Hung out to dry

For the first time in 70 years, we have a hung parliament.

Was it a result of Labor voters dissatisfaction? The so-called 'mining tax' and other disasters over the last three years? The brutal dumping of K. Rudd in June? Was it a change in direction for the Liberals? That the leader reflected a time under Howard when everything was just dandy and we were protected from international banking events?

Or was it that neither side projected strong enough image and policy to sway the voter?

I've always thought Labor made a mistake in giving the leadership to Kevin Rudd and Julia Gilliard as deputy PM. She had the credentials to move the country forward; K. Rudd was a diplomat who lacked diplomacy with his staff; who had some nifty ideas but executed them poorly and in haste; who gave his new ministers more than a year to adjust to their new portfolios before anything was done to actually govern the country. Julia would have kicked butt straight up.

So now we have the Greens Party, under the leadership of Bob Brown, who hold the balance of power in the Senate and has a member in the House of Representatives - he's also calling for proportional representation in the House to give his candidates a better chance at succeeding.

Personally, I loathe and despise a politician who will prostitute his ideals for power. A vote for the Greens meant a vote - once preferences are distributed - for Labor. It's reprehensible that a candidate can win most of the votes in an electorate, but still lose the set due to preferences. A party who hands over votes to one party, but says it will 'work with whoever is in government' isn't one that stands on it's principles.

A minority party does not express the will of the people, yet will use the balance of power to push through legislation reflecting it's own radical agenda. The Greens have held the balance of power before, much to the detriment of running the country by holding up legislation. Governing slowed down to such an extent that when they lost the balance of power, both sides - left and right - expressed their relief and they could now get on with it.

In the days of Senator Harridine from Tasmania, he held the parliament to ransom on a number of issues. Like... he would only vote in favour of legislation if Australia stopped providing contraceptives to certain third world countries, that promoting women's health included anti-abortion material. He was a man who didn't vote according to his constituency, but his own religious bigotry.

Now this. What will the Greens demand? More social justice? More money thrown at pie-in-the-sky energy boondoggles? Higher taxes on the wealthy to subsidise the poor?

I tell you, politics makes me crazy!