by Booney » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:30 pm
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:32 pm
by heater31 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:32 pm
If you have done that then what do you think I've been doing all morning......even glued my coffee cup to the desk!Booney wrote:Just bolted my chair and desk down, I can't work if this gets sold off.
by stan » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:39 pm
ElectraNet cant wait to get started. They plan to charge a **** load for transmissions costs.Booney wrote:But the Liberals continue to disagree with the ruling over their plan, which includes subsidised home solar and battery systems and an interconnector to New South Wales.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-15/l ... cy/9550238
by Magellan » Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:02 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:Magellan wrote:Irrespective of who you 'barrack' for in the political game, at least Saturday night delivered the state a majority government and relative stability compared to the horse-trading and deal-making that would've occurred under a hung parliament.
Still going to have to deal with the Upper House (the one Rau wanted to abolish)
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:42 pm
Magellan wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:Magellan wrote:Irrespective of who you 'barrack' for in the political game, at least Saturday night delivered the state a majority government and relative stability compared to the horse-trading and deal-making that would've occurred under a hung parliament.
Still going to have to deal with the Upper House (the one Rau wanted to abolish)
Dealing between houses is always part of the equation, but the extent of compromise and uncertainty is far less than under a hung parliament. Uncertainty lies in support for respective bills, rather than the potentially whacky trade-off necessary to ensure a majority on the floor.
I didn't know about Rau wanting to abolish the upper house, presumably it was for purely political reasons. Why wouldn't those with the majority on the floor of the house want to remove the house that cuts it lunch? Just ask Gough Whitlam when you next get hold of a Delorian.
For purely democratic reasons, though, there's definitely merit to it. In the federal sphere the senate acts as a house of review for the respective states (although that's been distorted as voting is not on a state-by-state bases (except for some independents) but rather along party political lines). The Parliament doesn't guarantee equal representation from each state, so it uses another house to ensure state interests are given a hearing.
But the legislative council, why does it exist, apart from mimicking the federal model or giving the lower house chance to have its legislative cock-ups fixed? There's no regional representation in our upper house unlike in the federal Parliament. Surely if you're democratically elected to form a majority, you propose bills, elected representatives from across the state vote, and if it get up, its law, or otherwise it should be back to the drawing board. Unrepresentative swill, or overpaid proof-readers.
Righto, rant over.
by Dogwatcher » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:16 pm
GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
by Magellan » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:21 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:Magellan wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:Magellan wrote:Irrespective of who you 'barrack' for in the political game, at least Saturday night delivered the state a majority government and relative stability compared to the horse-trading and deal-making that would've occurred under a hung parliament.
Still going to have to deal with the Upper House (the one Rau wanted to abolish)
Dealing between houses is always part of the equation, but the extent of compromise and uncertainty is far less than under a hung parliament. Uncertainty lies in support for respective bills, rather than the potentially whacky trade-off necessary to ensure a majority on the floor.
I didn't know about Rau wanting to abolish the upper house, presumably it was for purely political reasons. Why wouldn't those with the majority on the floor of the house want to remove the house that cuts it lunch? Just ask Gough Whitlam when you next get hold of a Delorian.
For purely democratic reasons, though, there's definitely merit to it. In the federal sphere the senate acts as a house of review for the respective states (although that's been distorted as voting is not on a state-by-state bases (except for some independents) but rather along party political lines). The Parliament doesn't guarantee equal representation from each state, so it uses another house to ensure state interests are given a hearing.
But the legislative council, why does it exist, apart from mimicking the federal model or giving the lower house chance to have its legislative cock-ups fixed? There's no regional representation in our upper house unlike in the federal Parliament. Surely if you're democratically elected to form a majority, you propose bills, elected representatives from across the state vote, and if it get up, its law, or otherwise it should be back to the drawing board. Unrepresentative swill, or overpaid proof-readers.
Righto, rant over.
Not a rant at all
by Booney » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:26 pm
GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:29 pm
Booney wrote:GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
Tarzia will be given something juicy as reward. Health or police?
by Booney » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:33 pm
jo172 wrote:Booney wrote:GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
Tarzia will be given something juicy as reward. Health or police?
I'd expect very minimal difference between the Shadow Cabinet taken into the election and the actual cabinet. The Shadow Ministers were reasonably well across their briefs, when you've got almost all first time Ministers they'll want people with some familiarity of the Department and policies stepping in.
by heater31 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:36 pm
Tea and biscuits steward......Booney wrote:jo172 wrote:Booney wrote:GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
Tarzia will be given something juicy as reward. Health or police?
I'd expect very minimal difference between the Shadow Cabinet taken into the election and the actual cabinet. The Shadow Ministers were reasonably well across their briefs, when you've got almost all first time Ministers they'll want people with some familiarity of the Department and policies stepping in.
So what will Tarzia get?
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:37 pm
Booney wrote:jo172 wrote:Booney wrote:GWW wrote:Any thoughts on the ministry?
Chapman - Attorney General?
Lucas - Treasurer (confirmed)
Wingard - Transport?
Spiers - ?
?
?
Tarzia will be given something juicy as reward. Health or police?
I'd expect very minimal difference between the Shadow Cabinet taken into the election and the actual cabinet. The Shadow Ministers were reasonably well across their briefs, when you've got almost all first time Ministers they'll want people with some familiarity of the Department and policies stepping in.
So what will Tarzia get?
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:38 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:39 pm
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:41 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:I think he's Marshall's parliamentary secretary now (whatever that means)
Aren't there some lucrative chairperson jobs going around?
Who will be Speaker?
How long before Foley loses all of his cushy jobs?
by Dogwatcher » Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:59 pm
by MW » Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:00 pm
by jo172 » Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:04 pm
MW wrote:How on earth is Rob Lucas going to be Treasurer...
He's nothing but a twitter troll for the last 5 years
by MW » Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:11 pm
jo172 wrote:MW wrote:How on earth is Rob Lucas going to be Treasurer...
He's nothing but a twitter troll for the last 5 years
Do you follow Kouts on twitter?
I don't follow Lucas, but if I'm to accept what you're saying on face-value I imagine it must be a required skill for a treasurer now because he's a shocker on it.
Come to think of it, imagine if Foley had it available to him 12 years ago!
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |