Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

Inflation about to swamp Labor, page-20

First 20 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Cowboyinvestor

23,686 Posts.

33

27/06/24

14:36

Post #: 74509274
Share

Originally posted by pintohoo: ↑

oh ---------- so a Labor party Prime Minister who has won 2 - yes TWO elections on the trot -

you think is going to be, as you say 'simple'(y) deposed and replaced with someone else

In 2018, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) introduced significant rule changes to make it more difficult to depose a sitting prime minister who has won the last election. These changes were aimed at ensuring greater stability and continuity in leadership. The key aspects of the rule changes are as follows:
1. **Leadership Spill Requirements**: A leadership spill can only be initiated if 75% of the members of the parliamentary Labor Party (Caucus) support the motion. This high threshold is intended to prevent frequent and destabilizing leadership challenges.
2. **Post-Election Protection**: For a sitting prime minister who has led the party to an election victory, the threshold for initiating a leadership spill is even higher, requiring the support of 60% of the Caucus. This rule provides additional protection to a prime minister who has recently secured an electoral mandate.
These changes were implemented to address the instability caused by frequent leadership changes within the party, which had been a significant issue in Australian politics in the preceding years[2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party
[2] https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parlia...rp/rp2223/Quick_Guides/PartyChangesChallenges
[3] https://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_...tration/Registration_Decisions/2018/index.htm
[4] https://www.minterellison.com/artic...under-a-new-australian-labor-party-government
[5] https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar.../section?id=committees/reportjnt/024195/27336

May I suggest you stop sucking the
Uncle Frog mushroom gummies

Expand

2 elections? you’re not even making a coherent argument now.

Yes, based on Albanese’s declining popularity and the likelihood of a rate rise causing further decline. Shorten will be garnering the numbers as we speak
4 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

RML

Resolution Minerals appoints industry experts to fast-track US growth strategy

FBU

Fletcher Building 'exploring options' around construction division sale

Listen: HotCopper Wire Podcast 018 – Potatoes, TACOs, and the $120M helicopter heist

ASX Market Close: How a megadam in Tibet pushed us into the red

CIA

'Share long-term visions': Champion Iron rallies on mooted Nippon, Sojitz partnership