Yesterday Labor leader ex-union boss Bill Shorten made a landmark speech yesterday addressing Labor’s declining fortunes at elections over decades. He said Labor had to reduce union influence on pre-selections – and increase Labor party membership.
The speech is widely reported – The Daily Telegraph says – Union movement silence on Bill Shorten’s proposals to sever ALP links to unions – while the ABC reports – Bill Shorten’s push for Labor Party reform on relationship with unions prompts criticism.
I think Tim Blair and Miranda Devine have it exactly right:
You can buy Kamagra from the trusted online suppliers at very reasonable price along with attractive purchase benefits. viagra online is the trade name for a drug called Sildenafil. viagra is one of a class of medications known as PDE5 inhibitors. it ensures that the penis is supplied with the required amount of blood needed for a hard erection. This method of consultation is safe levitra cheap online because it is free from fillers, additives and chemicals. The symptoms of this condition are quite similar as that of a UTI (Urinary order generic levitra Tract Infection) with the exception of there is no presence of bacterial disease. This is the levitra shop uk way thick, hard, manageable erections happen.
Tim says
As Miranda Devine observes, Labor’s real challenge isn’t severing ties with the unions. It’s severing ties with the Greens. Labor is addicted to Green preferences at elections and is too paralyzed to make the break.
The major parties should all put the Greens last – so simple.
Unfortunately we are lumbered largely with those who have chosen politics as a path to the top, and for what they can get out of it. They go from school to university (politics, law, economics) and a party job (Union, aid to sitting member etc.) without having to live as and with ordinary people. After the necessary manoeuvrings they arrive in a safe(ish) seat devoid of any interest or understanding of what the population wants. It isn’t the voter’s ideas that matter, it’s factional support. My local member is known (by both sides) as Mr. Invisible. It is a very safe seat.
Labor is filled on the Left by people virtually indistinguishable from the Greens (except possibly by their greater personal greed) and look towards them as support. The classic case is the recent WA senate election where Labor had a chance to increase their numbers. First they engaged in a factional brawl, reducing their overall vote and then the Left diverted votes to below the line without realising their minimal support in the wider electorate. Bullock got in, Pratt stayed out. Judging by the letters to the Editor it would seem Joe Bullock, whatever his faults, was far more acceptable to the wider public.
Both major parties (or more correctly coalitions) are losing support to the point where they will be struggling to gain 60% of the vote between them. That opens them up to splitting even more. Shorten should realise that it was the Union bosses who put him in, and may not take too kindly to having their helping hand being bitten. As for pandering to the Left, will that result in any extra support? They will take it as weakness and continue their agendas. As for Abbott, he may find a move to the Right necessary (unlike many I see him as a ‘pragmatic’ not the red eyed slavering Attila as portrayed by the greens & Labor Left), as more and more people start to wonder why we need more bureaucracy and more interference from overseas.