MAD doctrine doesn't translate in modern domestic politics

Nobody involved in negotiating this deal would have been under any illusion. They would have known that voters would be furious.

However they would not have cared, first because they could not see past the arguments they advance to argue that by ensuring that they continue to run things they way that they want to, they are the saviours of democracy and secondly because they have got to the point that they do not care if the voters are forewarned.

Under the MAD theory all that matters is that everybody holds their nerve.

One problem was that, whatever politicians respect or lack thereof for voters may be, four months out from an election, Coalition MPs were not prepared to insult them.

I suspect that another problem was that the money would go to federal offices of parties, making state branches supplicants - not exactly a great motive for state offices to support the proposal.

Last week we saw also hypocracy as usual.

The Greens cloaked themselves in the mantle of virtue, but said they would take the money.

It also seems that had at least an inkling of what was going on and did not tell anybody, even though it clearly breached their agreement with the Government.

A cynic might think that there was a wink and a nod and that the Greens would protest, but not too much.

Labor and the Coalition both took the high moral ground. Democracy is under threat. Both sides of politics are at risk of being captive to a declining donor base-read a few large unions on the Labor side and the likes of mining moguls on the Coalition side.

The solution: buy off the political parties so that they do have to succumb to these evils.

However, from the splendid isolation of the Hill in Canberra, politicians and commentators alike do not get that we do not buy the argument.