I’ve just had a piece published at the ABC’s The Drum on what I think the broader implications of the extraordinary series of events we’ve witnessed over the last 24 hours or so are. For the convenience of LP readers, I’m reproducing the text over the fold.
NB: Previous LP discussion of the leadership spill is here.
24-hour media cycle does no favours for our democracy
We are all New South Welsh-persons now.
Three Tweets encapsulated the extraordinary series of events which brought down a first term Prime Minister:
“We live in fickle and disposable times.”
“Damn poll driven politics. Narrow one dimensional snapshots of a single point in time are meaningless.”
“A certain smugness in the media at this coup by commentariat.”
Australians don’t pay anything like the constant attention to politics that suffuses the world of the journosphere, the political tragics, the commentariat. Or, of course, the world of Labor MPs and Ministers, many of whom were among the last to know that a coup against Kevin Rudd was in the works yesterday.
A lot of citizens will only be hearing now for the first time that Australia has a new Prime Minister. I’ve just had an email from a friend asking what has happened, and I won’t be the only one. My Facebook feed is full of people expressing shock that this could occur.
There was a significant moment on ABC tv this morning when Chris Uhlmann, asked about the public’s response to this sequence of unlikely events, could only answer that he didn’t know, and segue into a discussion of how Canberra public servants are feeling.
Australia is not contained in Canberra, not that Canberra is a bad thing. But the political class needs to remember that.
Much as those attached to the verities of the Westminster system might protest otherwise, it’s difficult for many to come to terms with the fact that an elected PM has been torn down.
And it will be particularly difficult if the plotters can’t get beyond policy wonk talk, process stuff, egos, and insider ALP obsessions. ‘The polls made us do it’, ‘Rudd was a bad chair of meetings’ and ‘Alister Jordan’ won’t cut the mustard.
Let’s make no mistake. It is a historic day for our country to have a female Prime Minister.
But it is also a historic tragedy that a first term Prime Minister, the first Labor leader to win a national election since 1993, has been politically executed by his own party. It’s a tragedy which will set a disturbing precedent.
Julia Gillard has become Labor leader at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons, and through the agency of the wrong people.
But let’s leave that aside. What does this event tell us about post-modern politics?
A few days ago, talk of a leadership challenge appeared to be the preserve of a bunch of urgers in the press gallery. No one outside the hermetic Canberra circle could have realistically expected what unfolded last night to occur.
After Kevin Rudd’s dignified and moving press conference today, the media couldn’t wait to get back to parsing the micro-details of his address. A pause for reflection on a very human moment might have been better than the ghoulish sights and sounds of the vultures circling his political corpse, and picking over the entrails of his remarks. It’s a very good argument against the relentless and dehumanising noise of the 24/7 media cycle.
Consider the comparison between the life cycle of the British New Labour government and Kevin Rudd’s 2 years and 5 months in office.
Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s reformed spinmeister, has written persuasively of the propensity of the press to devour politicians. The charge that spin takes precedence over governing is an ironic one when made by those with a never satiated appetite for yet another event, a yearning for an always renewed narrative.
Tony Blair survived three victorious elections before making an exit whose timing was not of his own choosing. A massively unpopular war was one of the key reasons for his demise.
Kevin Rudd has not been permitted to face the people as Prime Minister. He looked quite shocked at the fact that his political demise came when it did, and with good reason.
Poll driven perspectives ignore the fact that polls reflect a static view of political reality, and the absurdity of demanding that leaders shape up or ship out according to the Newspoll timetable should be evident.
It’s damaging our democracy, and profoundly. We’re constantly being told, in the anodyne language adopted by the commentariat, that Labor needed ‘clear air’, and that Kevin Rudd couldn’t ‘cut through’. Yet no one has explained to me how a complex and sustained political argument could be prosecuted in the context of a media obsessed with the eternal present.
We might well pause to reflect on the irony that Kevin Rudd, whose performance today should forever negate claims that he’s a passionless robot consumed only by anger or ambition, was trying to do so – on the Resources Super Profits Tax. That was impossible, it would seem, in the face of a concerted campaign by the big battalions of industry, and those backroom apparatchiks whose utterances were amplified by the megaphones of the media.
Kevin Rudd was arguing for progressive reform, and because he couldn’t be seen to ‘back flip’, his leadership was the sole obstacle to those who believe they properly own our resources and our public sphere. He had to go, they pronounced, and the Labor party obliged.
If leadership, in both senses of the word, is what is at issue, we must ask ourselves whether we allow our leaders the space, and the time, to exercise their political craft as we would like to see it practiced.
In a single parliamentary term, we’ve now seen three opposition leaders and two Prime Ministers.
Much has been made of purported governance concerns: a ‘kitchen cabinet’ and faceless advisors distinguished only by the supposed callowness of youth. Yet the faces of the hit squad who destroyed Rudd’s leadership are hardly well known.
Gordon Brown also promised a return to cabinet government, and due process, after Tony Blair’s ‘government on the sofa’ was roundly condemned. Yet nothing changed. It may be impossible, in a world where an hour is a long time in politics, to govern at the pace of a slower era.
Julia Gillard, whatever her intentions, may learn that lesson quickly. And that any honeymoon will be short indeed. The opposition, and the media, have been laying down the lines of attack, in readiness for the latest twist in the political narrative they’ve arrogated themselves the right to script.
Rudd was right, in his address to caucus, to warn against the transformation of federal politics into the sordid realms of Labor politics, New South Wales style. Yet the ALP held power in the Premier State for thirteen years before its leader was overthrown.
If the AWU and Sussex Street types who orchestrated Rudd’s downfall believe that Labor can win only by attacking the Coalition from the right (which I’d have thought was barely possible with Tony Abbott as leader), and by throwing the leader overboard at the first sign of trouble, then they only have to survey the damage wrought in NSW.
In the United States, the United Kingdom, and in this Commonwealth of Australia, disillusion with politics as usual has been the abiding sentiment of the electorate over recent years. We should stop to consider whether the culture of constant obsolescence and the relentless drumbeat of narratives of the eternal now we’ve just seen make history, almost without knowing what it was doing, is good for any of us.
Will any future Prime Minister take the time to reflect, or have the courage to lead, knowing that a few marginal seat polls and a media firestorm can dissolve their legitimacy in the flick of an eyelid?
Most political observers agree that the Labor party was still odds on to win this year’s federal election. The events of the past two days ought to make all of us slow down, take a breath, and think about what our democracy really requires of us.
One of the central reasons Kevin Michael Rudd was elected the 26th Prime Minister of Australia was that he correctly identified a widespread public sentiment that the problems we confront go beyond the short term horizons of the political and media class. Whatever his failings, and for me, many of them pall beside the dignity of his exit from high office, we must now ask ourselves whether politics as usual allows any leader to wrestle with the great moral challenges of our time.
Because those challenges are not going away, even as the timescale of the Twitterverse and the 24 hour news machine rolls relentlessly on to another moment of the present.
Dr Mark Bahnisch is a sociologist and a Fellow of the Centre for Policy Development. He founded the leading public affairs blog, Larvatus Prodeo.
A great article Mark which for me sums up all that was wrong about the events of the last 24 hours.
A great article Mark which for me sums up all that was wrong about the events of the last 24 hours.
@1 – Thanks, Trenton. I appreciate that.
I think it’s extremely depressing, and very bad for our democracy, that mining company and media interests can effectively bring down an elected PM. This is up there with The Dismissal. It’s great to have our first woman PM, but not this way, not for this reason, and not with these forces in support.
What we need is a different way of electing leaders with more legitimacy – primaries, or something akin to the UK system for choosing Labour leaders. Today’s events are undemocratic, whatever those who like to explain the Westminster system say. It’s broken. It needs fixing. This is very bad.
@1 – Thanks, Trenton. I appreciate that.
I think it’s extremely depressing, and very bad for our democracy, that mining company and media interests can effectively bring down an elected PM. This is up there with The Dismissal. It’s great to have our first woman PM, but not this way, not for this reason, and not with these forces in support.
What we need is a different way of electing leaders with more legitimacy – primaries, or something akin to the UK system for choosing Labour leaders. Today’s events are undemocratic, whatever those who like to explain the Westminster system say. It’s broken. It needs fixing. This is very bad.
How ironic that Andrew Forrest blames Ken Henry for Rudd’s downfall. Rudd was brought down because of a disinformation campaign about the RSPT from the mining industry, a disinformation campaign about the CPRS from the mining industry and other polluters, and constant disinformation from some sections of the press. So much for democracy.
How ironic that Andrew Forrest blames Ken Henry for Rudd’s downfall. Rudd was brought down because of a disinformation campaign about the RSPT from the mining industry, a disinformation campaign about the CPRS from the mining industry and other polluters, and constant disinformation from some sections of the press. So much for democracy.
Great piece Mark.
Clearly there is no opportunity to lead the public to higher ground when the race is only to the bottom – that is the sad thing for me in all of this.
That Arbib was concerned that the approach to asylum seekers was not winning votes in Western Sydney says all you need to know about his morality. What a pack of selfserving tossers.
Great piece Mark.
Clearly there is no opportunity to lead the public to higher ground when the race is only to the bottom – that is the sad thing for me in all of this.
That Arbib was concerned that the approach to asylum seekers was not winning votes in Western Sydney says all you need to know about his morality. What a pack of selfserving tossers.
I agree this is up there with The dismissal. I think some people around here do not grasp the gravity of what has happened in the last 24 hours or the precedents that have been set. Abbott got one thing right in his press conference when he suggested you shouldn’t treat a PM in that way. Not even a first term PM is beyond being hacked down by these bunch of backroom clowns.
I agree this is up there with The dismissal. I think some people around here do not grasp the gravity of what has happened in the last 24 hours or the precedents that have been set. Abbott got one thing right in his press conference when he suggested you shouldn’t treat a PM in that way. Not even a first term PM is beyond being hacked down by these bunch of backroom clowns.
Mark wrote:
The more I dwell on these events, the angrier it makes me. These two sentences explain why. This has been an incredibly dark 24 hours for those of us who still believed that Australias democracy was somehow better than rigged voting machines and hanging chads.
How utterly Australian to perform the execution in plain sight, without pretension.
“Shoot straight you bastards and don’t make a mess of it.”
Mark wrote:
The more I dwell on these events, the angrier it makes me. These two sentences explain why. This has been an incredibly dark 24 hours for those of us who still believed that Australias democracy was somehow better than rigged voting machines and hanging chads.
How utterly Australian to perform the execution in plain sight, without pretension.
“Shoot straight you bastards and don’t make a mess of it.”
Mark, we don’t have a Presdiential system. Part of he strength of Westminster democracy we have just witnessed. As I say, you’re bitter because you think this was a media conspiracy. It wasn’t. Gillard was as good a candidate for the top job as we have seen since Keating was elevated. She was drafted and she will serve well. End of story. Labor will have a better chance in my view with her to create a mandate, as much as a victory.
Mark, we don’t have a Presdiential system. Part of he strength of Westminster democracy we have just witnessed. As I say, you’re bitter because you think this was a media conspiracy. It wasn’t. Gillard was as good a candidate for the top job as we have seen since Keating was elevated. She was drafted and she will serve well. End of story. Labor will have a better chance in my view with her to create a mandate, as much as a victory.
Mark, one area where you are wrong, IMHO, is the view that the decision reflected a static view of the political landscape. This was a forward looking decision. Those that took it had formed the view that Rudd’s failings made it unlikely he would be able to turn things around before the election and indeed there was a real chance that things could get even worse in the marginal seats. That assessment was not just based on Canberra groupthink, and polling, but the feedback from MPs in their own seats. Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition, but it does provide context as to why it was so easy to tear him down. And be careful about drawing too many lessons from this for Gillard. Her roots and support within the party go far deeper than Rudd’s.
Also, mining companies did not bring down Rudd. Everybody understood that the attempt to introduce something like the RSPT would bring forth a well funded campaign from the interest groups affected. The ALP faced these same forces during the Hawke-Keating period. Back then though, there was better preparation, better negotiation, better execution and better communication. It need not have come to this.
Ultimately it was Rudd’s inability to deal adequately with the kinds of opposition that all governments face that did him in.
And don’t mourn for lost political courage. Good leaders will emerge in the future. Hopefully the messages they will draw from this episode are that: consistency in message is important; you have to cultivate your caucus; reform is difficult, so be well prepared; and focus on doing a few things well, rather than a lot of things badly.
Mark, one area where you are wrong, IMHO, is the view that the decision reflected a static view of the political landscape. This was a forward looking decision. Those that took it had formed the view that Rudd’s failings made it unlikely he would be able to turn things around before the election and indeed there was a real chance that things could get even worse in the marginal seats. That assessment was not just based on Canberra groupthink, and polling, but the feedback from MPs in their own seats. Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition, but it does provide context as to why it was so easy to tear him down. And be careful about drawing too many lessons from this for Gillard. Her roots and support within the party go far deeper than Rudd’s.
Also, mining companies did not bring down Rudd. Everybody understood that the attempt to introduce something like the RSPT would bring forth a well funded campaign from the interest groups affected. The ALP faced these same forces during the Hawke-Keating period. Back then though, there was better preparation, better negotiation, better execution and better communication. It need not have come to this.
Ultimately it was Rudd’s inability to deal adequately with the kinds of opposition that all governments face that did him in.
And don’t mourn for lost political courage. Good leaders will emerge in the future. Hopefully the messages they will draw from this episode are that: consistency in message is important; you have to cultivate your caucus; reform is difficult, so be well prepared; and focus on doing a few things well, rather than a lot of things badly.
What Mark Colvin said:
http://is.gd/d1ItC
http://is.gd/d1IC9
And really, this sort of mutiny has happened all the time in Australian politics. Why should it be so surprising now? No one seems to be acknowledging that the election, with Rudd as leader, was shaping up to be a knife-edge battle. I’m of the view that the electorate at-large – especially those who were disappointed in Rudd’s failings – will re-energise the Labor vote come polling day.
Seriously, I see the situation as the difference between a confident Labor win versus the (former) dire possibility of Tony Abbott as PM.
What Mark Colvin said:
http://is.gd/d1ItC
http://is.gd/d1IC9
And really, this sort of mutiny has happened all the time in Australian politics. Why should it be so surprising now? No one seems to be acknowledging that the election, with Rudd as leader, was shaping up to be a knife-edge battle. I’m of the view that the electorate at-large – especially those who were disappointed in Rudd’s failings – will re-energise the Labor vote come polling day.
Seriously, I see the situation as the difference between a confident Labor win versus the (former) dire possibility of Tony Abbott as PM.
Fantastic piece, Mark, you’ve really nailed the disturbing, depressing ramifications of this.
Fantastic piece, Mark, you’ve really nailed the disturbing, depressing ramifications of this.
“One of the central reasons Kevin Michael Rudd was elected the 26th Prime Minister of Australia was that he correctly identified a widespread public sentiment that the problems we confront go beyond the short term horizons of the political and media class.’
Sure, but isn’t a key reason why he found himself in this mess is that after promising to govern for the long term, he ended up governing for the short-term? His media unit and chief of staff were probably the most short-termist, poll driven, spinning groups we have had so close to a PM in history.
In the end, the gap between the rhetoric and the action was too great for his credibility to be maintained.
“One of the central reasons Kevin Michael Rudd was elected the 26th Prime Minister of Australia was that he correctly identified a widespread public sentiment that the problems we confront go beyond the short term horizons of the political and media class.’
Sure, but isn’t a key reason why he found himself in this mess is that after promising to govern for the long term, he ended up governing for the short-term? His media unit and chief of staff were probably the most short-termist, poll driven, spinning groups we have had so close to a PM in history.
In the end, the gap between the rhetoric and the action was too great for his credibility to be maintained.
Very well said Mark – I agree with you 100%.
I’m afraid that people are kidding themselves if they think this will end happily for Labor.
Very well said Mark – I agree with you 100%.
I’m afraid that people are kidding themselves if they think this will end happily for Labor.
It really is a tragedy, in the Greek sense. Rudd is a man of great talent and virtue but his personal failings were instrumental in his downfall.
It is not enough for a leader to be smart. Technocratic solutions are not solutions if you can’t bring people with you. Successful leaders don’t think they alone have all the answers.
It really is a tragedy, in the Greek sense. Rudd is a man of great talent and virtue but his personal failings were instrumental in his downfall.
It is not enough for a leader to be smart. Technocratic solutions are not solutions if you can’t bring people with you. Successful leaders don’t think they alone have all the answers.
