking back legislation without meaningful discussion and engagement! especially when its the greens talking about anything other than the environment!!!

at least we know that gary humphries hasn’t been afraid to take positions against his own party when it comes to fighting for his own electorate. why would you want to let someone like that go??

as for kate lundy in contrast, I have to say I only learnt her name in the past few weeks since the election was called – why do we never hear anything about the work she does as a senator? where has she been in the years prior to an election being called? does she do any work? the thought that Ms Lundy is likely to cruise back into the senate even though she seems to just enjoy the privileges of being one of our “safe” senate reps without putting in any real effort, while Gary Humphries who is out there all the time speaking up for us is at risk is just crazy.

Legalised theft?

Family First are nutjobs. Cut 10c off the price of petrol excise to lower the burden on families (have you heard of “supply and demand” mate?). $10,000 baby bonuses. What’s next, printing money?

I note that so-called “Family First” voted against equal rights for same-sex families in the Senate. Perhaps only some families count hey?

Family First are aligned with the happy-clappy “Hillsong Church”, who amongst other things offer pregnancy counselling services to women which does NOT include any information about abortion, and also try to “cure” vulnerable women of lesbianism with religious indoctrination.

A vote for Family First is a vote for the Liberals.

“I’d much rather the Greens. They’re not evil.”

Is legalised theft evil?

I suspect most Canberrans in the APS don’t mind too much if Labor apply the blowtorch a bit, provided it’s sensible. ie applied to the burgeoning SES. It’s out of control. SES don’t produce anything, they just justify their positions. Born bottlenecks. They are not do-ers.

And the greens don’t wreck stuff. They don’t try to control individuals, apply morals to personal issues or appeal to greed. I feel very safe voting Greens. I like Bob Brown.

Elvis Las Canberras11:38 pm 14 Nov 07

Its all a bit batty – I reckon Kerry has enjoyed too much of the greens in her time.

Just wait till the Libs get the boot – bye bye to the Canberra public service – $8 billion would buy the ACT.

Rudd will be content to just bank this money and see what happens.

Just take the Australian Cricket team – sack the lot of the in and field the Canberra Comets, just wee how wellshe all goes.

Put Kerry in and you may as well tell the crowd at Manuka Oval its tip cricket and whoever gets em out gets a bat.

Family First are crazed far right weirdos. I’d much rather the Greens. They’re not evil. Family First definitely are. Half their candidates seem to be sex weirdos, scammers and other flotsam. and their policies are scary. We’re not America yet.

If you vote one greens your vote will likely exhaust at greens, but will definately exhaust at Labor.

I won’t be voting greens in the senate. Bob Brown is virtually a dicator and the party are fuitbats. If they have the balance they will screw it up for Rudd. If labor have a majority they will self mutilate (just like the libs). A vote for the Dems is a vote for Labor (see previous). A vote for Libs will result in obstructionism – could be the family first option is not a bad one.

She’s a good, sensible, viable candidate. I’m voting 1 greens in both houses. In Reps I’ll cast my 2 to Kelly so Labor get it.

The Senate is a pain, there’s 70-something candidates in NSW. Greens 1 above the line, apparently means the vote goes to the democrats after that, and then Labor. I’ll have to investigate that, as I’m fine with preferences going to the Democrats, but I have to ensure that they don’t then direct my vote elsewhere. Like to the Family Fascists. gaaaaaah.

I want it to exhaust at Labor.

I think Kerry Tucker is a good candidate. I think she did good work in the Assembly (I certainly preferred it when the government did not have an absolute majority in the ACT) and I think she would be a good candidate for the Senate.

There is a good chance that I will cast my vote for the Greens in the Senate. Even people I know that wouldn’t normally vote for the Greens are considering going that way this time because they like Kerry.

Kerry was pretty good in the legislative assembly. I was surprised when she packed it in for the feds.

I still haven’t forgotten how she said she wouldn’t accept a govt car and then did so 2 days later though.

There is nothing normal about the Greens having the balance of power. Which they certainly will have after this election.

Poor dems have slid to super insignificance – no one is even talking to them!

The really disturbing thing is the she might have the balance of power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It would be worth 4 years of nightmare to see how the greens move from insignificant to having to actually do something and be accountable to all Australian’s. They will either come more to the centre or last one term in control.

Pierce, probably very close! 🙂

It’ll be interesting to see how reflective Riot-Act actually is of Canberra

The CFMEU will no doubt be pleased with their investment in the ACT Greens then!

She’s a tool, but Canberra being Canberra, she’ll no doubt bolt in.

Look on the bright side, her relentless hippy stylings on the bongo will keep her senate counterparts awake during those late sittings.

So essentially you are relying on a poll with a sample size of 339 conducted between July and October.

WHOA! Look out Liberals, the bell tolls for thee.

Heaven doesn’t exist, so no help for you there. I like her, sorry Gaz…you’re gone.

Well, heavens help us! If Kerry could manage to utter a complete sentence without using the word “around” in its jargonistic sense of never actually getting to the point about anything then I wouldnt want to vomit every time she opens her mouth!

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.