In the light of the hung parliaments and hung senates that seem to be the political reality these days the so-called 'Independent' candidates should have to clarify before the election which side of politics they would support in the event of a hung parliament.

Voters should know before they vote.

The Windsor & Oakshotte debarcle is testimony to that.

Instead of a poll you should find out what is wrong with a liberal party so that the independents would back them

We had Windsor & Oakshotte both ex-national party members backing a labor government, the bloke from Victoria who is a ex-liberal won't back a liberal government in Victoria and it looks like one of the independents in S.A.who is a ex-liberal member could back a labor government in S.A.

So what is wrong with the liberal party that ex liberal party and national party members won't back a liberal/coalition government. It looks like something in the liberal party stinks if ex members won't back them.

Well Wisey, that's why I raised the poll question.

An independent shouldn't back either side of politics because that 'defeats being independent'.  If they decalre their ideological preference are they voiding their independence?

I for one would want to know which side of the political fence they're on up front and I'm sure the people of Windsor's and Oakshotte's electorates would have as well.

Nobody is a total fence sitter.

The Democrats tried but they leaned too far left and became irrelevant. 

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 8:34am:

Still throwing a tanty lovey.

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 9:20am:

THIS!!

Why on earth should the Liberals expect an independent to support them after the Liberals have spent so much time denigrating him?

The independents have stated that they will seek stability, and so are more likely to support whichever of the major parties has won more seats. On the latest count, that is Labor. If the Liberals had won more seats, it would also be fair for the independents to support them. That may yet happen if a Labor seat was to fall to the Liberals in a by-election.

---

Minority governments supported by independents or minor parties are a fact of life in Australian politics. If it happens, deal with it. Every single state and territory - as well as the commonwealth - has had a minority government in the past 25 years. That's right, every single one.

Not all turned out well of course. Some minority governments were defeated at the following election - Gillard/Rudd, Borbidge. Others won the following election in a landslide. It all depends on where the government is in an election cycle and how well it governs in minority. Historically, Independents are more likely to give their support to the party or coalition that already has the greater numbers because this makes for a more stable government. If the numbers are tied, it is then that they are most likely to give support based on their personal preference.

It is also plausible that independents can switch sides and change the government on the floor of parliament. This is how the Menzies government was defeated on the floor of the house in 1940 after a budget appropriation bill was amended by being reduced by a token ten pounds. This demonstrated that the government no longer had the numbers to govern so Menzies resigned.

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:32am:


If it were neutral there would be options for declaring whichever and not declaring whichever since independants change their minds a lot and dont back same parties all the time

SOB

Setanta wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 11:30am:


You will find that it was individuals and not the party that sided with the GST, some voted for and some against.

Post GST you had Bartlet & Stott The Spoiler who were just as pinko as you.

They killed the Democrats off by their blatent lefty leanings.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:55am:


That's covered by the final question IMO SOB.

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:45am:


Fine, then they just have to be up front and say exactly that before the election.

Don't you think that is an important issue for a potential voter?  Sometimes it's pretty obvious who they would support just by their rhetoric and history.

Wilkie for example is a raving Lefty.  An ex-Green candidate.

Katter is more from the Right.  An ex-coalition MP.

I know it cuts both ways. 

In effect what you are really saying then is that independents should not be independent and join one of the two parties that will form Government...

Yet another big flaw with Representative Democracy (or minimalist democracy) reveals itself...