Fractured verdict Down Under

The people have spoken, but it's going to take a little while to determine exactly what they have said, Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard told supporters on Saturday night as it became clear that her Labour Party has failed to get an absolute majority in the parliament.

Taking a line from former US President Bill Clinton, Gillard tried to put up a brave face in the shunning snub she got from the Australian electorate.

The fact of the matter is that the Australian people have spoken out in very clear terms against the leadership of Gillard and the way she ousted her predecessor Kevin Rudd. Many analysts have said that Gillard misread the short period of honeymoon when as prime minister her approval ratings were high.

Although people say that the Australian voters are angry over the way Rudd was removed and punished Gillard for that, the major factor that contributed to massive losses was that Gillard's election campaign was marred by damaging leaks and party infighting.

Apart from this, the Labour Party paid a price for Rudd's decision to shelve the climate change legislation, an emissions trading scheme and the row with the country's big mining companies over a proposed tax on profits.

On the other hand, conservative opposition leader Tony Abbott, known for his image as a gaffe-prone "Mad Monk", ran a disciplined campaign.

Nobody gave him a chance for the top job when he took over the leadership of the Liberal Party. In fact, he was way behind Gillard when she decided to go for the snap polls. But the verdict is not in favour of Liberal Party either.

The fractured verdict has produced the country's first hung parliament in 70 years, triggering a period of uncertainty and instability as the fate of both parties now rests in the hands of four independents and a Green's MP.

People have already started talking about horse-trading. An Australian government has not had to rely on the support of independent lawmakers to rule since 1942.

The problem has been further aggravated by neither of the parties conceding defeat. Abbott has already claimed the outcome showed Australians wanted new leadership.

On the contrary, Gillard has vowed to deliver "stable and effective", claiming she is still the leader as her party had won more popular votes and started negotiations with independents. The question is how one can form a stable government with the support of handful independents whose allegiance is not known?

Recently, Britain too faced a hung a parliament in 40 years. But there two well established political parties Conservatives and Liberal Democrats joined hands and agreed to work according to a common agenda.

This scenario looks remote presently as both parties race to woo the independents, who will try to get the best deal they can for their constituencies.

So, local issues rather than national will decide the fate of the next Australian government.

It will be interesting to watch how either of leaders is able to cobble a coalition government.

But before this could happen, there is already talk about next elections as most of analysts believe that such an agreement will not last a full term.