One theme that’s come up in commentary on several threads about the Liberal leadership here is that the political suicide of Brendan Nelson has the potential to put the Howard years to bed at last. One other sign of this is how underwhelming and plain boring many of the “revelations” in Yesterday Man’s Memoirs have been - who really cares now about the accumulated ressentiment of a decade and a bit of internal treachery under the Dear Leader? (Howard’s poisonous human legacy, of course, lingers, as last night’s Four Corners demonstrated). Peter Costello is now history, and if he hasn’t acknowledged that, then the man is a greater and more self-serving fool than even most of us suspect. His book launch - presumably televised still today - is a sideshow.
Malcolm Turnbull needs to give up on placating all those who still long for the departed Howard’s firm hand. The Liberal Party needs to eschew stunts and populism and restore its tattered economic credibility (which was actually junked by Howard and Costello themselves - that was obvious enough in last year’s election but now it’s plain as day). It also needs to move with the times and take a responsible position on an ETS and trim its sails to fit the socially liberal winds that have been blowing - unsniffed as they were by the Tony Abbotts and Nick Minchins of the world.
But Turnbull is completely capable of squibbing all this. He may mistake the need to placate the diehard Liberal Right and “defend the legacy” as necessary pragmatism. If he does, he might be safer at the despatch box, but he will be repeating the same mistakes that brought Nelson down. Though without the jam and baked beans.
Turnbull’s selection of a Shadow Cabinet will give us a big clue as to how he’s going to shape the Opposition. Shadow Treasurer and Shadow Climate Change Minister in particular. And make no mistake, he has to shape the Opposition, not try to keep all its factions happy. A very difficult balancing act indeed, because the structural faults in both the party and in its electoral position haven’t been magicked away.
Elsewhere: Some more analysis from Sam Clifford at Public Polity. Update: And more from Pavlov’s Cat.
Blogosphere roundup: More commentary from Possum, Politically homeless, Andrew Bartlett, Corporate Engagement, Musings of an inappropriate woman, Road to Surfdom and Woolly Days.
Another one for the blog roundup: what it feels like for a boi.
Wait, there’s more!: Joanne Jacobs, The Poll Bludger and John Quiggin.
I find it rather interesting that one of the first reactions to him is his wealth - eg comments like “Captain Moneybags” or “Wealthy Banker” presumably to portray him as out of touch, whereas the Rudd family are much wealthier yet don’t attract the same monikers. I guess its a popular view as Turnbull spent some of his speech time describing his poorer childhood.
Kim, I may have misunderstood your post but you seem to be suggesting that Turnbull should shift the opposition more to the left? If that’s what you’re saying I disagree - there’s no point fighting for votes the Greens and Labor are already vying for while eschewing conservative votes. I do agree with you that Howard and Costello lost economic credibility with conservatives by beefing up the welfare state… perhaps Turnbull can advocate a set of small government policies?
Does anybody really think Minchin and his motley assembly of RWDBs are going to take this lying down. The Liberal Party of Menzies is well and truly dead. The Mad Right will not release their grip. They took years to kill off the progressives, lerd by Howard and others, and they ain’t gonna allow any kind of ressurrection under Turnbull of any ieas that might approach sanity. If, course, if I’m wrong, Rudd’s in real trouble.
It will be interesting to see whether Turnbull can drag his party to anything approximating a sensible position on climate change.
He may well have to try crash through or crash to get them there…
Thanks for the link, Kim. I reckon it’s way too early for Turnbull. The party needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, handed back to the moderates and suffer another election loss to get rid of all the dead wood such as Bronwyn Bishop, Phillip Ruddock, etc. Perhaps a double dissolution brought about by Fielding’s opposition to the Luxury Car Tax will give the Libs an opportunity to get some candidates preselected who aren’t hell bent on reliving the glory days of government under Howard.
The old order is dying, and the new is yet to be born. Rudd is home in 2010. The Libs will be bickering until they have yet another cleansing defeat.
From the left to the centre, Chumpai. Support for an ETS and an end to hardline social conservatism is where Rudd is at. It’s precisely Labor voters that Turnbull needs to win. That’s not necessarily attacking Rudd from the left (though David Cameron has shown that can be done - up to a point - in the UK), just moving into the mainstream.
