Labor wins Australian federal election

[apathy maybe]

Another day, another election. And this one has resulted in the previously ruling Liberal/National Coalition being removed from power, and the Australian Labor [sic] Party (ALP) winning over 80 seats out of the 150 seats in the lower house.

Of course, those who have been following the election will know that there is actually not a heck of a lot of difference between the two parties (Liberal and Labor).

Interesting facts, it looks like John Howard, the previous Prime Minister might not retain his Sydney seat of Bennelong. In 2004 the Greens candidate (Andrew Wilkie previous intelligence officer) had a strong showing (and now is a possible sixth senator from Tasmania). This time around Maxine McKew (ALP) looks set to take the seat.

As well, the five Tasmanian seats are once more ALP, the two northern seats switched to the Liberals at the last election.

And the final interesting fact, the Greens once more got a higher national vote then the Nationals, and the Nationals got 10 seats compared to the Greens zero... (in the lower house).


For more information, the ABC has a site: http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/


I haven't written anything on this election, but I've thought about it. The difference between the two main alternatives are bugger all. The alternatives, the Greens, the various Socialists, the fundamentalists and the other minor parties, not any of them share my beliefs, and can thus not represent me.

I did hear a thing on the radio from an 'anarchist' who wanted people to vote for the minor parties. The only real reason was to take a small amount of money of the major parties (something like $2). Bugger that, my vote doesn't count (well, it wouldn't have if I had have voted), and $2 is bugger all.


Oh, and what shall I tell the electoral office when they ask why I didn't vote? (I'm not going to be in the country at the time.) I think this time, I shall say religion. My religion forbids me to vote... :ph34r:

[Ismail]

It is true that there is no major difference between the two parties, but the nation will probably be better off under the Labor party. It seems that the Liberal party under Howard was getting more obviously racist, so hopefully the Laborites may change that too.

While all parties are bourgeois (sans minor ones that if ever elected to anything quickly turn reformist and eventually bourgeois) I do not believe that mass refusal to vote is correct all of the time, particularly when a potentially damaging candidate is running. We shouldn't encourage Communist parties to participate more than voting for the least shitty candidate though.

[spartan]

One of the good things about this Labour victory in the elections is that they are against the monarchy and have promised a referendum on whether or not the Queen should still be head of state of Australia.

Opinion polls clearly show that a majority of Australians no longer want the monarchy and if Australia goes it alone by ditching the monarchy this will help strengthen other Republican anti monarchy movements in countries such as Canada and New Zealand whose populations are also turning against the monarchy.

Hopefully Britain will soon follow suit and get rid of this outdated and embarrassing symbol of a time long gone.

[Lenin II]

I'm not familiar with the policies of the Liberal, Labor or Green Party of Australia, since I don't live there and have not been there. Someone from the region please enlighten me as to the nature of these groups, and the extent of their revolutionary and counterrevolutionary tendencies. Finally, how do you personally and ideologically feel about this election?

[Ismail]

Originally posted by Lenin [email protected] 24, 2007 10:43 am
Someone from the region please enlighten me as to the nature of these groups, and the extent of their revolutionary and counterrevolutionary tendencies.
The Labor party apparently has quite a bit of interaction with trade unionists, but they certainly aren't revolutionary ones.

[Hiero]

Positive things can come out of this election, we can start to campaign to turn over alot of Howard's doings. It is now time to start to pressure the ALP government to remove the troops from Iraq, change the IR laws and remove the latest terrorist and riot laws. The first two were ALP election promises. Now we have to make sure they will act on their promises.

And we need to keep up the campaign to remove the army and police from Aboriginal communities and keep up the climate change campaign.

It is so easy to say "nothing will change under a ALP government". Removing Howard was the first stage of a larger movement, now we need to work towards working class reforms and get back what we lost under Howard.

