Is it possible Labor, Greens and Xenophon will be able to preserve the ETS?

Xenophon is against carbon pricing.

Greens require the balance and Labor to stick to principle over danderous climate change.

Correction,

That roadblock is Nick Xenophon, who has confirmed he will be digging in his heels on Direct Action, which he has called "clunky and inefficient". He told Business Spectator on Sunday: "I will not support the repeal [of Labor's carbon tax legislation] unless there is a Frontier-style scheme on the table."

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/2/election/xenophon-wont-back-down-carbon-trading


Xenophon will play hardball to get his vote to repel.

____ wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:42pm:

Xenophon is against carbon pricing. Greens require the balance and Labor to stick to principle over danderous climate change. Correction, That roadblock is Nick Xenophon, who has confirmed he will be digging in his heels on Direct Action, which he has called "clunky and inefficient". He told Business Spectator on Sunday: "I will not support the repeal [of Labor's carbon tax legislation] unless there is a Frontier-style scheme on the table." http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/2/election/xenophon-wont-back-down-carbon-trading Xenophon will play hardball to get his vote to repel.

But what are the senate results?

only if the greens hold the balance. Even if it comes down to Xenophon I wouldn't want to rely on him.

Interestingly, I was about to say that labor will likely capitulate and vote to abolish it - but just as I was about to type it, Bill Shorten just told us that putting a price on carbon remains a labor priority  :)

Fairfax simulation has Greens maintaining BOP  [smiley=beer.gif]


Quote:

The simulations, carried out for Fairfax Media by a politically independent statistician who wishes to be known only as ''the truth seeker'', show the most likely outcomes in each state would see the Greens gaining three seats, despite losing votes, to retain the balance of power. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/power-play-in-senate-as-greens-and-microparties-race-to-tip-the-balance-20130906-2taue.html#ixzz2eD2z5CHT

Nick is a rational man. He won't stand for Abbott's economic vandalism.

MOTR wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:48pm:

Nick is a rational man. He won't stand for Abbott's economic vandalism.

During his little stash with Hanson-Young and the greens, he stated in an interview that his constituency is split roughly even between supporters of the two major parties. To me that sounded code for "I'm going to capitulate to coalition demands".

Bobby. wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:46pm:

____ wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:42pm: Xenophon is against carbon pricing. Greens require the balance and Labor to stick to principle over danderous climate change. Correction, That roadblock is Nick Xenophon, who has confirmed he will be digging in his heels on Direct Action, which he has called "clunky and inefficient". He told Business Spectator on Sunday: "I will not support the repeal [of Labor's carbon tax legislation] unless there is a Frontier-style scheme on the table." http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/2/election/xenophon-wont-back-down-carbon-trading Xenophon will play hardball to get his vote to repel. But what are the senate results?

Probably be a few days until we have the final result.

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:53pm:

MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:48pm: Nick is a rational man. He won't stand for Abbott's economic vandalism. During his little stash with Hanson-Young and the greens, he stated in an interview that his constituency is split roughly even between supporters of the two major parties. To me that sounded code for "I'm going to capitulate to coalition demands".

He is a man of principle. I can't see him voting away the best solution for attacking carbon pollution.

Antony Green has just declared on ABC that labor/greens have lost balance of power in the senate.


so good to hear.  you can negotiate with the rest but not the Greens.

MOTR wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:53pm: MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:48pm: Nick is a rational man. He won't stand for Abbott's economic vandalism. During his little stash with Hanson-Young and the greens, he stated in an interview that his constituency is split roughly even between supporters of the two major parties. To me that sounded code for "I'm going to capitulate to coalition demands". He is a man of principle. I can't see him voting away the best solution for attacking carbon pollution.

after the way the Greens have attacked him  - and it was disgusting here in SA - I think Nick will vote against anything the Greens support.  He was furious with them and deservedly so.

____ wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:55pm:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:46pm: ____ wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:42pm: Xenophon is against carbon pricing. Greens require the balance and Labor to stick to principle over danderous climate change. Correction, That roadblock is Nick Xenophon, who has confirmed he will be digging in his heels on Direct Action, which he has called "clunky and inefficient". He told Business Spectator on Sunday: "I will not support the repeal [of Labor's carbon tax legislation] unless there is a Frontier-style scheme on the table." http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/2/election/xenophon-wont-back-down-carbon-trading Xenophon will play hardball to get his vote to repel. But what are the senate results? Probably be a few days until we have the final result.

Just saw on TV.

Looks like Abbott will need the support of a few idiots like Palmer
to pass legislation but he will be able to do it in the SENATE.

Labor are slow learners.

The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time.

Swagman wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:08pm:

Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time.

you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ????

John Smith wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:13pm:

Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ????

no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:59pm:

Antony Green has just declared on ABC that labor/greens have lost balance of power in the senate. so good to hear.  you can negotiate with the rest but not the Greens.

Yep toothless Greens will be an excellent result.

Palmer party, DLP, Xenaphon. Family First, Liberal Democrats are the others.  Different looking Senate.  Most being anti-carbon tax.

With the possible makeup in the senate, could be viewed as prompt karma for Abbott, if one believes in karma.

This coming bad government will be all on his shoulders.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:13pm: Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ???? no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up.

libs got slaughtered because of work choices and only because of workchoices   .... labor didn't lose this election because of the carbon tax or any other policy, they lost it because of 3 yrs of bad politics  ...

Swagman wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:59pm: Antony Green has just declared on ABC that labor/greens have lost balance of power in the senate. so good to hear.  you can negotiate with the rest but not the Greens. Yep toothless Greens will be an excellent result. Palmer party, DLP, Xenaphon. Family First, Liberal Democrats are the others.  Different looking Senate.  Most being anti-carbon tax.

What will it take to win Family Firsts Senators Vote Mr Abbott, creationism in the science class.

What of Pauline's One Nation's Vote, kick out muslims.

And Mr Palmer, he has a score to settle with Mr Abbott.

Oh this is going to be so much fun.

The Liberal Democratic Party polled more than the Greens in NSW.

I almost voted for them by accident myself.  I think they got lots of votes from people that thought they were voting for the LIB / NATS....

They may have the balance.... :o

At least the coalition don't hold absolute power in the senate.

It will be interesting to see how the senate works with so many minor parties.

Swagman wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:59pm: Antony Green has just declared on ABC that labor/greens have lost balance of power in the senate. so good to hear.  you can negotiate with the rest but not the Greens. Yep toothless Greens will be an excellent result. Palmer party, DLP, Xenaphon. Family First, Liberal Democrats are the others.  Different looking Senate.  Most being anti-carbon tax.

most importantly it is a group that can be negotiated with.  Several TV commentators made the point that the the Greens are just flat-out 'no' in the senate so they have to negotiate with others.

Swagman wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:26pm:

The Liberal Democratic Party polled more than the Greens in NSW. I almost voted for them by accident myself.  I think they got lots of votes from people that thought they were voting for the LIB / NATS.... They may have the balance.... :o

some of the comments I heard tonight were that they got a lot of votes accidentally. How is this even allowed to happen? A finger to democracy isn't it?

John Smith wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:24pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:13pm: Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ???? no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up. libs got slaughtered because of work choices and only because of workchoices   .... labor didn't lose this election because of the carbon tax or any other policy, they lost it because of 3 yrs of bad politics  ...

you keep telling yourself that. Libs now have a comprehensive and undeniable mandate for the removal of the Carbon Tax and a senate likely to repeal it.  so bugger off.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:46pm:

____ wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 10:42pm: Xenophon is against carbon pricing. Greens require the balance and Labor to stick to principle over danderous climate change. Correction, That roadblock is Nick Xenophon, who has confirmed he will be digging in his heels on Direct Action, which he has called "clunky and inefficient". He told Business Spectator on Sunday: "I will not support the repeal [of Labor's carbon tax legislation] unless there is a Frontier-style scheme on the table." http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/2/election/xenophon-wont-back-down-carbon-trading Xenophon will play hardball to get his vote to repel. But what are the senate results?