Chris @ 1 - I doubt Therese Rein is wealthier than Turnbull. Turnbull’s seriously wealthy. But I’m sure some of it comes from the fact that he spent time as a very prominent figure in the law and business while Rudd was a public servant then a pollie. And the Eastern Suburbs silvertail image. It may just be a matter of presentation/perception, of course, but these things get entrenched, and anyway, a faux “man of the people” persona a la Nelson wouldn’t wash for Turnbull.
And re Paul’s comment at 5 - getting the Libs back in the centre is going to be very difficult to manage, as I suggested in the post.
Oh and I think that the economic cred lost was equally about fiscal profligacy - and even a total abdication of any concern from Nelson - as Howard style handouts. A small government position would be interesting. Who knows if it’s saleable though? Australians don’t really take to small government!
I still can’t understand why Turnbull wanted the leadership at this point. Labor is very unlikely to lose the next election - I’m pretty sure there’s never been a single-term govt in my lifetime (even Whitlam got re-elected) - and the Libs don’t tolerate losers. He’s very unlikely to ever be Prime Minister.
Update: And more from Pavlov’s Cat.
He probably didn’t. But his hand was forced by Nelson’s decision to spill the leadership.
If he can lead the party to a respectable loss in 2010 (the status quo probably wouldn’t be a bad result for them) they might give him more time.
I’m keen to hear some more of Turnbull’s ideas - the so far unsaid ones.
And I agree with Kim in that a faux “man of the people” persona won’t wash - however, I also believe Turnbull has the capability of coming across as a man of the people - in that I think he has it within himself. The occasion to show it hasn’t yet arrived, well, not without cruelling everything else he was working on, given time and space so far have been limited. But roll the sleeves up, bit of red dust on the bicep, genuine warmth for the farmer and his wife, beers hugs all round (no, don’t vomit yet!), Lucy’s influence for putting forward a very real agenda for women, kick a footy with the kids… hate to say it (in that I wish each were capable), but that’s all much more real than Rudd.
So, the out-of-touch imagery while the danger, can actually be swung completely around and make Turnbull very dangerous. In fact, doing that, is possibly (need more time to think) the only way he can root out the faux-Howard peoples’ man from the Libs, and have them actually back the bloke with genuine regard.
I’ll back Turnbull in what he has to do to succeed. It’s what he has to work with which could kill his ambition.
Rob @ 12 - That’s where it also gets interesting - the expectations game. A lot of Libs must have known they were facing going further backwards under Brendan. Do they really believe Turnbull can return them to the Treasury benches in one go? If the press gallery goes into “real contest” mode too far, it might do them some damage. Turnbull would be better off suggesting that they should go for a two term strategy, but I somehow doubt he will.
And herein is the key to this imbroglio.
The Howardistas knew that:
1. Nelson wasn’t their man. He was just a place-keeper in the post-loss chaos.
2. The Libs wouldn’t win the next election.
Therefore, provoke a spill and run dead so that Turnbull carries the can for the next five years or so.
And Howardistas, still in control of the NSW Branch of the Libs, can still hope to win the election after next.
The question is, did Nelson know of his own role as sacrificial lamb in this sordid affair?
Yes, wouldn’t Turnbull be pushing the “a small swing our way and we’re home” line in the party room?
The timing is fascinating. One considers how he would prefer it: later, with the Libs having worked through the who they are dilemma. But Turnbull seems the sort of person who would rather be the solution to that, ie, “let it be made by me”. And of course to not stand today would have ruined him for the opportunist, which element is rife in the place already. I do believe that if anyone can restate the Liberal Party it’s Turnbull.
No, this is really good stuff. The Rudd Turnbull battles will be great for the country.
If Turnbull fails, it’s a fair bet the Libs will show up as a party whose time is over.
The Greens, then, in this have a fair task ahead of them, too. No more time for the bicker, they need to provide real criticism (so a value results) where needed and seriously consider reinventing themselves in the image of a major, in preparation for the fallout.
FWIW, Nelson in his press conference said “the Rudds” were richer than Turnbull.
It could be fun. Turnbull operates by the maxim “ready, fire, aim”, rather like Mark Latham.
Spiros: let’s hope he’s keeping extensive diaries then!
If I was Rudd I’d be angling for a DD over the ETS. For several reasons - split the Libs over an issue where they are out of line with popular opinion (read the polls folks), have a single and more ideologically congenial party holding the Senate balance of power, remove the risk of Turnbull winning the Libs’ intra-party war and being a threat to you by the next election, and go to an election while you can still blame Howard for any economic woes. Above all you’ll be making the buggers vote against the big pension increases and the tax cuts funded by the ETS (which of course you’ll put up as a single package) and can make that the centre of a “fistful of dollars” campaign.
