That double dissolution came about simply because the major political parties wanted even more control over who should be elected to both Houses of Parliament. They don't want free thinkers in parliament.

And the election is being called because the Senate refused to accept a Bill that was aimed at the union movement, nothing more.

Sure, inquiries have shown some union officials have been crooks and they need to be dealt with by the courts of law, but the problem goes much deeper than that. My understanding of the law is that it is just as illegal to offer a bribe as it is to accept one. So far, we have heard of bribes being paid to these officials, but we don't know who initiated these deals, if it was a case of 'If you pay me a bribe, I will make sure there are no work disruptions', or 'If I pay you a bribe, will you ensure there are no disruptions?' Same result, but quite different origins.

There is no doubt that some of the union officials have abused their positions, but there must be questions asked on both sides.

One party wants an inquiry into the banking industry, the other side says this is unnecessary but it is obvious that some big questions have to be asked about the activities in corporations such as the Commonwealth Bank, the National Australia Bank, the Macquarie Bank, IOOF, and 7-Eleven, for a start.

If some union leaders end up in court and possibly in jail for illegal activities, why should those from 'the other side of the fence' be treated differently.

Is there any reason one crook could end up in jail while other crooks are free to continue their illegal activities?

It does seems rather petty that the election has been called because parliament refused to pass a seemingly not-very-important Bill about keeping the unions under control.

Labor wants inquiries into the top level banks and financial industry, but neither side seems interested in establishing a Federal ICAC that could investigate all and any illegal or suspicious actions by anyone.

The simple fact is that all Australians are aware that there are people and organisations on both sides of the fence that have regularly abused their powers.

Mr Turnbull will also have a big task in convincing the voters that his Coalition team we will be voting for is not the same team that was elected nearly three years ago. Will the voters forget the long list of promises made by Mr Abbott but broken immediately after he and his party won office? Sure, those promises were made by the previous prime minister, but not one of Mr Abbott's team corrected him, so the voters had to assume what he said was Coalition policy!

That aside, the voters should be looking for a team that has policies that will have a long-term impact on Australia and its people. Short term problems and short term fixes are simply a waste of time and money.