Fantastic post. Unfortunately I think we’ll see more of this in the future. Also, it’s a shame that the office of Prime Minister has been so disrespected in much of the news coverage, e.g. a “coup”, “Rudd” being “knifed”, “dumped”, etc.
Fantastic post. Unfortunately I think we’ll see more of this in the future. Also, it’s a shame that the office of Prime Minister has been so disrespected in much of the news coverage, e.g. a “coup”, “Rudd” being “knifed”, “dumped”, etc.
Gillard – bastard child of Sir John Kerr.
Gillard – bastard child of Sir John Kerr.
Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition,
I dunno, LO, you seemed to be implying that pretty strongly in the other threads. Also, if it wasn’t the reason, how do you explain that
a) Rudd’s polls weren’t actually that bad for where he was in the electoral cycle, except in the marginal polling commissioned by the AWU which we haven’t seen.
b) The people who ousted him were largely the ones advocating the very change (cprs) that took him down. So they didn’t disagree with him about policy, except for the RPST, of course, which *wasn’t* that unpopular with the electorate, at least according to the polls they all love.
I realise you have many more “connections” than I, but this seems like it was all about rudd’s personality and style, and that disappoints me. I hate it when citizens vote on it, and it’s even worse when MP’s do it.
Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition,
I dunno, LO, you seemed to be implying that pretty strongly in the other threads. Also, if it wasn’t the reason, how do you explain that
a) Rudd’s polls weren’t actually that bad for where he was in the electoral cycle, except in the marginal polling commissioned by the AWU which we haven’t seen.
b) The people who ousted him were largely the ones advocating the very change (cprs) that took him down. So they didn’t disagree with him about policy, except for the RPST, of course, which *wasn’t* that unpopular with the electorate, at least according to the polls they all love.
I realise you have many more “connections” than I, but this seems like it was all about rudd’s personality and style, and that disappoints me. I hate it when citizens vote on it, and it’s even worse when MP’s do it.
Good essay Mark.
Encouraged by their success the media will continue to be an even obstacle to public democracy.
And just to repeat some numbers.
49
50
51
52
Good essay Mark.
Encouraged by their success the media will continue to be an even obstacle to public democracy.
And just to repeat some numbers.
49
50
51
52
Corin wrote:
No mandate from the people who voted, directly, for a presidential campaign almost solely based around the slogan “Kevin07″.
There was no way the public would have given a damn about the RSPT without the organised campaign of the miners and News corp. None.
You can now count two parliamentary party leaders who fell victim to the machinations of resource companies: Turnbull and Rudd. They have spoken twice and our political system acquiesced.
Corin wrote:
No mandate from the people who voted, directly, for a presidential campaign almost solely based around the slogan “Kevin07″.
There was no way the public would have given a damn about the RSPT without the organised campaign of the miners and News corp. None.
You can now count two parliamentary party leaders who fell victim to the machinations of resource companies: Turnbull and Rudd. They have spoken twice and our political system acquiesced.
Yes, nice piece.
The Left’s reaction to this has been astonishing. The grubbiest creatures from the Right of the ALP — Dave Feeney, FFS! — have maneuvered Labor to take a harder stance against refugees and to abandon any attempt to recoup super-profits from the mining magnates. In what alternative universe is there anything for the progressives to celebrate in this?
Personally, I think the odds of a Abbott victory have just improved massively. If Labor legitimizes Tory policy on refugees and tax, why should voters accept a second-rate substitute when they could have the real thing?
Yes, nice piece.
The Left’s reaction to this has been astonishing. The grubbiest creatures from the Right of the ALP — Dave Feeney, FFS! — have maneuvered Labor to take a harder stance against refugees and to abandon any attempt to recoup super-profits from the mining magnates. In what alternative universe is there anything for the progressives to celebrate in this?
Personally, I think the odds of a Abbott victory have just improved massively. If Labor legitimizes Tory policy on refugees and tax, why should voters accept a second-rate substitute when they could have the real thing?
Just a tangential thought, but company boards also have a habit of dumping CEO’s that have made unpopular decisions and are wedded implacably to them. The idea is that a new CEO has the freedom to modify the situation, without losing credibility.
On a wider perspective, perhaps politics may not be the only ruthless game in town?
Incidentally, a rather overwhelming number of people suggested that Costello had “no ticker” for not challenging the incumbent PM Howard before the last election.
If we accept that, then perhaps we could suggest that our Jules has indeed some ticker? What if she kept saying “no challenge” and then ALP lost at the next election? Would we all be accusing her retrospectively of having no ticker at the critical moment?
20/20 vision in foresight would be a wonderful thing…
Just a tangential thought, but company boards also have a habit of dumping CEO’s that have made unpopular decisions and are wedded implacably to them. The idea is that a new CEO has the freedom to modify the situation, without losing credibility.
On a wider perspective, perhaps politics may not be the only ruthless game in town?
Incidentally, a rather overwhelming number of people suggested that Costello had “no ticker” for not challenging the incumbent PM Howard before the last election.
If we accept that, then perhaps we could suggest that our Jules has indeed some ticker? What if she kept saying “no challenge” and then ALP lost at the next election? Would we all be accusing her retrospectively of having no ticker at the critical moment?
20/20 vision in foresight would be a wonderful thing…
You’ve all gone mad. I reckon more of your average voters are thinking three things: 1) a touch of sadness; 2) KR lost his way; 3) You go girl!
They are unlikely to be sitting around contemplating mandate theory.
BTW – WorkChoices and education was the election as much if not more than Kevin07. Gillard has claims.
You’ve all gone mad. I reckon more of your average voters are thinking three things: 1) a touch of sadness; 2) KR lost his way; 3) You go girl!
They are unlikely to be sitting around contemplating mandate theory.
BTW – WorkChoices and education was the election as much if not more than Kevin07. Gillard has claims.
I was wondering how to respond to this analysis as I read it. Then you made the following observation:
“Whatever his failings, and for me, many of them pall beside the dignity of his exit from high office, we must now ask ourselves whether politics as usual allows any leader to wrestle with the great moral challenges of our time.”
Funnily enough Rudd described climate change as the great moral question of our time as he railed against all those deniers you were putting at risk the lives of their children and grand children.
At the time Rudd made that statement he was unassailable in the polls and Turnbull was under pressure in a divided coalition. Turnbull lost the leadership and Abbott came out in opposition to the CPRS. It was narrowly defeated in the Senate. The “great moral question of our time” was the greatest justification ever presented to a Prime Minister to go to a double dissolution. It was vital to have the legislation passed prior to the Copenhagen Conference to give credibility to the government’s position.
Copenhagen came and went as a total failure and the “great moral question of our time” disappeared from the political radar being put back until after the election. The great moral question became disposable. This decision would not have been made in a vacuum. The Government would have had polling that showed that the CPRS had become toxic in the community. After all it was a tax measure that allowed the government to redistribute large amounts to its constituencies. A new tack had to be found.
Rudd created the “principle” that the people were entitled to a fair share of the proceeds of mineral development. This was only now important. It wasn’t considered important at the time of the last election to be put to the people then.
It was important now because of the loss of the CPRS and the dire budgetary position the government found itself in.
Rudd had Ken Henry cobble this policy together and promote it – an unusual duty for a public servant. Obviously Swann was intellectually incapable to arguing the case. Rudd and his team assumed that taxing the miners would go down well in the electorate as it was a small group of rich operators who would be affected. The problem was that just about every worker in the country has a stake in the ongoing profitability of the mining industry through the dividends and capital growth received by their superannuation funds. They could see the long term rammifications of this policy on their retirement incomes. Rudd was looking at his short term budgetary problems caused by a series of policy bungles.
It was not the short term political cycle that sowed the seeds of the government’s problems but the long term destruction of voters retirement incomes. The GFC made workers very aware of the risks that can erode their superannuation.
The reality now is that the government raises taxation at its peril. The RSPT was brought in to apply to mining. Ken Henry has let the cat out of the bag by saying that it should apply to all industries. This is clearly obvious as governments continue to expand their reach into more and more services. It all has to be paid for one way or another.
Switching leaders will not solve the underlying problems. Politicians and public servants have no idea how to provide most of these services resulting in massive waste and unintended consequences. By continuing down this path will not solve those problems. Accepting that individuals are responsible for their own decisions and futures will go a long way to realigning the reach of governments into all aspects of our lives. They can then concentrate on the protection of people’s rights as they pursue their own aspirations. Politicians might then find that the political cycle becomes a little more manageable.