But I suspect Rudd is simply too cautious to give this a go.
“I suspect Rudd is simply too cautious to give this a go.”
You think?
A shame that Xenopohon wants to keep the Medicare surcharge at 76000 - but thats a start/improvement anyway.
And incidentally, this is the Libs voting against a tax cut.
The Rudd Turnbull battles will be great for the country.
I hope so. I really hope so. It’s looking better than Obama versus McCain, or Harper versus Dion.
It would be great if Rudd did pull the DD trigger, principally over ETS, but I doubt he will. For starters he risks (from his point of view) the Greens gaining more influence in the Senate and pushing the ETS to targets that are actually meaningful, which will put him more at odds with the business lobby. As a Green I’d love this of course, but I won’t hold my breath.
One thing’s for sure, Fielding alone is going to give Rudd more DD triggers than virtually any other government has ever had, and probably all in the first 12 months. It’s clear that Fielding is out of his depth in terms of understanding how to negotiate in the Senate, and a more than erratic weathervane. A salutory lesson on preference deals if nothing else I hope.
I’d love to see Turnbull do a David Cameron and steal the climate change high ground from Rudd - going by his performance as Environment Minister, he’s certainly got largely the right personal beliefs and a more credible track record than Garrett. However I suspect hell will freeze over and Nick Minchin will skate to work before that is allowed to happen.
Hmmmm - from doing it tough in rented flats, to investment banker, to pollie.
Lucky he found a new job or he might have come ended up back in the flat on todays market performance.
No wonder he played down the banker part.
Myriad: perhaps. But Fielding is apparently driving them wacky. At the moment they have to please Fielding, Xenophon, and the Greens to get through anything that the Coalition opposes. That’s mission impossible.
Not to mention that they could pile up a whole bunch of stuff tto ram through in a joint sitting…
Far be it for me to be a Malcolm apologist, but to be fair Turnbull is a self-made multi-millionaire, not born to the lordship like Downer. And his fairly impressive career CV - journo, lawyer, merchant banker, head of ARM etc - would suggest he has much wider life and career experience than Rudd (bureaucrat —-> pollie), Howard (suburban laywer —-> pollie), Keating (pollie from the start) or Hawke (union hack —-> pollie). Ironically Turnbull may have more of the common man touch about him than most PMs in recent history.
I do think for the moment that his appointment augers well for progressive politics, particularly LGBTI equality. This is the first time a PM candidate holds a seat a/ with a high percentage of queer voters and b/ marginal enough that their vote counts. Even Nelson committed himself to staring down the ‘arch-conservatives’ over the current same-sex couple law reform bill should he win, and he was the hard-right’s puppet - so I can only imagine Turnbull as their nemesis will be even more aggressive against them on this issue. If nothing else, it’s in Turnbull’s electoral interests to facilitate this bill’s passage as effortlessly and expediently as possible.
So yeah - I’m willing to give him a shot.
Agree Robert re: Fielding, but I guess my point was I doubt that Rudd would want to fight a DD over the ETS if he could help it. I did notice having just looked that the Oz coverage says that Turnbull has “left the door open” on CC/ETS - guess we’ll have to watch this space. But frankly my greatest fear is that Labor & Liberal will agree on the ETS because that almost certainly spells a piss-weak ETS shambles.
I think a DD is worth just to demonstrate to that f’n unrepresentative swill Fielding that he has *zero* public support in Victoria; and his entire political career was an silly error at ALP HQ, abetted by our utterly bizarre, wrongheaded and undemocratic ‘above the line’, no-actual-voter-prefs-involved-at-any-point hack-ocratic shambles and international embarassment of an upper house electoral system.
Lets’ see what Mal is really made of: how will he reply?
Ps - Sam I agree on Turnbull. He’s certainly not even remotely stupid, was a competent Minister once he got over his lawyer/control freak tendencies, and is a welcome return to small-l liberalism, if he can pull it off. And if he does, he’s smart enough to wedge Rudd all over the place.
