disproportionate funding , page-2

poxndexter

I agree fully with your assertions.

But, in my opinion, it has absolutely nothing to do with the extra $10B funding for the Independents electorates.

As was posted here on HC two weeks ago, it has everything to do with Labor (Gillard) doing whatever it takes to remain in power.

Labor would have promised the Suez Canal to the Independents if it meant securing their support.

So, the issue of "disproportionate funding", whilst valid and reasonable, is not the substantive argument here.

Labor and Gillard "HAD" to retain power. Nothing was off limits to be promised. Because if they didn't, both Labor and Gillard would have been banished to the bowels of political life for many years to come.

Some may argue that is where they belong, based upon their demonstrated performance, but i will leave that discussion to others.

cheers.