Comments on: Position vacant: government with integrity

By: dendy

dendy — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:33:16 +0000

I see you linked to Michael Stokes’ opinion. To remind you: “Let’s say we continue to have a multi-party parliament with the norm being that no party has a majority. On the basis of this decision we mightn’t get a change of government for 50 years,”

Face it Michael. The Greens are not going to go away. Unless you’re happy being out of government for the next 50 years you and your party are going to have to deal with them.

You might as well start now. Hodgman should pick up the phone and talk to McKim before it’s too late.

By: Ian

Ian — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:13:20 +0000

Michael, in the recent election I voted Greens with preferences flowing to the Liberals. Why? I wanted a change to a political environment where there is a focus on consensus, combined problem solving, a problem focused approach and and end to the childish behaviour we currently see in state and federal parliaments. I had hoped that Will Hodgman would have seized the opportunity to negotiate with all of parties to secure a stable and innovative approach to governing Tasmania but not so. I think we can safely say that the Libs haved missed a golden opportunity by some misplaced political ideology. I’m sorry that you are continuing on in the same old sad dualistic thinking as we have seen for decades. Good luck with your new appointment and hoping to see some innovative approaches for the future.

By: Michael C

Michael C — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:39:29 +0000

The current government is entirely legitimate at this point in time, as the Governor has commissioned Bartlett. Unless you’re claiming that the commission is illegitimate or illegal. Are you?
Of course, your party can seek to install itself in government, but you’ll need the confidence of parliament to do that. That’s where legitimacy will come from in this case. If you want to sit on the bleachers and claim the moral high ground in order to wreck and distabliize the government that is a dangerous game not in the interests of stability. Surely you’d be better to participate in the current parliament by working to shape legislation as it arises?

By: dendy

dendy — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 06:59:52 +0000

Michael, all your leader needs do to obtain government is pick up the phone and talk to McKim. Surely you have common ground that you can work with. Why doesn’t he try? Or is he so under the thumb of his father and the other old men in the Liberal Party shadows?

It is astounding that your party and your leader could be so foolish as to let this opportunity slip by. Do you and he really want to implement your policies? Do you want to make Tasmania the successful place you claim? Well why don’t you do something about it?

Incidentally, I’m sure you know that there is no “Labor/Green” government, or are you totally ignorant as to how Westminster democracy works? That kind of thing may play well with some of the electorate but is likely a turn-off for intelligent voters, some of whom I know voted for you…

By: dendy

dendy — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:35:30 +0000

No Michael. Your leader’s grotesque pig-headedness in not even picking up the phone to talk to McKim has caused this. As a result you’ve condemned yourself to another four years of futile opposition and the State to another four years of corrupt Labor government.

Very well done(/sarc)