Sudden improbable fantasy - Turnbull putting forward a robust ETS in response to the almost certainly milquetoast Rudd/Wong one coming, and joining with the Greens & Xenophon. A girl can dream…
Aside from that, Im broadly supportive of the current mechanisms for determination of senate representation in this country :0)
Sam, why is someone who works for a union (at the highest level) a ‘hack’, wheras someone who works for a newspaper, merchant bank, or the government is not?
Language is a wonderful thing!
Katz@15: My guess is that Nelson took his own decision to call a snap spill last night, perhaps provoked by Bernard Keane’s prescient line in Crikey yesterday:
“Nelson’s got guts and doggedness and has taken a lot of pain while he’s been in the job. He deserves to fall in battle, not withdraw from the contest to spare everyone’s feelings. There’s more honour in that. Turnbull should challenge him and the sooner the better for the country and the party.”
With Costello more or less out of contention by yesterday morning, Nelson decided it was time to take the “honourable” course of action, challenge Turnbull, and “fall in battle” on the numbers. This leaves him looking noble, sacrifcing his own ambitions for the good of the party etc etc…
Had Nelson left it to Turnbull to challenge when the time was ripe (as Keane suggested), then Nelson would have lost control of the heroic narrative (currently being bashed out on the Shanahan/Milne keyboards) and ended up looking like a pathetic victim who did not understand his own time had come. He would have lost the sympathy vote.
Liberal politicians are particularly prone to these boys-own personal battlefield narratives. Keating said early last year that Howard would never ditch the leadership, no matter how dreadful the polls, and regardless of any promises to Costello, because it would look like he was running away from a fight. It was a simple explanation, based on nothing more than a clear-eyed character assessment, and in my view, dead right.
On a bit of a tangent, keep a close watch on Minchin, who has a ferocious temper when crossed. He will be a very angry man right now, and his head might just explode on television.
Apologies. Union leader. No offense intended - point was meant about relative narrowness of career experience (though I guess when Hawke was head of the ACTU it was a bit more influential then than it is now).
Sam, you could written Bob Hawke (Rhodes Scholar —> PM). It’s easy to be selective about people’s backgrounds, which renders them a poor predictor of performance for the job at hand. I would also challenge the notion that “life experience” equates to treading the hallowed halls of both law AND banking. After all, I bet Turnbull couldn’t shoot a wild moose, or ride a snowmobile!
If you had written Bob Hawke (Holder of beer skulling world record —> PM) then we would have been on the same page
Record holding pisshead, Shield Cricketer, Rhodes Scholar and Union leader.
Come on: Has anyone ever been *more* qualified to be Straya’s PM?
Kim @ 7 - I did a bit of googling and you’re correct. Turnbull is worth somewhere around $130 million and the Rudd’s around anywhere from about 60 to over a 100 million (estimates seem to vary widely). Perhaps its just his accent, but I think a lot of people assume Turnbull grew up rich, but if you believe what he’s been saying it was much closer to Rudd’s upbringing.
When did Bob Hawke play Sheffield Shield? There was a Neil Hawke in the 1960s
(link to stats
here), but I don’t think they were any relation.
Aargh, link stuffed up! Try adding a ‘?’ after ‘hsumm’ if you really need to know!
“Nick Minchin’s head might just explode on television.”…
That will be a youtube hit for sure, but what’s gonna get him riled so, the fact that Christopher Pyne will be the south australian with the most influence?
BTW, that thoughtful Mr. FirstDogOnTheMoon has put a board game Lead The Liberals and its rules up for everyone’s enjoyment
Lefty E is clearly not one to spoil the ship for a hap’orth of tar.
Guts and doggedness and baked-beans Oh My!
‘…Australians don’t really take to small government!…’ sez Kim.
And no first Australians or animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture?
The elephant in the room from now on is nothing less now than a fully independent Australia…and I give credit to King Ruddy for being right on top of this hot-button issue.
With moneybags Mal Turdbull in charge of the Titanic, the Jims franchise branch-stacker extraordinaire in charge at the helm, its just got to be all republic, all the time, from now on. Queen Camilla my arse. Mal de Merde.
I don’t know if anyone has read it, but Andrew Elder has a perceptive post on this.
Kim: “Do they really believe Turnbull can return them to the Treasury benches in one go?”
41 thought not, I suspect.
GP
But the short notice looks a lot like an ambush.
If he was prepared to fall in battle, then he would have given Turnbull longer notice to do the numbers, twist arms, etc. Moreover, Nelson would have looked more sporting than he does now. The snap spill looks like a mixture of desperation, mean-spiritedness and disorganisation.