I was wondering how to respond to this analysis as I read it. Then you made the following observation:
“Whatever his failings, and for me, many of them pall beside the dignity of his exit from high office, we must now ask ourselves whether politics as usual allows any leader to wrestle with the great moral challenges of our time.”
Funnily enough Rudd described climate change as the great moral question of our time as he railed against all those deniers you were putting at risk the lives of their children and grand children.
At the time Rudd made that statement he was unassailable in the polls and Turnbull was under pressure in a divided coalition. Turnbull lost the leadership and Abbott came out in opposition to the CPRS. It was narrowly defeated in the Senate. The “great moral question of our time” was the greatest justification ever presented to a Prime Minister to go to a double dissolution. It was vital to have the legislation passed prior to the Copenhagen Conference to give credibility to the government’s position.
Copenhagen came and went as a total failure and the “great moral question of our time” disappeared from the political radar being put back until after the election. The great moral question became disposable. This decision would not have been made in a vacuum. The Government would have had polling that showed that the CPRS had become toxic in the community. After all it was a tax measure that allowed the government to redistribute large amounts to its constituencies. A new tack had to be found.
Rudd created the “principle” that the people were entitled to a fair share of the proceeds of mineral development. This was only now important. It wasn’t considered important at the time of the last election to be put to the people then.
It was important now because of the loss of the CPRS and the dire budgetary position the government found itself in.
Rudd had Ken Henry cobble this policy together and promote it – an unusual duty for a public servant. Obviously Swann was intellectually incapable to arguing the case. Rudd and his team assumed that taxing the miners would go down well in the electorate as it was a small group of rich operators who would be affected. The problem was that just about every worker in the country has a stake in the ongoing profitability of the mining industry through the dividends and capital growth received by their superannuation funds. They could see the long term rammifications of this policy on their retirement incomes. Rudd was looking at his short term budgetary problems caused by a series of policy bungles.
It was not the short term political cycle that sowed the seeds of the government’s problems but the long term destruction of voters retirement incomes. The GFC made workers very aware of the risks that can erode their superannuation.
The reality now is that the government raises taxation at its peril. The RSPT was brought in to apply to mining. Ken Henry has let the cat out of the bag by saying that it should apply to all industries. This is clearly obvious as governments continue to expand their reach into more and more services. It all has to be paid for one way or another.
Switching leaders will not solve the underlying problems. Politicians and public servants have no idea how to provide most of these services resulting in massive waste and unintended consequences. By continuing down this path will not solve those problems. Accepting that individuals are responsible for their own decisions and futures will go a long way to realigning the reach of governments into all aspects of our lives. They can then concentrate on the protection of people’s rights as they pursue their own aspirations. Politicians might then find that the political cycle becomes a little more manageable.
Corin wrote:
Given that she hasn’t exactly excelled at either (we still have 80% of WorkChoices and the education revolution doesn’t even have a little red netbook in kids hands yet) I am not holding out much hope.
Corin wrote:
Given that she hasn’t exactly excelled at either (we still have 80% of WorkChoices and the education revolution doesn’t even have a little red netbook in kids hands yet) I am not holding out much hope.
PatrickG. Perhaps I should have phrased it like this. Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management of his caucus and office were necessary but not sufficient conditions for today’s decapitation. Alone they weren’t close to enough to bring this on. But put together with the collapse in support in the marginals, it was a deadly combination.
You can interpret the polls in a number of ways. One reading is that the government weren’t in an unusual situation and there was plenty of scope to turn their fortunes around, espcially when the foucs returned to the coalition during the campaign. Another is that the pace of decline in Rudd’s popularity is more spectacular than anything we’ve seen before. No other leader in 25 years has seen their net satisfactin decline by 60pp in 9 months. Polling in the marginals and a more realistic interpretation of likely preference flows suggested that things looked even worse than the headline 2pp suggested. The concern was that with Rudd’s governing style and inability to credibly renegotiate the RSPT, things might have become worse, not better.
PatrickG. Perhaps I should have phrased it like this. Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management of his caucus and office were necessary but not sufficient conditions for today’s decapitation. Alone they weren’t close to enough to bring this on. But put together with the collapse in support in the marginals, it was a deadly combination.
You can interpret the polls in a number of ways. One reading is that the government weren’t in an unusual situation and there was plenty of scope to turn their fortunes around, espcially when the foucs returned to the coalition during the campaign. Another is that the pace of decline in Rudd’s popularity is more spectacular than anything we’ve seen before. No other leader in 25 years has seen their net satisfactin decline by 60pp in 9 months. Polling in the marginals and a more realistic interpretation of likely preference flows suggested that things looked even worse than the headline 2pp suggested. The concern was that with Rudd’s governing style and inability to credibly renegotiate the RSPT, things might have become worse, not better.
I think you’re flailing after a ghost … Rudd resigned end of. Labor is bigger than an election. End of. It’s a movement not a single moment in time. End of. Mark, you of all people should realise this!
I think you’re flailing after a ghost … Rudd resigned end of. Labor is bigger than an election. End of. It’s a movement not a single moment in time. End of. Mark, you of all people should realise this!
I agree completely with comments about the similarities to the dismissal. That’s the connection I made this morning- it reminded me of how I felt in ’75. Dirty deeds done and an elected PM destroyed for no good reason, with shadowy figures pulling the strings. I think that the way that it was done is appalling – it feeds into the worst of our political culture that chases the 24 hour news cycle and the poll-driven spin.
I hope Gillard defeats Abbott but I think that has to be in doubt. If this delivers an Abbott Govt I will never forgive the ALP powerbrokers. As a feminist, I wish this could’ve happened in way that I could celebrate. Instead I feel sick at heart.
I agree completely with comments about the similarities to the dismissal. That’s the connection I made this morning- it reminded me of how I felt in ’75. Dirty deeds done and an elected PM destroyed for no good reason, with shadowy figures pulling the strings. I think that the way that it was done is appalling – it feeds into the worst of our political culture that chases the 24 hour news cycle and the poll-driven spin.
I hope Gillard defeats Abbott but I think that has to be in doubt. If this delivers an Abbott Govt I will never forgive the ALP powerbrokers. As a feminist, I wish this could’ve happened in way that I could celebrate. Instead I feel sick at heart.
“It’s a movement not a single moment in time”
Okay then Corin. Where is this movement moving?
“It’s a movement not a single moment in time”
Okay then Corin. Where is this movement moving?
Come on, people! None of you appear to remember (or are old enough to remember) the Hawke coup against Bill Hayden in 1983.
Rudd could say, as Hayden said then, that a drover’s dog could win the next election but winning is not the goal. A comprehensive victory is required to ensure the progressive mandate the Left wants.
The right-wing industrial Labor troglodytes are ugly fellow-travelers, indeed, but “thems the breaks”.
Come on, people! None of you appear to remember (or are old enough to remember) the Hawke coup against Bill Hayden in 1983.
Rudd could say, as Hayden said then, that a drover’s dog could win the next election but winning is not the goal. A comprehensive victory is required to ensure the progressive mandate the Left wants.
The right-wing industrial Labor troglodytes are ugly fellow-travelers, indeed, but “thems the breaks”.
The lower bowel.
The lower bowel.
I look forward to the execution of the hit squad. The ALP really needs to get rid of these crypto-liberal thugs.
I look forward to the execution of the hit squad. The ALP really needs to get rid of these crypto-liberal thugs.
I remember it very well. I was 15 at the time. Even Hawke himself obviously had pangs of conscience about taking down Hayden.
It was, of course, back when there really was a labour movement to speak of.
And I’ve made this point before – there’s a lot of difference between some of these past precedents and the removal from office of a first term PM.
I remember it very well. I was 15 at the time. Even Hawke himself obviously had pangs of conscience about taking down Hayden.
It was, of course, back when there really was a labour movement to speak of.
And I’ve made this point before – there’s a lot of difference between some of these past precedents and the removal from office of a first term PM.
I remember the Hawke\Hayden coup but this happened while Labor was in opposition, so it is hardly relevant to the current situation is it.
I remember the Hawke\Hayden coup but this happened while Labor was in opposition, so it is hardly relevant to the current situation is it.
