Last week the Prime Minister made a plea to the House, for the members to vote in the national interest, not their party interest. Where are the members of the ALP who are voting in the national interest?
Last week the Prime Minister made a plea to the House, for the members to vote in the national interest, not their party interest. Where are the members of the ALP who are voting in the national interest?
Heh. Snippy. Though I must admit all those Rudd-ian claims about being above politics, pragmatic, bla bla bla, are looking rather hypocritical in light of the wedge delivered to the Opposition over the last week.
Is “no bill is better than the negotiated one” the unstated premise of this outburst?
I would agree that the negotiated one is worse than the intoduced one, which in turn is worse than the Garnault papers led us to expect; but my view is that an act that can be amended is better than no act at all, and not just because it’s good to ante-up with something before Copenhagen.
Or do I have the unstated premise wrong? Is it “I’m a Minchkin“?