If Nelson thought he had a chance of winning, the snap spill was the way to go. And if he thought he had that chance, how did he make such a huge miscalculation?
Moreover, why not call a spill for the deputy leadership as well? His preservation of Bishop as the Deputy suggests that he was trying as hard as he could not to antagonise more Libs than was necessary.
A person who is looking to lose doesn’t care very much about whom he antagonises, especially if that antagonism helps to achieve the object of defeat.
I believe that Nelson believed he could win!
yair, but it wasn’t a HUGE miscalculation Katz. Only a coupla votes in it, eh?
Agreed, Katz, that Horatio Studs Nelson thought he could win.
I disagree Katz. Nelson knew he was on a losing wicket…
Re Bishop, Malcolm will make his own call in due course. I don’t think he will want the lady with the mad eyes sitting behind him for too long…
What the Liberals need to do know is take a deep breath, and then shut up. Use question time effectively, but make very little noise otherwise. Let the MSM write about the government for a while.
They also need to face reality. They aren’t winning the next election, under almost any circumstances. They need to keep out of their state branches way, because before the next electoral cycle is complete, the Libs should be in power in ACT, NSW & NT, and pretty close in Tasmania, Queensland & Victoria.
The real battle will be in Turnbull’s head, between his intellect and his ambition. We know he is smart, and if he acts smart, he’ll work on a two election strategy a la Beazley. He’ll also devise a way to mollify those inside the Coalition who still want to act like a government in exile. However, if his ambition gets the better of him, he’ll start to act like he can win in 2010, and that won’t work.
And thats my user-friendly, introductory ’soft version’ critique of our upper house electoral arrangements Paul.
Oh, and I was looking forward to the batty years of Charles 111. Still, life has taught me you don’t always get what you want. Or was that the Rolling Stones? Ah, well.
Yawn!
I think you’ll see the exact opposite, HowardC. Starting from tonight: Malcolm the Mauler at 7.30.
Where Rudd has it all over Malcolm is in the political smarts. Rudd has antennae when Malcolm has guts, and it’s debatable whether those guts are for feeling, when sensitivity is needed. Diplomacy on both parts, and as PC says on her blog, dignity. But each can get riled with impatience - whether Malcolm is comfortable with necessary compromises or the extent of those compromises will test him, but even then I think he has the wits to hold forth. It’s the political smarts and the internal bloodforce of the Libs which are agin him. (The party just may not be existentially relevent any more).
Expect Malcolm to tear into Rudd, and watch him further correct that toffee image, from the gitgo.
In the next week you’ll also see him lay out his claim to win in 2010 and ridicule the two term strategy.
In the next month you’ll see five clear policy frames which can very possibly do that.
Except, though, for the under-story which journos will be forever seeking until it’s spent: the internal rejection of what Turnbull puts forward. His battle is directly with the forces within the Libs.
My bets he’ll come across anything but laid back: strong, forceful, publicly exercising his right of power, if anything to overcompensate for the internal rifts let alone to set his very determined agenda to lead the country (something no one else has in the LNP), and very persuasive.
How he handles the subtleties, the nuance, the beast and the dating that the Libs have become will be far the more interesting - and, again, how politically smart he is. On the latter, one imagines he’ll be surrounding himself with the right people for the job (rather than for him), and how he chooses his policy line will reflect that.
I hope he avoids the bonehead stuff like introducing a private appropriations bill. That’s a move from the Robert Doyle playbook on how to turn an advantage into a terminal liability.
I don’t necessarily want him to be “laid-back”, but more measured and thoughful. Unfortunately, if he is focussing on his toffee image and changing that, he was already taken his eye off the ball.
And surrounding yourself with the right people when, like Turnbull, you suffer incomptence so poorly, yet see it everywhere.
Blogosphere roundup: More commentary from Possum, Politically homeless, Andrew Bartlett, Corporate Engagement, Musings of an inappropriate woman, Road to Surfdom and Woolly Days.
“Perhaps its just his accent, but I think a lot of people assume Turnbull grew up rich, but if you believe what he’s been saying it was much closer to Rudd’s upbringing.”
Brought up in the eastern suburbs (Vaucluse and Double Bay) educated at Sydney Grammar. Although it is claimed he went to Grammar largely on scholarship it was still a relatively privileged childhood in comparison to Rudd’s.