Mark I’m not saying I’m not distressed at this removal of Rudd, I think it’s fairer to say that that the mining/media interests were a catalyst, reprehensible as those money grubbing interests are, however there was the deferred 2013 climb down on the global warming Rudd agenda that sticks in my craw (among I believe many others I believe).
For me particularly (as a legal practitioner) the gutless refusal to modify the Howardista anti-terrorist legislation (not that necessarily Julia will be any better), the waffle and piffle and inability to get his message across…and Afghanistan excuses remain (again not that Julia…etc)
I think some perspective is called for. I look upon this in a comparison to Hawke, a most loved larrikin and reformer who eventually burnt out his welcome after many years as leader, rolled by Keating when the Caucus got the idea that there was a real risk that Labor would lose the next election. Hayden warned him, I think it was the “The dingoes are pissing on your swag, time to move on”. Rudd burnt out his welcome in a much shorter time due to piffle and waffle, all talk and no action on too many fronts. Rudd was promising 100 times like “no child left in poverty” but never delivered, apart from the global financial meltdown Keynesian pump priming (for which he is to be commended)and some other stuff.
It’s a shame, it’s tragic but I agree with Fyodor in another, earlier thread, sadly: he was a Dudd. I think Keating is right, Rudd was beholden to so called experts:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1945526.htm
Some pragmatism is now called for. At the risk of sounding sexist, Julia Gillard has far more testicular credentials for the job, much more capable IMHO of sinking the boot into the execrable Abbott: something that Rudd appeared utterly incapable of doing in the last few months.
It’s gonna work out OK folks.
Mark I’m not saying I’m not distressed at this removal of Rudd, I think it’s fairer to say that that the mining/media interests were a catalyst, reprehensible as those money grubbing interests are, however there was the deferred 2013 climb down on the global warming Rudd agenda that sticks in my craw (among I believe many others I believe).
For me particularly (as a legal practitioner) the gutless refusal to modify the Howardista anti-terrorist legislation (not that necessarily Julia will be any better), the waffle and piffle and inability to get his message across…and Afghanistan excuses remain (again not that Julia…etc)
I think some perspective is called for. I look upon this in a comparison to Hawke, a most loved larrikin and reformer who eventually burnt out his welcome after many years as leader, rolled by Keating when the Caucus got the idea that there was a real risk that Labor would lose the next election. Hayden warned him, I think it was the “The dingoes are pissing on your swag, time to move on”. Rudd burnt out his welcome in a much shorter time due to piffle and waffle, all talk and no action on too many fronts. Rudd was promising 100 times like “no child left in poverty” but never delivered, apart from the global financial meltdown Keynesian pump priming (for which he is to be commended)and some other stuff.
It’s a shame, it’s tragic but I agree with Fyodor in another, earlier thread, sadly: he was a Dudd. I think Keating is right, Rudd was beholden to so called experts:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1945526.htm
Some pragmatism is now called for. At the risk of sounding sexist, Julia Gillard has far more testicular credentials for the job, much more capable IMHO of sinking the boot into the execrable Abbott: something that Rudd appeared utterly incapable of doing in the last few months.
It’s gonna work out OK folks.
@32 – And again, it’s the sorts of circumstances which shape politics these days which were very different in 1983. That’s the entire point of the post.
@32 – And again, it’s the sorts of circumstances which shape politics these days which were very different in 1983. That’s the entire point of the post.
I think it’s instructive that the ABC and SBS news tonight both made significant mention of the positive reaction by the capitalists to the election of Gillard. Mining stocks up, Forester grinning from ear to ear etc etc.
I’m not sure it’s another dismissal in one sense, that is the ALP is still in power and able to govern however I think the event does call into question the authority of an elected leader and possibly parliament, particularly in the face of a carefully orchestrated campaign conducted on behalf of the rich and powerful.
I think it’s instructive that the ABC and SBS news tonight both made significant mention of the positive reaction by the capitalists to the election of Gillard. Mining stocks up, Forester grinning from ear to ear etc etc.
I’m not sure it’s another dismissal in one sense, that is the ALP is still in power and able to govern however I think the event does call into question the authority of an elected leader and possibly parliament, particularly in the face of a carefully orchestrated campaign conducted on behalf of the rich and powerful.
Deja vu all over, Kerry O’Brien leads with a “blood on your hands” type of question in the Gillard interview.
Deja vu all over, Kerry O’Brien leads with a “blood on your hands” type of question in the Gillard interview.
Not sure what drug Julia took this afternoon, but on the 7.30 report right now, someone is on a power trip.
Not sure what drug Julia took this afternoon, but on the 7.30 report right now, someone is on a power trip.
No other leader had 60pp to lose in the first place, not without getting down to Brendan Nelson style numbers. And most of the loss came from dumping the CPRS, which was prompted by the same people who later knifed him.
No other leader had 60pp to lose in the first place, not without getting down to Brendan Nelson style numbers. And most of the loss came from dumping the CPRS, which was prompted by the same people who later knifed him.
No Barrie Cassidy, you never really got it so did a hatchet job to make up for your ignorance.
No Barrie Cassidy, you never really got it so did a hatchet job to make up for your ignorance.
We don’t have a President and party is core to Westminster systems. The party tossed Rudd out not Julia. The party is bigger than the PM. I can’t believe Mark you would say Labor made the wrong decision dumping Hayden! Just weird frankly.
We don’t have a President and party is core to Westminster systems. The party tossed Rudd out not Julia. The party is bigger than the PM. I can’t believe Mark you would say Labor made the wrong decision dumping Hayden! Just weird frankly.
The unobservant park their opinions here.In noticing what Rudd said last night about being a “strung out ” type of circumstances,then it follows they both Rudd and Gillard played the heart strings.An orchestral musical chairs with the emotive music played by commentators everywhere.A distraction from the main game,the undermining of Australia by senile fuckwits,who are, by and large younger than me.
The unobservant park their opinions here.In noticing what Rudd said last night about being a “strung out ” type of circumstances,then it follows they both Rudd and Gillard played the heart strings.An orchestral musical chairs with the emotive music played by commentators everywhere.A distraction from the main game,the undermining of Australia by senile fuckwits,who are, by and large younger than me.
@40 – you can’t believe that because I didn’t say it, Corin. Please read a bit more carefully.
@40 – you can’t believe that because I didn’t say it, Corin. Please read a bit more carefully.
Thanks Mark, today has been a very sad day indeed, not the least for the labor party, who we now know will willingly sacrifice anything and anyone and destroy their credibility along the way. I was never a Kevin fanatic, but this is beyond the pale, and Gillards capitulation to the mining industry is sickening.
Thanks Mark, today has been a very sad day indeed, not the least for the labor party, who we now know will willingly sacrifice anything and anyone and destroy their credibility along the way. I was never a Kevin fanatic, but this is beyond the pale, and Gillards capitulation to the mining industry is sickening.
@40 – in addition, party may indeed be core to the Westminster system, but in its home, the UK, this sort of thing would be impossible, because the Labour leader is elected by party members and members of affiliated unions as well as MPs.
The only alternative to a vote by caucus is not a presidential system.
Having said that, I’d prefer people to focus on the specific issues I raised in the article. There are a stack of other posts around if folks want to discuss the merits or otherwise of the leadership shift per se.
@40 – in addition, party may indeed be core to the Westminster system, but in its home, the UK, this sort of thing would be impossible, because the Labour leader is elected by party members and members of affiliated unions as well as MPs.
The only alternative to a vote by caucus is not a presidential system.
Having said that, I’d prefer people to focus on the specific issues I raised in the article. There are a stack of other posts around if folks want to discuss the merits or otherwise of the leadership shift per se.
Mark
FWIW, neither myself, nor Corin I suspect would object in the slightest to leadership votes being opened up to the broader base. And I suspect we both think that open primaries for MPs would be a good thing as well. You won’t get any argument for me about the often malign nature of certain union characters and factional chiefs over the ALP and I’d welcome a dilution of their power. Don’t confuse my dissatisfaction with Rudd and his leadership, and hope for something better under Gillard, with support for the current influence of factions. It happens in this circumstance that they have probably delivered the best outcome. But that isn’t the usual state of affairs.
