Political question

[lal-au0]

This thread is about a technicality and NOT about who is the worst/most inept party/politician.

Please stay within the topic.

I am NOT interested in another tony/the other labor guy/whoever bashing.

My questions are:

1) can tony just bumble around until the next election (in 4 years?) not getting his budget through until then?

2) isn't that what a double dissolution is for?

3) if almost every single thing he wants to do gets thrown out by the senate doesn't that mean that his government isn't working and therefore there must be new elections?

[gkam2]

---

@paintsew007 wrote:

What we need.....is to be rid of self-serving, lying politicians like Tony Abbott and his Team 'Astraya maaates

---

So much for rational debate.

[fourandsixpants]

Okay. .....but this is what these threads are about. I can give my opinion......you can infer that my opinion is irrational or that I am not debating in a rational way.....which is it pls?

Or is it that you disagree with my opinion that we need to get rid of self-serving, lying politicians like Tony Abbott and his LNPer maaaates?

[wilk1149]

I'm with you paints but I believe that if they are not like that when they enter they soon are contaminated like apples in a barrel

[vicr3000]

Paint

Read the OPs post.

Everyone else seems to have been able to control themselves.

[aftanas · Accepted solution]

---

@lal-au0 wrote:

This thread is about a technicality and NOT about who is the worst/most inept party/politician.

Please stay within the topic.

I am NOT interested in another tony/the other labor guy/whoever bashing.

My questions are:

1) can tony just bumble around until the next election (in 4 years?) not getting his budget through until then?

2) isn't that what a double dissolution is for?

3) if almost every single thing he wants to do gets thrown out by the senate doesn't that mean that his government isn't working and therefore there must be new elections?

---

The answer is no.  Pursuant to section 5 of the Constitution the Governor‑General may dissolve parliament and call elections.  By convention this is only done on a request from the Prime Minister.  Double dissolutions are provided for under section 57 of the Constitution and occurs if a bill is twice rejected by the Senate.  However, under section 57 the Governor-General is not required to dissolve parliament: it is a discretion and, by convention, is only exercised upon a request from the Prime Minister.  This was the problem with the dissolution of the Whitlam government in 1975: Governor-General John Kerr exercised the discretion in the absence of a request from the Prime Minister.  After what happened to John Kerr, no Governor-General will ever ignore the convention again.

Whether the government is working or not, parliament will only be dissolved on a request from the Prime Minister.  However, I think if the government is failing so badly because of stubbornness on the part of the Prime Minister, the government caucus will act to correct the problem.

[fourandsixpants]

So this is why Tony Abbott awarded a high ranking member of The Crown a Knighthood then?

 A 'protection' award? a 'look after me/don't be too harsh on me' award ?......

ref. the GG powers-the GG acts on behalf of the Queen, remembering that the PM of Australia swears an oath of allegiance to The Queen  ??

....seems like it to me

[fourandsixpants]

to aftanas ref...... "After what happened to John Kerr, no Governor-General will ever ignore the convention again...."

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Can't see the people of Australia 'boo-ing' and 'hissing' Cosgrove if he dissed Abbott.

[fourandsixpants · Accepted solution]

to the OP:

However, there are some powers which the Governor-General may, in certain circumstances, exercise without – or contrary to – ministerial advice. These are known as the reserve powers. While the reserve powers are not codified as such, they are generally agreed to at least include:

1. The power to appoint a Prime Minister if an election has resulted in a ‘hung parliament’; 
2. The power to dismiss a Prime Minister where he or she has lost the confidence of the Parliament; 
3. The power to dismiss a Prime Minister or Minister when he or she is acting unlawfully; and 
4. The power to refuse to dissolve the House of Representatives despite a request from the Prime Minister.

http://www.gg.gov.au/governor-generals-role

[fourandsixpants]

to the OP

A Governor-General may be recalled or dismissed by the monarch before their term is complete. By convention, this may only be upon advice from the Prime Minister, who retains responsibility for selecting an immediate replacement or letting the vacancy provisions take effect.

No Australian Governor-General has ever been dismissed and it is unclear how quickly the monarch would act on such advice.

The constitutional crisis of 1975 prominently raised the possibility of the Prime Minister and the Governor-General attempting to dismiss each other at the same time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor-General_of_Australia

....wouldn't this situation cause a stirring in the colony?

[lal-au0]

so no dd then.

tony would never do that.

we can only hope that the queen/GG have mercy with us all.