BTW Mal is also a Rhodes Scholar
There is one very good reason why Turnbull would enter this now.
Quite simply he will be the next PM after Rudd is dismissed by the Governer General. It’s happened before and it’s going to happen again.
Sorry! Broken link for Musings of an inappropriate woman in the blog roundup. Fixed in the post now and here it is:
http://miss-r.tumblr.com/post/50315753/malcolm-turnbull-sarah-palin
Lefty E: I don’t see why they don’t just bring in above the line optional preferential as is the case in New South Wales’s upper house, and do away with “ticket preferences” entirely. Let the people decide, not the hacks.
Imaginably he’ll find the time and space now to come across a lot more warmly than before, on occasion, ie, in longer interviews and on task. A certain charisma perhaps at times. But he’s still Opp Leader and it’s a long way to the camera from where he sits. And he’s crook when he has to sell something he doesn’t believe in.
What happens if he ends up with a swag of policy positions more ’socially left’ than Rudd?
Interesting times.
“Farewell to old England for ever…”
Armagny - Certainly owns more Hensons.
Julia & Co. will be dusting off the HIH Royal Commission files in.. due season.
Couldn’t agree more Chris! Or optional BTL, so independents have a fair crack too.
Just google “rant / australia / senate” and you’ll no doubt find my, erm, moderate and reasoned arguments on the question in several places.
Exactly how are the Libs’ economic credibility in tatters?
.
I don’t think they deserve the credibility mind, but they’ve got it. And will continue to keep it as long as the ALP keeps insisting on getting elected just as things are about to fall thru the floor.
.
A few years down the track when the bubble’s burst and the greedyguts’ve passed their unpaid bills on to the rest of us the dopey twaddle that makes the bulk of the populace will hold the government responsible and remember Howard with fondness.
.
Oh to insert Economics 101 into every primary class: Look stupid the government doesn’t manage the economy, no-one does.
I do wonder whether it will be possible for Turnball to ‘end the Howard years’. I believe the ’60s was a cultural catastrophe’ types are alive and well and not giving up any time soon. Will Turnball beat ‘em or join ‘em? Will we see him extolling the virtues of open and fair debate viz Intelligent Design in biology class? Will he end up burning his Henson pix?
.
Or will he get the boot. Publishing his own memoir The Last Liberal?
.
C’arn Jack Strocchi where are ya?
Yes, bringing on a Double Dissolution over an ETS is a great idea!
Let’s all ignore whatjust happened in the NT and WA - ALP Governmnets, big majorities, polling showing handy leads over Conservatives - bring it on!
Political genius!
Razor: there’s a world of difference between calling a snap election just because you can, and calling a double dissolution used for the purpose which it was intended.
But that doesn’t mean it can’t mismanage the economy, Adrien!
See:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/12/peter-costellos-legacy/
7.30 Report
Highlights: (a) correctly identifying Rudd’s miscalculation in nominating the republic as the particular important issue facing Australia on which he would like to collaborate with Turnbull, instead of mentioning the economy; and (2) describing how any PM who runs the republic issue when QEII is on the throne is doing it for political reasons, not republican ones.
Lowlight: “My Dad was a battler. It was really hard for him to scrape together my Sydney Grammar fees.” Heaven help us.
BBB
Another one for the blog roundup: what it feels like for a boi.
But that doesn’t mean it can’t mismanage the economy,
.
That’s true and the rub. You can’t make it go but you can fuck it up.
BBB - well maybe it’s supposed to appeal to all those “aspirationals” who are working the proverbial three jobs to send their kids private?
BTW my view on Costello’s ‘management’:
One unresolved legal matter facing Turnbull is the advisory role he took as a merchant banker in the HIH takeover of FIA which could be said to have led to the eventual downfall of that (HIH) insurance bubble. Even if this is legally resolved in Turnbull’s favour, we can expect to hear plenty from aggrieved HIH investors on the inflated value Malcolm is alleged to have put on ex-convict Rodney Adler’s FIA.
Wait, there’s more!: Joanne Jacobs, The Poll Bludger and John Quiggin.
Kim -
.
Your link suggest Turnball’s play. Alternative environmental policy. Amongst his lot he’s somewhat of a pioneer in promoting that. And competition in that field is highly desirable.
.
For the Greens that’s a double-edged blade. On the one hand it marginalizes them; on the other it’s mission accomplished.
