´óÏó´«Ã½

Commentators look at Australia's inconclusive election result.

the nation has sent a message to its politicians on their absence of policy:

"Neither leader managed in the campaign to spell out a clear vision about how they intended to make the reforms in tax, productivity and infrastructure that will help deliver future prosperity. As The Australian has said often, both parties are complacent about the resources boom, happy to let China Inc do the heavy lifting and ducking the tough calls needed to ensure future generations reap the benefits of our mining wealth."

that reform is needed in Australia to deal with the increasing prosperity of China, but with this result, paralysis may set in:

"On the one hand a minority Labor government would probably bring us stability. On the basis that the Coalition in opposition would not be mindlessly obstructionist of the things that really matter. But it would be at great risk of being pulled to the left by a de facto coalition with the Greens in the Senate.
Ìý
"In contrast, at least with a Coalition government it would be simply unable to 'do anything'. Unfortunately, do anything good as well as bad.We need firm reform-focused government. We are not going to get it."

Adelaide's quick action to resolve who will run the country:

"It is not necessarily the ideal recipe for stable government and, at a crucial time with the world's economy still on a knife edge, any democracy needs to have a government capable of making key decisions without being held to ransom by independents - all of whom, quite rightly, have differing agendas on a whole range of issues and have to get the best deal for their electorates.
Ìý
"This electoral dilemma is something we are going to have learn to live with, but it needs to be solved and solved quickly. It must not be allowed to drag on for weeks, as some are predicting."

After having a similar result in May, UK newspapers have also been commenting on the significance of this.

The the differences between the UK's election result and Australia's may mean Australia may have to return to the polls:

"Like Britain, Australia has not had a hung parliament for years nor a coalition government since wartime. Unlike Britain, however, the arithmetic is equally frustrating for both sides. The Labor and Liberal/National parties have won almost the same number of seats. They each need only two or three more to clinch a majority. But there is no third party to woo. Rather there are three re-elected independent MPs, a newly elected Green MP and a fourth independent whose win is yet to be confirmed. Of little electoral consequence until this weekend, they are all now relishing their power, suggesting that they will be swayed by whatever is most beneficial to their constituents. Talks may descend to bargaining over pork barrel politics. The prospects for a stable coalition are not bright."

The a coalition wouldn't work as well as it says the UK's does:

"Australian eyes are already straying across the oceans to Britain, where a coalition government seems to be managing well enough. But the parallels are limited. The handful of MPs who can make a difference in the lower house there are from very different points in the political spectrum. There would be no coherence in a Labor-led coalition or minority government with, or supported by, independents whose leaning is toward the right.
Ìý
"But, equally, a bargain between the much-strengthened Greens and the Liberals would be very hard to strike, given their fundamental differences on environmental matters."

Links in full

•
•
•
•
•