[Herman]

All nice and good, except for the fact that Kevin Rudd describes himself as a economic conservative.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 04:42 pm
Positive things can come out of this election, we can start to campaign to turn over alot of Howard's doings. It is now time to start to pressure the ALP government to remove the troops from Iraq, change the IR laws and remove the latest terrorist and riot laws. The first two were ALP election promises. Now we have to make sure they will act on their promises.

And we need to keep up the campaign to remove the army and police from Aboriginal communities and keep up the climate change campaign.

It is so easy to say "nothing will change under a ALP government". Removing Howard was the first stage of a larger movement, now we need to work towards working class reforms and get back what we lost under Howard.
I agree with Hiero.

Labor may not be much different from the liberals (although it is good to have a party in office that actually has a left wing...), but there should be some slight improvements (that we have to pressure them on) but the most important thing to come out of this election is the HUGE swing against the liberals, which means that the Australian people know that things aren't right and are getting worse.

That's the potential that we have to tap into as the revolutionary left.

Edit: Mal Brough lost his seat. Mwahahaha.
Also, I realised last night that I've only ever lived in Australia under Howard! No wonder I feel this strange elation even though I know Krudd is hardly an improvement.

[Demogorgon]

Well Kevin Rudd will be no better, but I am sorry, if anyone is going to tell me I can't gloat at John Howard's downfall then sorry, we aren't going to agree there. Even losing his own seat :lol:

[Hiero]

Also, I realised last night that I've only ever lived in Australia under Howard!
What! How old are you?

Edit: Disregard that.

[Black Dagger]

ALP government to remove the troops from Iraq, change the IR laws and remove the latest terrorist and riot laws.

I can see the first happening, the second - maybe - but the third? Unfortunately labour (at state level) has spearheaded such laws, and at federal level - given their support to liberal party measures. That i suppose is the 'give with one, take away with the other' situation the ALP provides in terms of rolling back the Liberal agenda but replacing it with something equally conservative, he's no Whitlam... he's not even a Keating! :lol:

But you're right, this does provide a good opportunity - i must say, if Howard had won again that would reflect a firmly depressing view of workers consciousness in australia - to introduce something like work choices and still get the peoples support come polling time... thankfully that was not the case.

Also, i gotta agree with ML, Mal Brough losing his seat was fucking gold! (ditto for Howard, go Maxine! Lol) I'm so glad that racist piece of shit is gone, and i hope those were tears i saw on his face last night as his defeat set in. Sorry Mal but you deserve much worse for what you've done to Aboriginal australia! :angry:

[Cheung Mo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 02:43 pm
One of the good things about this Labour victory in the elections is that they are against the monarchy and have promised a referendum on whether or not the Queen should still be head of state of Australia.

Opinion polls clearly show that a majority of Australians no longer want the monarchy and if Australia goes it alone by ditching the monarchy this will help strengthen other Republican anti monarchy movements in countries such as Canada and New Zealand whose populations are also turning against the monarchy.

Hopefully Britain will soon follow suit and get rid of this outdated and embarrassing symbol of a time long gone.
Canada will never get rid out of the crown due to arcane constitutional baggage designed to cater to petty regionalism as opposed to the collective desires of Canada's people. We have tons of worthless or misdirected institutions that will not be fixed for the forseeable future because regionalist interests are more concerned about getting their own piece of the pie than they are about implmenting genuinely progressive public policy.

[Xiao Banfa]

I'm pretty pleased by the ALP victory, if only for the fact that Rudd's going to withdraw troops from Iraq.

He said he would scrap Work Choices (anti-union legislation), but how much of it he will scrap remains to be seen.

[Cheung Mo]

A shame it's impossible to not win a majority in Australia...Otherwise Rudd would have to deal with organised labour from one barrel of the radical shotgun and the Greens from the other.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Xiao [email protected] 26, 2007 10:44 am
I'm pretty pleased by the ALP victory, if only for the fact that Rudd's going to withdraw troops from Iraq.