Don't know for sure yet, but Anthony Green and Kerry O'Brien predict that the Greens have lost the balance of power

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:37pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:24pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:13pm: Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ???? no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up. libs got slaughtered because of work choices and only because of workchoices   .... labor didn't lose this election because of the carbon tax or any other policy, they lost it because of 3 yrs of bad politics  ... you keep telling yourself that. Libs now have a comprehensive and undeniable mandate for the removal of the Carbon Tax and a senate likely to repeal it.  so bugger off.

you can cry mandate all you want ... I hope ALP tells them to bugger off.

John Smith wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:44pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:37pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:24pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:13pm: Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ???? no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up. libs got slaughtered because of work choices and only because of workchoices   .... labor didn't lose this election because of the carbon tax or any other policy, they lost it because of 3 yrs of bad politics  ... you keep telling yourself that. Libs now have a comprehensive and undeniable mandate for the removal of the Carbon Tax and a senate likely to repeal it.  so bugger off. you can cry mandate all you want ... I hope ALP tells them to bugger off.

a new and hopefully smarter leader than rudd or Gillard might finally work out that the electorate HATES the carbon tax.  It destroyed Gillard and it destroyed Labor.  It would be in their best interest to repeal it when it comes before parliament in the next few months as a matter of honour rather than fight it, earn the electorates continued wrath and then have the new senate repeal it anyhow.

There is everything to lose and nothing to gain by refusing to repeal the carbon tax.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:52pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:44pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:37pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:24pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:13pm: Swagman wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:08pm: Labor are slow learners. The carbon tax cost them govt and not honouring mandates will see them in opposition for a long time. you mean like when the libs honoured labors mandate for an ETS ???? no, like how the libs honoured the mandate on Workchoices.  Its called ethics.  look it up. libs got slaughtered because of work choices and only because of workchoices   .... labor didn't lose this election because of the carbon tax or any other policy, they lost it because of 3 yrs of bad politics  ... you keep telling yourself that. Libs now have a comprehensive and undeniable mandate for the removal of the Carbon Tax and a senate likely to repeal it.  so bugger off. you can cry mandate all you want ... I hope ALP tells them to bugger off. a new and hopefully smarter leader than rudd or Gillard might finally work out that the electorate HATES the carbon tax.  It destroyed Gillard and it destroyed Labor.  It would be in their best interest to repeal it when it comes before parliament in the next few months as a matter of honour rather than fight it, earn the electorates continued wrath and then have the new senate repeal it anyhow. There is everything to lose and nothing to gain by refusing to repeal the carbon tax.

not sure why you keep trying to convince me, I've told you several times what I think of your mandate .... they'd be stup1d to give Abbott his way ...

it's to run opposition the way Abbott did .... block , block, block ... after all, it worked for Abbott.

Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable.

MOTR wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:57pm:

Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable.

'Authority to govern' comes from where???  THE PEOPLE.  'The people' don't take too kindly to having that authority denied them.  They shafted Gillard and Rudd and Labor over the Carbon Tax tonight.  you really want to go round two on that?  At what point does a party that actually stands for democratic principles accept the unequivocal verdict of the people?  You (and nutters like Shorten) are adopting the Mugabe version of democracy.  Which seems only fair since you pinched his election slogan!

Its time to let democracy have a chance to be heard.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:07am:

MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:57pm: Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable. ! Its time to let democracy have a chance to be heard.

Who told you that you lived in a democracy?

You live in an Oligarchical Corpocracy - a form of totalitarian tyrannical fascism

enjoy your delusional dream state you clown puppet

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:10am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 8th, 2013 at 12:07am: MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:57pm: Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable. ! Its time to let democracy have a chance to be heard. Who told you that you lived in a democracy? You live in an Oligarchical Corpocracy - a form of totalitarian tyrannical fascism enjoy your delusional dream state you clown puppet

I don't know where you were hiding today but the rest of us exerted the priviledges of a DEMOCRACY.  you can keep your paranoid delusions elsewhere and preferably under control with medication.

