Clive Palmer’s negotiations with Christopher Pyne obviously didn’t go as well as the Minister for Education thought.
The government should set people free so they can help the country and not need to work in boring jobs because of their debt.
The PUP leader and Member for Fairfax has also put pen to paper for The Guardian:
The Abbott government’s first budget delivered for the lobbyists and donors of the Liberal party. The age of entitlement has arrived. But out in the western suburbs of Melbourne, in the Hunter Valley, in Western Australia and Queensland, in New South Wales and the Northern Australia and right across the nation, the people are moving. The 46% of voters that didn’t vote for Liberal or Labor in the Western Australian election may soon be 60%. The face of power and politics in Australia may be changing forever.
If tech companies long to disrupt markets, then perhaps Clive is inflicting a bit of “disruptive innovation” on the political sphere.
Voters are actually looking more closely at the anti-politician, the #resistance plutocrat Clive Palmer, who lists unpredictably between high parody and precision “truth” bombing. Palmer in this budget period has emerged as that character from Shakespeare who somehow, despite absolute randomness and exquisite incoherence in the delivery (or perhaps because of it), cuts through the chaos. He’s the character who manages to narrate the tragedy in ways the protagonists can’t because they are too busy spinning their wheels in the court intrigue and foul murther.
Those developments alone have got to be the very definition of interesting times.
The voting public in the post-budget washup appears to be sending Abbott a clarion message – they aren’t buying the Coalition’s version of national interest, made manifest in last Tuesday’s budget, nor are they buying Abbott’s latest outbreak of post-truth, post-fact dissembling.
In the hit to Abbott’s personal authority we see in the latest published opinion polls, voters are giving the thumbs down to the prime minister’s attempt to blame them for not listening adequately to his “mantras” before the election (which by his own admission he minimised and maximised, according to the audience) – rather than blaming himself for promising them hand on heart that he would deliver a world that he evidently had absolutely no intention of ever delivering.
But what to make of Clive Palmer’s negation of almost all the budget measures?
(Incidentally, there’s more than a little contradiction between The Greens’ campaign to #bustthebudget and their statements about what they may and may not vote for. It’s hard to square intimations that they will support fuel excise indexation with a call to “reject the 2014 Budget“.)
My strong suspicion is that Clive Palmer will equivocate over some of the Budget measures, thinking out loud to draw attention to PUP and to the impacts of the said measures, then end up voting against most of them.
The face of power and politics in Australia may be changing forever.
Sooner rather than later.
PUP has everything to gain and very little to lose from a double dissolution election. Labor and The Greens may be talking the talk, but I think Clive is walking the talk.
Don’t forget that the anti-politician Palmer learnt his politics at the feet of Joh Bjelke-Petersen. Now he was a cunning populist…