Has he quit?
He has resigned and will leave at the end of his current contract.
But now the prominent womenâs refugee advocate, domestic violence campaigner and Australian of the Year finalist has had her assets frozen by the powerful NSW Crime Commission following an investigation into âserious crime related activityâ and her âunexplained wealthâ.
I would really like to see an end to Australian of the Year. Full of stupid politics.
Actually, same with all official awards, honours etc. Would love to see Turnbull do away with them.
I sort of agree, although it is good for people who dedicate themselves to good causes get recognised but not as âAustralian of the Yearâ.
1 Like
Not sure if mentioned but there is support in Parliament for fixed 4 year terms with a set date for each election - the same as the US and other countries. I think this is an outstanding idea. Will be much better for the country. The only problem is if you have fixed 4 year terms, then the senate has 8 year terms and not many people would agree with that! So that needs to be looked at! A bill will be presented to parliament by a Liberal MP and the Labor Party has said they will support it.
In order for this to happen - there will need to be a referendum.
I think itâs a great idea, will allow a government to make tough decisions early on and give them a bit more time to get things done. Will also stop all the âwhen will the election beâ talk and shit like that.
No, no, no, no no!
Especially when we canât even have Prime Ministers (and State Premiers, in NSW at least itâs so bad that itâs laughable) in the job for a full term, we need to have Federal (and State) Elections more often, not less often! Every year or two seems more appropriate these days IMO, because heaps can change in four years!
1 Like
Are you serious? I mean this is the nicest possible way but you have no idea about politics if you think having an election every year or 2 is a good idea⌠Wow 
3 Likes
I knew that my opinion wasnât going to be popular, but I still think four year terms for Federal Parliament are way too long when we have leaders that donât even last two years in the job!
I can go along with the idea for a fixed date/time of year though.
4 years is reasonable; the UK has 5 year terms, while the USA is insane with every other year being an election year (for congress) where congress used to get a year of work done before the electioneering began, but now instead what resulted - combined with the flawed idea of primaries - is that extremism has taken hold and nothing works, because the politicians (particularly on the right wing party) are too scared of the extreme part of their party to compromise, and compromise is essential for the system to work (true for both the Westminster parliamentary system and the US-style system).
Australia has succeeded the most and had the best economy when we have had long term governments (Howard, Hawke/Keating). Constantly changing leaders doesnât help the country, so how would constantly changing governments?!
I think 4 year terms, even 5 year terms would be muvh better!
1 Like
But you are not voting for a âleaderâ you are voting for a party. It shouldnât matter who the leader is because voters are voting for a parties views and these, as you will see with Malcolm and Tony, will not change with leaders.
I am all for a fixed period and 4 years seems to be reasonable.
3 Likes
Exactly right.
Agree 100% with fixed four year terms for the HoR but theyâll need to reform the senate if they go that route IMO - 8 year terms for senators are just far too long.
1 Like
your not eveing doing that. your voting for a person. thats why someone can leave a party they were elected with (see cory bernadi) and nothing happens in terms of forcing a by-election. itâs my opinion that if someone is elected under a party i they leave that party a by-election should be triggered
Interesting. Something I didnât really consider until you just brought it up. Well yeah I guess that is the sticky situation. You are/should be voting for a party with certain political views. If someone decides to leave that party, retire etc there needs to be an alternative. At the end of the day Cory Bernadi would have used funding from the Coaition. He is under a contract and if the Coalition really needed that seat there should be something they could do about him breaking that contract. Maybe someone else could shed some light on this.
They should change the law so that whoever does that would be forced to lose their seat and have to recontest it as an independent. That should stop them from doing it mid-termâŚand acting so shonky by using the partyâs funds to get elected and then stab them in the back to sing their own tune.
1 Like
I think Iâd be in favour of term limits on MPs and Senators before Iâd be in favour of fixed terms. Something like, you can only be in parliament for three elections in the HOR and two elections (cycles) if youâre in the Senate. That way political parties donât become full of crusted old farts and we see young people with different ideas and more enthusiasm brought into politics frequently. And donât take my word for it, old mate Trump is in favour of term limits too 
Hate fixed terms. It only means weâll begin to see long election campaigns like the US, which is not something I am really excited about tbh.
1 Like
While I agree that fixed terms have problems and just changing from 3- to 4-year terms for House of Reps would be fine, I think 3 terms as MHR & 2 for Senator is way too short. We donât want the place to be full of crusty old farts but we shouldnât throw away all experience either; that would just replace one problem with another (bunch of incompetents).
But we donât elect parties to a seat, we elect representatives and it just so happens that theyâre affiliated with a party.
Forcing MPs to go through a by-election if theyâre dumped/resign from a party only solidifies political parties in politics more, and punishes MPs who stick to their convictions and go against the will of a party for the better interests of their constitutents. What we want is less partisanship and more compromise.
Your recommendation would also mean political parties could dump ârenegadeâ MPs and force the taxpayer to cough up for another by-election. It would only give political parties more power at the expense of local politics.
1 Like
Assuming fixed terms of four years each, thatâs twelve years for a MHR and sixteen for a Senator.
Assuming the current unfixed three year convention remains in place, maybe four elections for an MHR and three for a Senator would be a compromise.
There are plenty of members in politics who sit in safe seats and never have to fight for their constituents. The Right Honourable Tony Abbott is one of them. Forcing a party to run another candidate to replace local MPs in an electorate would allow more currently âsafe seatsâ to be contestable and would thus make it more attractive for political parties to run candidates in seats they otherwise wouldnât. Labor didnât even run a candidate in Joe Hockeyâs by-election.