MOTR wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:57pm:

Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable.

And Australia is listed in the top 5 regions of the world that will be hardest hit by Anthropogenic Global warming effects

We are feeling first - will suffer from it first

There will be nowhere to hide for these corporate fossil freaks

Come on Pauline, you can do it!

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:12am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 8th, 2013 at 12:10am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 8th, 2013 at 12:07am: MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:57pm: Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable. ! Its time to let democracy have a chance to be heard. Who told you that you lived in a democracy? You live in an Oligarchical Corpocracy - a form of totalitarian tyrannical fascism enjoy your delusional dream state you clown puppet I don't know where you were hiding today but the rest of us exerted the priviledges of a DEMOCRACY.  you can keep your paranoid delusions elsewhere and preferably under control with medication.

You believe democracy is casting a vote every few years?

You poor deluded freak puppet clown. You have taken the bait hook line and sinker.

Look up the word democracy - its a simple Greek word. Its a system or socio-political organisation modality whereby the state and instruments of power are controlled by the people/citizenry

Can you provide examples of this anywhere in this country?

Australia is an Oligarchical Corpocracy functioning under the banner of a Monarchy

How can this be democratic?

there are NO democracies in the world today

Open your eyes, lift your head and take a good long look through the bars of your prison cell

(stop wafting that foul putrid stench throughout this noble and peaceful forum you scoundrelous weasel dropping)

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:10am:

Who told you that you lived in a democracy? You live in an Oligarchical Corpocracy - a form of totalitarian tyrannical fascism enjoy your delusional dream state you clown puppet

I think you are the one with delusions.

We have an Ochlocracy.  The minority that pay the majority of the cost of Govt are in effect slaves to the majority that pay the minority of the cost of Govt.

Ours is indeed closer to your socialist utopia than to any Corporatocracy.

The corporates bow to the Govt and the Govt is of the people and it's just that the majority exploit the success of a minority which is why it's not a democracy but an
Ochlocracy.

Occasionally like today, the majority sees the light and works out that other people's money does have a limit........... :P

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:07am:

MOTR wrote on Sep 7th, 2013 at 11:57pm: Take away the price on carbon and you'll eventually lose your authority to govern in the future. When reality hits, those politicians that fostered denialism and fought action will become unelectable. 'Authority to govern' comes from where???  THE PEOPLE.  'The people' don't take too kindly to having that authority denied them.  They shafted Gillard and Rudd and Labor over the Carbon Tax tonight.  you really want to go round two on that?  At what point does a party that actually stands for democratic principles accept the unequivocal verdict of the people?  You (and nutters like Shorten) are adopting the Mugabe version of democracy.  Which seems only fair since you pinched his election slogan! Its time to let democracy have a chance to be heard.

I did say unelectable, longy. The people won't want a bar of leaders who ignored the clear warnings coming from our scientific community. Abbott will be remembered as a fool or something far worse. If Abbott somehow cooks up an alliance in the Senate to remove the price on carbon, the Liberal brand will be tarnished forever. They will be held accountable for this gross act of stupidity. It's for this reason Labor will never vote down the price on carbon.

http://youtu.be/047vmL6Q_4g

Upset results rock Abbott's Senate plan      :)

    by: Christian Kerr
    From: The Australian
    September 08, 2013


TONY Abbott seems set to face an uphill battle steering his agenda through the Senate.    

In upset results, Clive Palmer's Palmer United Party may have taken Senate places in both Queensland and Tasmania.

Independent Nick Xenophon appears sure to be returned from South Australia, while Family First's Bob Day may well have claimed the final position from the state.

The Palmer win in Tasmania and Mr Day's victory have robbed the Coalition of third Senate spot wins they hope for in the two states.

In a surprise outcome Green Sarah Hanson-Young may be returned in South Australia at the expense of "faceless man" and giant of the Labor Right Don Farrell.

The Greens may also have increased their representation with a second senator in Victoria.   