Mark
FWIW, neither myself, nor Corin I suspect would object in the slightest to leadership votes being opened up to the broader base. And I suspect we both think that open primaries for MPs would be a good thing as well. You won’t get any argument for me about the often malign nature of certain union characters and factional chiefs over the ALP and I’d welcome a dilution of their power. Don’t confuse my dissatisfaction with Rudd and his leadership, and hope for something better under Gillard, with support for the current influence of factions. It happens in this circumstance that they have probably delivered the best outcome. But that isn’t the usual state of affairs.
Onya, Mark.
The events of today, taken together as an aggregate with Turnbull’s earlier political demise, show that you can’t hope to get meaningful structural reform in this country any longer, unless you have the prior approval of the Minerals Council and Twiggy Forrest.
Corin, and a few others, are inexplicably sanguine about this state of affairs.
Onya, Mark.
The events of today, taken together as an aggregate with Turnbull’s earlier political demise, show that you can’t hope to get meaningful structural reform in this country any longer, unless you have the prior approval of the Minerals Council and Twiggy Forrest.
Corin, and a few others, are inexplicably sanguine about this state of affairs.
Mark, I agree it is a great piece and I concur with your view that “Whatever his failing, and for me, many of them pall beside the dignity of his exit from high office” (despite Peter Hartcher’s criticisms of him on 702 on Thursday evening for showing emotion).
Two things occurred to me as I watched: The first was the criticism of Gough Whitlam and how it reminded me of a stanza in a poem I read as a youth:
“Poor souls with stunted vision,
Oft measure giants by their narrow gauge,
The poisoned shafts of falsehood and derision,
Are oft impelled ‘gainst those who mold the age.”
The other was Rudd’s repetition of “I am proud of”. And it was an impressive list.
I could not help reflecting on what Tony Abbott could say:
“I am proud of cutting $1 billion out of public health funding.”
“I am proud of insulting a dying man (Bernie Banton) after he tried to present a petition to me.”
“I am proud of abusing a woman opponent because I turned up late for an election debate.”
“I am proud of putting my own religious beliefs before the interests of Australian women.”
That said, I do think Gillard handled herself well at the media conference.
WhileI believe Rudd would have defeated Abbott and I think it is a tragedy that he was not given that opportunity. But, the die is cast and with whatever misgivings, I think it is important that progressive people do everything they can do ensure Abbott does not win.
In this process, I hope they will not fall victim to the media judgment about how Whitlam (and in future Rudd) were bad Prime Ministers. Both actually achieved more in social reforms of benefit to the nation and ordinary people than most of their predecessors.
Mark, I agree it is a great piece and I concur with your view that “Whatever his failing, and for me, many of them pall beside the dignity of his exit from high office” (despite Peter Hartcher’s criticisms of him on 702 on Thursday evening for showing emotion).
Two things occurred to me as I watched: The first was the criticism of Gough Whitlam and how it reminded me of a stanza in a poem I read as a youth:
“Poor souls with stunted vision,
Oft measure giants by their narrow gauge,
The poisoned shafts of falsehood and derision,
Are oft impelled ‘gainst those who mold the age.”
The other was Rudd’s repetition of “I am proud of”. And it was an impressive list.
I could not help reflecting on what Tony Abbott could say:
“I am proud of cutting $1 billion out of public health funding.”
“I am proud of insulting a dying man (Bernie Banton) after he tried to present a petition to me.”
“I am proud of abusing a woman opponent because I turned up late for an election debate.”
“I am proud of putting my own religious beliefs before the interests of Australian women.”
That said, I do think Gillard handled herself well at the media conference.
WhileI believe Rudd would have defeated Abbott and I think it is a tragedy that he was not given that opportunity. But, the die is cast and with whatever misgivings, I think it is important that progressive people do everything they can do ensure Abbott does not win.
In this process, I hope they will not fall victim to the media judgment about how Whitlam (and in future Rudd) were bad Prime Ministers. Both actually achieved more in social reforms of benefit to the nation and ordinary people than most of their predecessors.
Mark, I accept I overstepped but he Tories couldn’t get rid of Duncan-Smith for 2 years! That requirement for ballots is just absurd. Primaries for candidates makes more sense but ballots of members that take 6 to 8 weeks is madness.
Mark, I accept I overstepped but he Tories couldn’t get rid of Duncan-Smith for 2 years! That requirement for ballots is just absurd. Primaries for candidates makes more sense but ballots of members that take 6 to 8 weeks is madness.
Thanks Mark, agree with all you wrote.
If Rudd was dumped for not delivering we should see a greener government. Julia will cut through and deliver what Labor promised.
On the other hand if it was a conspiracy between brown unions, mining and media bosses and political apparatchiks in the party and the media (possibly just joining in out of bloodlust) we’ll see a government more acceptable to mining interests. In this case Rudd was dumped for threatening to achieve too much (little as it was).
The sharemarket seems to believe the latter scenario.
Thanks Mark, agree with all you wrote.
If Rudd was dumped for not delivering we should see a greener government. Julia will cut through and deliver what Labor promised.
On the other hand if it was a conspiracy between brown unions, mining and media bosses and political apparatchiks in the party and the media (possibly just joining in out of bloodlust) we’ll see a government more acceptable to mining interests. In this case Rudd was dumped for threatening to achieve too much (little as it was).
The sharemarket seems to believe the latter scenario.
Not for everybody. Not for backroom dealers. Not for gallery reporters. Not for mining directors. Those people, who have not one-tenth the talent or the dedication of the man whose job they just demolished — they get to keep their jobs, and years hence they will still be floating around together like a bowlful of unflushable turds.
The real power lies with those for whom the times are neither fickle nor disposable.
Not for everybody. Not for backroom dealers. Not for gallery reporters. Not for mining directors. Those people, who have not one-tenth the talent or the dedication of the man whose job they just demolished — they get to keep their jobs, and years hence they will still be floating around together like a bowlful of unflushable turds.
The real power lies with those for whom the times are neither fickle nor disposable.
Mark – all those words and not one mention of factions?????
Mark – all those words and not one mention of factions?????
Mark I’m in awe of your summation of events and the agony of Kevin Rudd’s demise. I am however still as strong for labor as ever and tonight, on the end of Red Kerry’s attempt to sound bite and dramatize Julia’s ascension, I watched a woman I am so glad to have lived long enough to see, begin a era that will last well past my twilight.
Mark I’m in awe of your summation of events and the agony of Kevin Rudd’s demise. I am however still as strong for labor as ever and tonight, on the end of Red Kerry’s attempt to sound bite and dramatize Julia’s ascension, I watched a woman I am so glad to have lived long enough to see, begin a era that will last well past my twilight.
Nice post Mark. I am sad about this, and find myself unable to celebrate something i had waited for with a fair amount of anticipation for a while. I am sure that you are right about the twitterverse and the news cycle, but there is a wiff of the computer game mentality here, that sense that you can have as you traverse the final frames not sure that you have enough firepower to win the next boss fight, so you hit the reset button.
there is a story in Plutarch’s history of Lycugus that is ment to explain Spartan toughness. a boy steals a fox to eat, is stopped and questioned by some elders, during which the fox wakes up and inflicts mortal damage to the boy, so intent is the boy on not showing any weakness that he does not utter a sound and so escapes with his prize only to die later of his wounds. needless to say the Spartans held him up as an example to all future young warriors. sometimes i think that the NSW right is a lot like that fox, held to the vitals of the ALP.
Nice post Mark. I am sad about this, and find myself unable to celebrate something i had waited for with a fair amount of anticipation for a while. I am sure that you are right about the twitterverse and the news cycle, but there is a wiff of the computer game mentality here, that sense that you can have as you traverse the final frames not sure that you have enough firepower to win the next boss fight, so you hit the reset button.
there is a story in Plutarch’s history of Lycugus that is ment to explain Spartan toughness. a boy steals a fox to eat, is stopped and questioned by some elders, during which the fox wakes up and inflicts mortal damage to the boy, so intent is the boy on not showing any weakness that he does not utter a sound and so escapes with his prize only to die later of his wounds. needless to say the Spartans held him up as an example to all future young warriors. sometimes i think that the NSW right is a lot like that fox, held to the vitals of the ALP.
Look at Turnbull and Rudd – there you have people worth tens of millions, being rolled by people worth billions.
Abbott vs. Gillard? It doesn’t even matter — they’re both minnows who owe others and will be bought off — Abbott can’t even manage the mortgage on one suburban home.
The billionnaires, united, will never be defeated.
