Telstra Connectivity Issues Why do they play tennis in summer?

52 sitting days for the senate

January 19th, 2009 at 05:02pm

An email to 2GB’s Jason Morrison:

Good afternoon Jason,

Welcome to the drive show.

I’m in awe at the arrogance of this government in having such a low number of sitting days for the senate. As far as I can see, with the ETS and other complicated and convoluted legislation set to go through this year, plus the usual lengthy process of approving the budget, it looks to me as if the Rudd government either want to turn the senate in to the house of the rubber stamp by rushing them through all of the legislation, or they’re trying to trigger a double-dissolution.

Perhaps a double-dissolution isn’t such a bad thing…although I’m not convinced that the current opposition would do a better job, not until Julie Bishop and Joe Hockey are the leadership team anyway.

Samuel Gordon-Stewart

Entry Filed under: Talkback Emails

Print This Post Print This Post


  • 1. davky  |  January 19th, 2009 at 11:10 pm

    I honestly don’t believe that we will ever see a voluntary double dissolution.

    Since 1996 it seemed to have been a fantasy of the political journos to have an ‘bonus’ election. In reality, the ALP will be reasonably happy with the current Senate. (They can either deal with the Coalition, the Greens or the minors – so many options and possible trade-offs to make)

    The journos were always claiming that Howard was considering a Double Dissolution but he was never stupid enough to risk his government even when the Senate was hostile (they needed either the ALP or the Democrats to pass legislation.)

    As for Julie Bishop, I find her really awkward to watch. She reminds me of the loner girl at school who gets picked on. (Doesn’t make her a bad person or policy maker, but it may make her hard to get elected)

    Just my two cents…

  • 2. padders  |  January 20th, 2009 at 8:04 am

    My choice of Opposition leadership team has always been Peter Costello as leader and Sharman Stone as deputy. It won’t happen, so I’ll just add my two bob’s worth on Julie Bishop. People need to be aware that just because someone was a good minister in government (particularly after a long time in government) does not necessarily mean that they will translate to being an effective shadow minister in opposition. Being in opposition requires different strategies, different thought processes and different tactics to being in government. Sadly, Julie Bishop has not made the transition to opposition well, and has certainly not been helped by requesting and being given the Treasury portfolio. She is too lightweight in this portfolio. It needs to be filled by someone with a bit of “fire in their belly”. I think Bishop is very capable and certainly should be in the shadow cabinet – just not in Treasury.

  • 3. legshagger  |  January 21st, 2009 at 12:21 pm

    Samuel, I hope you are not banishing Julie Bishop and Joe Hockey to political obscurity … any tip or endorsement from you seems to be a kiss of death!


January 2009

Most Recent Posts


Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg and modified for Samuel's Blog by Samuel Gordon-Stewart.
Printing CSS with the help of Martin Pot's guide to Web Page Printability With CSS.
Icons by Kevin Potts.
Powered by WordPress.
Log in