I am appalled by the arrogance of the Prime Minister declining to call an election now, before the detail of her carbon tax is revealed. It’s been almost a year since the Liberals lost – is it really fair for them to have to wait another two before they get to go again? Why can’t we just keep having elections until the Liberal Party wins?
It’s what we do with football grand finals – the losing team gets to demand a rematch to be held immediately. It’s what we do in any other competitive arena, where a decision is reached between two sides and immediately junked because the loser won’t accept it. Why should the losing side not get to keep going just because they lost? Why can’t we have weekly grand finals? Why can’t we have elections, if not every week, at least every six months?
And in the case of Gillard, it’s even more important, because she BROKE HER WORD. In exactly the same way as when the rightful rulers of Australia (the Liberal and National parties) promised at the 2007 election to implement an emissions trading scheme and then blocked it, she promised not to implement a carbon tax and then changed her mind. And, in contrast with all those times John Howard broke a “non core” promise, and wasn’t required to call a new election to renew his “mandate”, there’s one fundamental difference which makes anything but a new election completely unacceptable: if we don’t have an election now, then the Liberals can’t govern for at least another two years.
Even though their supporters in the community and News Ltd want them to. It’s just so unfair.