Look at Turnbull and Rudd – there you have people worth tens of millions, being rolled by people worth billions.
Abbott vs. Gillard? It doesn’t even matter — they’re both minnows who owe others and will be bought off — Abbott can’t even manage the mortgage on one suburban home.
The billionnaires, united, will never be defeated.
This is as bad as the dismissal.Rudd didn’t even get to use his own/Gillard’s new work place relations laws, he didn’t even get a weeks notice.Anyone reading about this ‘coup d’etat in a paper outside of Australia would think we were a country in South America.How many times have we all read, after Whitlam, never again?
It is a sorry day for democracy in Australia,it just goes to show, power corrupts we all know the rest.
This is as bad as the dismissal.Rudd didn’t even get to use his own/Gillard’s new work place relations laws, he didn’t even get a weeks notice.Anyone reading about this ‘coup d’etat in a paper outside of Australia would think we were a country in South America.How many times have we all read, after Whitlam, never again?
It is a sorry day for democracy in Australia,it just goes to show, power corrupts we all know the rest.
Mark, I believe you have nailed it.
And to my own surprise so did Jonathan Green
“A certain smugness in the media at this coup by commentariat.”
The MSM was thoroughly debunked by the online analysts but the numbers men couldn’t get it through their thick heads.
Does anyone think the commentariat will cop to responsibility? Or are these non-journalists, solely op-ed writers the historians now?
Mark, I believe you have nailed it.
And to my own surprise so did Jonathan Green
“A certain smugness in the media at this coup by commentariat.”
The MSM was thoroughly debunked by the online analysts but the numbers men couldn’t get it through their thick heads.
Does anyone think the commentariat will cop to responsibility? Or are these non-journalists, solely op-ed writers the historians now?
Mark, BTW, I have written extensively on democratising the ALP:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3696
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=159
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9376
Mark, BTW, I have written extensively on democratising the ALP:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3696
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=159
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9376
I’ve posted elsewhere (and Anthony Green) independently that this isn’t unprecedented. Menzies 1 and Gorton were chopped off within 3 years. It’s a sign of the ‘eternal present’ in contemporary political mania that people reach for superlatives like ‘unprecedented’.
(Neither of these precedents are good omens for Labor of course!)
This isn’t a cavill: what is spot on in Mark’s analysis is the poll-driven, baseless vacuity of the parties, the relentless ‘I’m a player’ mentality of the media, and the vortex of a 24 hr cycle and twittersphere the political class is lost in. Sadly Internet culture exacerbates rather than reforms this.
I’ve posted elsewhere (and Anthony Green) independently that this isn’t unprecedented. Menzies 1 and Gorton were chopped off within 3 years. It’s a sign of the ‘eternal present’ in contemporary political mania that people reach for superlatives like ‘unprecedented’.
(Neither of these precedents are good omens for Labor of course!)
This isn’t a cavill: what is spot on in Mark’s analysis is the poll-driven, baseless vacuity of the parties, the relentless ‘I’m a player’ mentality of the media, and the vortex of a 24 hr cycle and twittersphere the political class is lost in. Sadly Internet culture exacerbates rather than reforms this.
Senexx, look on the bright side. David Marr’s rancid little book will now get to the remainder bins in record time.
Senexx, look on the bright side. David Marr’s rancid little book will now get to the remainder bins in record time.
No wonder you’re a Labor outsider. In less than three years you’ve forgotten all about the focus-group-focused, poll-driven, short-termist ways of the lying rodent.
No wonder you’re a Labor outsider. In less than three years you’ve forgotten all about the focus-group-focused, poll-driven, short-termist ways of the lying rodent.
‘we must now ask ourselves whether politics as usual allows any leader to wrestle with the great moral challenges of our time.’
Mark – Interesting post, but I wonder if your analysis of Rudd’s fate understates his unique circumstances and the importance of the connection between party structure and individual agency in determining a Labor leader’s political longevity. From all reports Rudd seems to have been something of an anomaly in Labor politics. As someone apparently without any deep base of support in the party he doesn’t seem to have been as ‘insulated’ as other leaders before him from such challenges. A more politically savvy leader might have been better able to better ‘mangage’ the factional machinations in the manner of Hawke and Keating to maintain power, enhance internal stability and implement policy objectives over several terms i.e. the art of the possible Labor style?
‘we must now ask ourselves whether politics as usual allows any leader to wrestle with the great moral challenges of our time.’
Mark – Interesting post, but I wonder if your analysis of Rudd’s fate understates his unique circumstances and the importance of the connection between party structure and individual agency in determining a Labor leader’s political longevity. From all reports Rudd seems to have been something of an anomaly in Labor politics. As someone apparently without any deep base of support in the party he doesn’t seem to have been as ‘insulated’ as other leaders before him from such challenges. A more politically savvy leader might have been better able to better ‘mangage’ the factional machinations in the manner of Hawke and Keating to maintain power, enhance internal stability and implement policy objectives over several terms i.e. the art of the possible Labor style?
A very sad day in Australian politics for all the resaons you have outlined Mark. The only good thing for me is I finally found a reason to resign from the ALP. I just can’t stomach being associated with such an act of disloyalty, not to mention a complete cave in to media spin.
A very sad day in Australian politics for all the resaons you have outlined Mark. The only good thing for me is I finally found a reason to resign from the ALP. I just can’t stomach being associated with such an act of disloyalty, not to mention a complete cave in to media spin.
Mercurius, David Marr wrote a book?
I’d rather read BattleLines or the Hawke Memoirs <- actually pretty good.
It amuses me because despite the polling my vote was decided, now it is parked after these events.
Mercurius, David Marr wrote a book?
I’d rather read BattleLines or the Hawke Memoirs <- actually pretty good.
It amuses me because despite the polling my vote was decided, now it is parked after these events.
Don’t worry rainbowdog – I’m sure some Union Apparitich will ensure your name and vote remains on the ALP membership lists.
Don’t worry rainbowdog – I’m sure some Union Apparitich will ensure your name and vote remains on the ALP membership lists.
Sam Newman is dressed up like Julia, i cannot watch.
Sam Newman is dressed up like Julia, i cannot watch.
Came across this piece on the way home and thought it was bloody good. Anyway, as exciting as it is to have the first female PM, the party (machine) surely looks treacherous, poll-driven and lacking in, err, ticker. Got The Howard Years out of the library not long ago (it was located behind several series of Star Trek and Dreamgirls) and was amazed at the resilence and staying power of the old bugger. The Rudd Years will be as long as a sitcom with the ads taken out. The show should have went on till the audience decided whether it was worth a second episode.
Came across this piece on the way home and thought it was bloody good. Anyway, as exciting as it is to have the first female PM, the party (machine) surely looks treacherous, poll-driven and lacking in, err, ticker. Got The Howard Years out of the library not long ago (it was located behind several series of Star Trek and Dreamgirls) and was amazed at the resilence and staying power of the old bugger. The Rudd Years will be as long as a sitcom with the ads taken out. The show should have went on till the audience decided whether it was worth a second episode.
Gillard’s elevation was met by a surge in mining company prices on the stock market, and with the rightnik climate-change-deniers proudly displaying the knives, it’s not hard to find the powers behind the newly enthroned. Grubby, and as Mark wrote, diagnostic of a sick so-called democratic system.
It’s worth noting that Tanner announced today he won’t be contesting, while at the same time denying it had anything to do with the coup. I suspect the engineering of the coup – Gillard telling Rudd to be soft on climate change (the thing that started to put KRudd on the nose) while Tanner argued along KRudds “great moral challenge of our times” lines, had more than a bit to do with his resignation: watching the poison being offered and swallowed rather than the actual death.
The likes of Tanner (who has been a responsible, thoughtful, and therefore boring minister) resigning fits in, I reckon, with Mark’s comments on the state of democracy I reckon – and Hewson’s comments on The Drum a couple of weeks ago about both major party machines being easily bought by Big Carbon and other sectional interests with deep pockets.
Gillard’s elevation was met by a surge in mining company prices on the stock market, and with the rightnik climate-change-deniers proudly displaying the knives, it’s not hard to find the powers behind the newly enthroned. Grubby, and as Mark wrote, diagnostic of a sick so-called democratic system.