I'm not really pleased about that.

As if with Rudd generally (as i said before), it's a case of giving with one hand and taking away with the other.

Yes he wants to withdraw australian troops from iraq but i don't this as all that significant given that troops numbers there have already been reduced dramatically and what troops are still present in iraq are already in largely non-combative roles.

Worse, Rudd's plan is to shift the troops - some from Iraq to Afghanistan, and the rest to garrison the pacific.

And in the case of the latter deployment the effects will be felt much more dramatically by the local people than had the same troops remained in Iraq providing security detail to Japanese engineers or what have you. As with most things Rudd, it's a little bit different but essentially more of the same (say a plain donut vs. a plain donut with some sprinkles on top) - certainly not 'better' in any serious material sense, and certainly not for the people of the Pacific.

[Yazman]

I am pretty thoroughly disgusted with the Australian left after this election.

They have built up such a cult of personality (incorrectly used, I know, but it's the closest term I can think of) around John Howard that millions of Australians have ended up simply attributing all of Australia's problems to John Howard alone. They have been led to believe that if we simply "get howard out!" (as the movement's slogan goes) then all of our problems will slowly disappear..

It has been a reformist movement that has really eroded what little anti-government sentiment there actually was. Now that Kevin Rudd is in power and people have been brainwashed into thinking the ALP is a safe "alternative" to the Liberal Party, there is little no no substance or steam left in the movement besides "pressuring Kevin into keeping his promises."

Which, we all know, is a steaming load of horse shit. Which reminds me of this little gem... "Read my lips.... no new taxes" anyone? The ALP has proven in it's terms in government since the 70's that it is fully willing to rape the workers of Australia again and again, while simultaneously reducing education and healthcare funding until almost half the country relies on private health insurance to get coverage.

The difference between the ALP and the Liberal Party is really the same difference between the Republicans and the Democrats in the USA......none.

Interesting story, at the May Day March in Brisbane this year with my sign that said "Rudd = Howard" I was pretty much lambasted as a "traitor to the workers" by most people there, even so-called communists condemned me for having a sign that said that. The only people there who liked it and thought it was a good idea were members of the Socialist Alliance contingent.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 08:18 pm
The only people there who liked it and thought it was a good idea were members of the Socialist Alliance contingent.
That shocks me. Truly. The SA is a load of dog shit.

But yeah, what you say is true.

[Marsella]

Rudd to apologise to Aborigines
Australia's new government will issue a formal apology to Aborigines for the abuses they suffered in the past, prime minister-elect Kevin Rudd has promised.

Mr Rudd, whose Labor Party swept to power in an election on Saturday, said the apology would come early in his first parliamentary term.

Outgoing Prime Minister John Howard had repeatedly refused to say sorry.
Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7112773.stm)

I came across this on the BBC News.

Thoughts?

[Yazman]

I support the apology and think it's a good idea, although it's just a piece of rhetoric if it's not backed up by serious efforts to improve the living standards of aborigines, which the government will of course... NOT bring.

[chebol]

Proper Tea is Theft Posted on Today at 08:34 pm



QUOTE (Yazman @ November 26, 2007 08:18 pm)
The only people there who liked it and thought it was a good idea were members of the Socialist Alliance contingent.

That shocks me. Truly. The SA is a load of dog shit.

But yeah, what you say is true.

Umm. Thanks. I never realised that I was canine excreta before, mate. Or maybe you should sharpen your reading skills before waxing lyrical with offensive language.

Chebol (one of the main organisers of the NSW "load of dog shit")

[apathy maybe]

Hey Chebol, how is your reformist party getting on :D.

Say hello to Alex Bainbridge for me (incidentally, in the survey, now closed, someone said he was their most disliked political figure :lol:. I can't remember who it was though).