.
Personally I’ll be amazed if the fuddy-dudds don’t knife him.
It’s a real litmus test for him, I think, Adrien. He’s obviously - based on the 7 30 report interview - going to present himself as a big L Leader compared to both Nelson and Rudd. So does he go for a good ETS - even a better one than the compromised mess that Rudd looks like serving up - or squib it and do the bidding of Michin and all the denialists…
Paul@3: the RWDBs have no future, the intellectual model that began with Thatcher & Reagan has now fallen apart under Cheney & Palin (Palin has peaked, btw, but that’s for another thread). There is real scope for climate change realists to show themselves, in the same way that it was possible to have a Labor government where communism was no longer an issue.
Sam@5: you can’t hand a party back to people who aren’t there. Real power can’t be given, Prime Minister Costello could have told you that.
Kim@9: you seem to think that small government or Howard-style giveaways are the only two choices. I don’t, and Turnbull has greater room to manoever too.
Katz@15: government does funny things to the Liberal Party, brings in whole swathes of new members. An O’Farrell Government in NSW would see an influx of new members such as would tip the balance, as happened under Greiner. Nelson was so disconnected from the party machine he wouldn’t know if the Trotskyites had taken over.
Robert@16: depends what you mean by ‘fails’, really. Let’s write Robertson off for a start.
Spiros@18: no he doesn’t, you don’t make the money he’s made by doing that. Might get you places in the NSW ALP Right though.
DD@20: you can’t seriously expect Labor would win an election on that. Oh well, I suppose John Hewson did win the 1993 election on policy-wonk issues, so you may be right. All those Labor people who spent 11 years in the wilderness, they’ll be champing at the bit to get some ETS action! Yeah!
Robert@26: assuming there’s a pile of stuff ready to go …
Guido@44 and Kim: thanks.
The first. One of those rare occurrences where good policy and good politics go together. If he squibs it people will see him as weak. And they’ll be right.
.
.
I do suspect however it would’ve been wiser of him to let someone else win this time. He’ll probably lose the next election. Kevvie’s still popular. But he has a very big ego. I know. I’ve been in the same room as him and I felt crushed up against the wall. And it was a very big room.
.
Methinks he’ll have to work on that one. Arrogance is grounds for dismissal in ‘Straya. Unless yer a footy playa of cawse.
Not necessarily, Andrew, but I’d be interested in your speculation about which way Turnbull might go.
Not quite, Adrien. It’s the perception of arrogance. Name me a PM who wasn’t arrogant.
Name me a PM who wasn’t arrogant.
.
Alrighty then. I will. Um, um, um….
.
Touché
Who’s up for Treasury spokesperson? Samantha Maiden at the OO is reporting that:
Mr Abbott is understood to have told colleagues that he wants to be “fully in harness” in the Turnbull era.
I wonder whether Abbott also wants to be on the front bench?
Actually harking back to the poisonous legacy of Howard as shown by 4 Corners last night, Malcom Turnbull is on the record as supporting the Howard policy on immigration. He comes across as this social progressive, but maybe things are not all what they seem below the surface. Also a 4 Corners program on him shows him mixed up with some company scandal? Apparently he might have to spend some time in court clearing his name. That’s going to look great for an opposition leader.
Whatever it is though, the man emits a corona of electric sparks. Things were getting pretty dull here with Rudd and Swan not getting much of a challenge from the ineffectual, burbling Nelson and the booming old bore, Costello. Hopefully Turnbull should test their mettle a bit more. I’m almost over the three-legged race going on in the USA.
I was disappointed with Turnbull tonight on 7.30 Report when he said the Republic should wait until the Queen dies. What on earth does the Queen have to do with it????? This is our Constitution, not England’s…
Megan,
Without wanting to sound like an apologist, I think Turnbull’s point is a very realistic one. The current Queen engenders a significant amount of affection in Australia. Realistically, a new referendum will not succeed until she is no longer the monarch.
I’m quite sure that Turnbull hasn’t given up yearning for a Republic.
I’ll give you a 57 year old truck drivers veiw of Turnbull. He hasn’t seen a hard yard in his life, been groomed for this by the sivertails that own him, he’s made made his money legally, but I guarantee not ethicaly or morally. In short he’s just another born to rule , plum in the mouth squatter, who should be treated with the contempt he, and those of his ilk, so richly deserve.