Early results suggest one of the micro-parties, the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts, may have won the last position in Victoria.

Another micro-party that almost broke through at the 2010 poll, the libertarian Liberal Democratic Party, could take a seat.

Results were not available from Western Australia at the time of writing, but they are expected to split three to the Coalition, two to Labor and one to the Greens.

This scenario would put the Coalition with 33 votes in the Senate, short of the 39 needed to control the 76-member chamber.

Labor would have 26 and the Greens nine, also denying them control of the upper house.

That will make the crossbenchers - John Madigan from the Democratic Labour Party, not up for re-election at this poll, Senator Xenophon, Mr Day, David Leyonhjen from the LPD, the Palmer candidates, former rugby league great Glenn Lazarus and Tasmanian Jacqui Lambie, and Motoring candidate Ricky Muir - key to controlling the Senate.

Mr Day is a former Liberal Party officeholder and donor who defaults towards economic rationalists. Mr Leyonhjen will swing the same way. This could open conflict between the more populist crossbenchers.

But while the process may be tortuous, the way is open for the new prime minister to negotiate his platform through.

Any obstacle is a good obstacle.

Senate looms as an obstacle to Tony Abbott

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/senate-looms-as-an-obstacle-to-tony-abbott-20130907-2tcqu.html

I feel vindicated here. I started a thread about the farcical nature of Senate voting before the election and it is interesting - and rather disturbing - to see just how right I am.

It is a farce that parties we haven't heard of have probably got elected to the Senate.

I've been looking over the Senate results on the ABC website and here is the dross that are currently listed as having won a seat in the Senate:

• NSW: Liberal Democratic Party.
  
• South Australia: Family First Party
  
• Victoria: Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party
  
• Western Australia: Australian Sports Party

I doubt these parties have much more than half a quota of primary votes between them.

(In addition, the Palmer United Party are listed as having won seats in Queensland and Tasmania, but I do not count them here because they have polled strongly enough overall to merit election IMO. Xenophon is not counted here either because he polled well over a quota of primary votes.)

Keating called the Senate "unrepresentative swill". Never have his words rung so true as they have with this vote. Minor parties should not be elected based on a lottery, as has clearly happened in NSW; the "Liberal Democrats" won group A on the NSW ballot while the "Liberal and Nationals" group were buried in Group Y.

If ever there's a case to abolish ticket voting, it was eloquently made with this result. I hope both major parties learn a lesson from this. The Liberals in particular should feel aggrieved given that these results have probably cost them seats. The sooner we replace the Senate voting with a simpler system, the better off we will all be.

The system I would like to see abolishes below the line voting, abolishes group tickets, and replaces the above the line vote with optional preferential voting for six parties or more.

The new Senate ballot would look like this:

• List PARTIES in a vertical (not horizontal) list on the left in a large font with boxes that can be numbered. Parties can also be independents.
  
• A dividing line down the middle separates the parties from the candidate list.
  
• On the right the parties list their first four candidates (or eight candidates in a double dissolution election). If these lists are a unity ticket from multiple parties (such as happens with the Coalition in some states), the party affiliation is also listed in parentheses. These candidate lists are only listed for information purposes and cannot be voted on individually because they have no boxes.

To vote, number six party boxes or more. This is optional preferential voting.

Funny if Hanson gets in, she is not likly to support the bastard that organised the slush fund that put her in gaol.

John Smith wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:55pm:

not sure why you keep trying to convince me, I've told you several times what I think of your mandate .... they'd be stup1d to give Abbott his way ... it's to run opposition the way Abbott did .... block , block, block ... after all, it worked for Abbott.

The new opposition will not have Murdoch protecting it or covering up for bad decisions.

skippy. wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 10:17am:

Funny if Hanson gets in, she is not likly to support the bastard that organised the slush fund that put her in gaol.

She is a conservative - none of them are very bright.

matty wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 12:19am:

Come on Pauline, you can do it!

Negotiations between Pauline and Tony will be very interesting. Matty's heart will be torn.