On Iraq: Labor was only going to remove some combat troops (certainly not all troops) from Iraq.
On IR laws: Labor was never going to repeal them completely, of any of the mainstream parties, I think only the Greens (maybe the Dems) actually had a decent (relatively speaking) plan here.
On terrorism laws, refugees, "Aboriginal intervention" and a load of other issues, the Labor Party is not going to change anything.


On the 'cult of personality', interestingly, you see that everywhere. In the US it is Bush, in the UK, Blair (now Brown), and so on. We do have to remember, it wasn't just Howard (nasty scum fucker though he is), it was Abbot, "Amnesty" Ruddock, "VSU" Nelson, Costello and all the rest. It is more then that of course, it is the whole fucking system!


Of course the ALP are slightly better then the Libs. But the difference is small. They both want capitalism, they both want business, they both want large government, they are both opportunistic parties. On symbolic issues, and issues which don't threaten the fundamental nature of the system, they might differ, but almost everything else...

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Yazman
Interesting story, at the May Day March in Brisbane this year with my sign that said "Rudd = Howard" I was pretty much lambasted as a "traitor to the workers" by most people there, even so-called communists condemned me for having a sign that said that. The only people there who liked it and thought it was a good idea were members of the Socialist Alliance contingent.

That's interesting (your comment about SA). In NSW, the SA was instrumental in pushing similar personality politics in relation to the APEC summit, which through their efforts became 'Stop Bush!' - similarly lacking the anti-government focus you mention. Maybe SA functions differently in Qld.

[Yazman]

The ALP are "better than the libs" in the same way that Hirohito was "better than Hitler," and the same way that Krushchev was "better than Stalin."

Give me a fucking break, seriously.

[Hiero]

Unfortunately labour (at state level) has spearheaded such laws, and at federal level - given their support to liberal party measures.

I am corrected. It is going to be hard to remove these laws, bourgeois governments like to hold on to these powers. They usually come in during a "crisis", I think the situation requires a real crisis for the bourgeois government to give them up. I think we are heading there, with the revelation about AFP treatment of "terrorist" suspects, and Aboriginal deaths in custody.


Yes he wants to withdraw australian troops from iraq but i don't this as all that significant given that troops numbers there have already been reduced dramatically and what troops are still present in iraq are already in largely non-combative roles.

Worse, Rudd's plan is to shift the troops - some from Iraq to Afghanistan, and the rest to garrison the pacific.

That is a good point.


The ALP are "better than the libs" in the same way that Hirohito was "better than Hitler," and the same way that Krushchev was "better than Stalin."

Give me a fucking break, seriously.

No one here is saying that. Stop acting so hysterical.

My point specificaly was not to look at the parties themselves, but the situation that have in front of us. I think we have a bit of room to get things done. We aren't going to gain power any time soon, so we have to work to pressuring the government to make working class reforms and internationalist reforms. While at the same time raising working class and proleteriat conscious. The Howard government was really setting up alot of state protections for the bourgeois, the anti-union and terrorist laws are example of this.

[juozokas]

Originally posted by Xiao [email protected] 26, 2007 12:44 am
I'm pretty pleased by the ALP victory, if only for the fact that Rudd's going to withdraw troops from Iraq.

He said he would scrap Work Choices (anti-union legislation), but how much of it he will scrap remains to be seen.
He said he is going to phase out workplace agreements over five years, and make some rollbacks/changes to Workchoices. He is not going to scrap Workchoices.

Rudd is not only fiscally right-wing but is a practicing Anglican and opposed to gay marriage.

This result is about as exciting as a pimple on my dick, and (while I probably don't really mean what I am about to say) if anything I think it would have been better in some way if Howard won as there is an attitude now of 'it's all going to be alright now Kevin the radical leader is here to serve up some social justice and take care of the workers of Australia'. He is just as right-wing economically and politically as John Howard.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Hiero+--> (Hiero)It is going to be hard to remove these laws, bourgeois governments like to hold on to these powers. [/b]

Indeed, the enhanced powers given to police to control the aftermath of the cronulla 'riot' and carried over to APEC were set to expire soon... but the ALP state govt. (and police) are determined to have them renewed... i guess indefinitely? :(


Hiero

They usually come in during a "crisis", I think the situation requires a real crisis for the bourgeois government to give them up.

How do you figure? You're right, they did come in because of a 'crisis' (the racist violence at cronulla and its aftermath) - but why do you think a furture crisis would see the government relinquish these powers rather than extend them further?

[chebol]

While the ALP are practically "no better than the libs", a Labor government is still "better" than a Tory one.

While ALP governments have always deepened the attacks on the working class - usually further than the Tories do - this also exposes their flank.

One reason they are able to do so is because of the labour aristocracy and the pliant union bureaucracy, which serves to keep the labour movement tame.

When Labor is elected (especially with such expectations - and it seems clear that the biggest factor in this election was WorkChoices) and they quickly disappoint those with illusions in them (which they invariably will), this creates the space for the militant workers, the radical unionists, and the left in general, to win more people away from Laborism and to the need to fight as much against a bosses' government in hard hats as one in pin-stripe suits. (This is, for example, more or less what happened in the '80's, when a section of the labor left and those around them broke off into first the Nuclear Disarmament Party and then into the formations that became the Greens).

This is only really possible at the moment under Labor. Under the Coalition, the unions, even some of the most radical ones, and their members, can be easily convinced to toe the line and support "the only realistic alternative" to the tories.

The situation now is actually better for the left, because we will now have a greater hearing for our views, although it will still be a struggle as the unions and ALP try and shut down the Your Rights at Work campaign (they've already announced a firesale of merchandise).

[Bilan]

Originally posted by bleeding gums [email protected] 28, 2007 12:55 am
Indeed, the enhanced powers given to police to control the aftermath of the cronulla 'riot' and carried over to APEC were set to expire soon... but the ALP state govt. (and police) are determined to have them renewed... i guess indefinitely? :(

Seriously?! You mean the super draconian ones?
details? info?

[chebol]

That's not quite correct. The APEC police powers legislation was specially created for APEC, and are quite different from (and much worse than) the post-Cronulla powers police were given.

The NSW government intends to continue the Cronulla powers, which are due to lapse because of a "sunset clause" that was included when they were passed. There has been a "review" and the state Labor government has decided that they "need" these powers, presumably because they want to emulate Joh Bjelke-Petersen.

I haven't checked the status of the APEC laws recently, but last I checked, the government was also keen on keeping a few of them... Will check and update.

[Cheung Mo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 11:12 am
they want to emulate Joh Bjelke-Petersen.

Isn't that grounds for capital punishment to any sane Aussie?

Incidentally, why do Coalition supporters tend to preference the Greens and the Democrats over Labor?

Both are less reactionary have less in common with the Coalition than Labor does...

(And for that matter, why do 1/5 of Green supporters prefer the Coalition to Labor? I would say they were high, but I smoke pot and I would never put the Coalition above anyone..hahaha)

[Hiero]

How do you figure? You're right, they did come in because of a 'crisis' (the racist violence at cronulla and its aftermath) - but why do you think a furture crisis would see the government relinquish these powers rather than extend them further?

Well if deaths in custody continue, and we show the government what the term riot means, in the sense of a general riot it can lead dialogue.

I am thinking of Paris, where student movements lead to a riot the government usually takes a step back and opens up dialogue. If we were able in the time of "crisis" to bring say a major city to stand still then the government usually has to bend our way.

It is the same when Unions in their glory days could stop whole industries. the employers and government had to open up talks with the unions.

I think now that is a bit abstract, but we do know that struggle leads to these situations.


I haven't checked the status of the APEC laws recently, but last I checked, the government was also keen on keeping a few of them... Will check and update

Where do you check?

I should keep up to date on these things, I usually only find these things out at the end of the line.