It’s worth noting that Tanner announced today he won’t be contesting, while at the same time denying it had anything to do with the coup. I suspect the engineering of the coup – Gillard telling Rudd to be soft on climate change (the thing that started to put KRudd on the nose) while Tanner argued along KRudds “great moral challenge of our times” lines, had more than a bit to do with his resignation: watching the poison being offered and swallowed rather than the actual death.
The likes of Tanner (who has been a responsible, thoughtful, and therefore boring minister) resigning fits in, I reckon, with Mark’s comments on the state of democracy I reckon – and Hewson’s comments on The Drum a couple of weeks ago about both major party machines being easily bought by Big Carbon and other sectional interests with deep pockets.
Newman as Gillard? These footy boys never miss the chance to frock up and mock. Although I cannot help thinking something else drives the footy drag fetish.
Newman as Gillard? These footy boys never miss the chance to frock up and mock. Although I cannot help thinking something else drives the footy drag fetish.
@7
You argument is pathetic. On the one hand you say that we don’t have a Presidential system but then you place all the emphasis on the leader. Sorry pal you can’t have it both ways. If you were true to your professed belief in the Westminster system you would argue that it is the party and not the leader that is important but that seems to have gone over your head.
@7
You argument is pathetic. On the one hand you say that we don’t have a Presidential system but then you place all the emphasis on the leader. Sorry pal you can’t have it both ways. If you were true to your professed belief in the Westminster system you would argue that it is the party and not the leader that is important but that seems to have gone over your head.
@7
Further to you exposition of the Westminster system, can you point to actual specific instances that would have brought about a catastrophic loss of confidence on the Rudd? Other than opinion poll and media commentary I mean.
@7
Further to you exposition of the Westminster system, can you point to actual specific instances that would have brought about a catastrophic loss of confidence on the Rudd? Other than opinion poll and media commentary I mean.
@8
Self-satisfaction alert.
“Those that took it had formed the view”
And the rest is just speculative drivel. History is what you should be taking note of and history would show you that there is no precedent for a party in Labor’s current position losing an election. You say it’s not “Canberra Groupthink” then go on to say
“Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition, but it does provide context as to why it was so easy to tear him down.” Where is the external force (i.e. the electorate) providing the stimulus in that scenario?
And again this sage warning:
“And be careful about drawing too many lessons from this for Gillard. Her roots and support within the party go far deeper than Rudd’s.”
Abolutlely, fundamentally jackshit to do with policy or the electorate.
Your para re the mining industry is a complete non-sequitir as Rudd was engaging with the mining sector, he just wasn’t rolling over. And what the hell difference is there between “consultation” and “negotiation” anyway?
“And don’t mourn for lost political courage.”
And try, please try not to patronise.
I’m sorry if you find this difficult but interventions are always hard and sometimes integrity can reemerge.
@8
Self-satisfaction alert.
“Those that took it had formed the view”
And the rest is just speculative drivel. History is what you should be taking note of and history would show you that there is no precedent for a party in Labor’s current position losing an election. You say it’s not “Canberra Groupthink” then go on to say
“Rudd’s internal unpopularity and poor management style was not the central reason for his deposition, but it does provide context as to why it was so easy to tear him down.” Where is the external force (i.e. the electorate) providing the stimulus in that scenario?
And again this sage warning:
“And be careful about drawing too many lessons from this for Gillard. Her roots and support within the party go far deeper than Rudd’s.”
Abolutlely, fundamentally jackshit to do with policy or the electorate.
Your para re the mining industry is a complete non-sequitir as Rudd was engaging with the mining sector, he just wasn’t rolling over. And what the hell difference is there between “consultation” and “negotiation” anyway?
“And don’t mourn for lost political courage.”
And try, please try not to patronise.
I’m sorry if you find this difficult but interventions are always hard and sometimes integrity can reemerge.
“I think it’s extremely depressing, and very bad for our democracy, that mining company and media interests can effectively bring down an elected PM.”
Oh please, get a grip Mark. Rudd proved himself utterly inept at the boring old political task of managing vested interests and selling reform to a justifiably sceptical electorate. The only thing bad for our democracy here is the political cowardice of the faceless men who apparently run the ALP these days. Cowards very rarely are the source of good policy.
BBB
“I think it’s extremely depressing, and very bad for our democracy, that mining company and media interests can effectively bring down an elected PM.”
Oh please, get a grip Mark. Rudd proved himself utterly inept at the boring old political task of managing vested interests and selling reform to a justifiably sceptical electorate. The only thing bad for our democracy here is the political cowardice of the faceless men who apparently run the ALP these days. Cowards very rarely are the source of good policy.
BBB
I don’t agree with the thrust of the piece. I don’t think Rudd was some blameless swot sideswiped by a rigload of Sussex Street heavies, nor a leader undermined by an media scrum running a “political narrative they’ve arrogated themselves the right to script”.
Gillard made a very specific reference to the Hawke/Keating economic legacy in her press conf this morning, neatly smacking down the Coalition’s claims to divine status on matters monied. But it highlights something else central to why Rudd could not continue to lead the ALP. The Hawke/Keating years also gave us the Accord, and there a persistent and unique partnership between the ALP and unions and a perhaps less than transparent but nevertheless realpolitik culture of negotiation. Neither a tradition nor a skill set that Rudd possessed. Ask anyone who bumped up against him during his adviser days for Goss, let alone the antics since Oct 2007.
What Gillard’s ascension means is a swing back to the pragmatic, the mediated, the pragmatically principled ALP which delivered astonishing macro-economic reform (and true often at the cost of wages, conditions and livelihoods of its natural constituents…) A Rudd led ALP simply cannot deliver the type of negotiated structural reforms that tax, carbon credits, blah blah blah have to be part of.
I don’t know how much internal panicking there really was going on over the much bandied-about party polling, but one consequence of a Rudd led ALP has been for the last 6 months a gradual grinding to a halt of governance, decisions, and policy implementation in senior levels of the PS in Canberra. SES level bureaucrats have been muttering into their lattes that this is almost unprecedented. Rudd’s need to micro-manage had become cannabalistic – he is a good man who simply could not do what he expected of himself. As no one could have done what he expected. But it is also a management style that is fundamentally at odds with ALP practice since the 1980s. Gillard has rightly re-iterated that the structural changes that the ALP wish to introduce MUST be negotiated – they cannot be imposed by the Big Bunny of Good Intentions. If you do not give the stakeholders and affected communities a sense of ownership of the process, that is fundamentally undemocratic.
I don’t agree with the thrust of the piece. I don’t think Rudd was some blameless swot sideswiped by a rigload of Sussex Street heavies, nor a leader undermined by an media scrum running a “political narrative they’ve arrogated themselves the right to script”.
Gillard made a very specific reference to the Hawke/Keating economic legacy in her press conf this morning, neatly smacking down the Coalition’s claims to divine status on matters monied. But it highlights something else central to why Rudd could not continue to lead the ALP. The Hawke/Keating years also gave us the Accord, and there a persistent and unique partnership between the ALP and unions and a perhaps less than transparent but nevertheless realpolitik culture of negotiation. Neither a tradition nor a skill set that Rudd possessed. Ask anyone who bumped up against him during his adviser days for Goss, let alone the antics since Oct 2007.
What Gillard’s ascension means is a swing back to the pragmatic, the mediated, the pragmatically principled ALP which delivered astonishing macro-economic reform (and true often at the cost of wages, conditions and livelihoods of its natural constituents…) A Rudd led ALP simply cannot deliver the type of negotiated structural reforms that tax, carbon credits, blah blah blah have to be part of.
I don’t know how much internal panicking there really was going on over the much bandied-about party polling, but one consequence of a Rudd led ALP has been for the last 6 months a gradual grinding to a halt of governance, decisions, and policy implementation in senior levels of the PS in Canberra. SES level bureaucrats have been muttering into their lattes that this is almost unprecedented. Rudd’s need to micro-manage had become cannabalistic – he is a good man who simply could not do what he expected of himself. As no one could have done what he expected. But it is also a management style that is fundamentally at odds with ALP practice since the 1980s. Gillard has rightly re-iterated that the structural changes that the ALP wish to introduce MUST be negotiated – they cannot be imposed by the Big Bunny of Good Intentions. If you do not give the stakeholders and affected communities a sense of ownership of the process, that is fundamentally undemocratic.
Sam Newman on the Footy Show is currently dressed in drag as Julia Gillard, so I might take refuge in front of my PC …
Riffing on the above comments and a few thoughts of my own:
– to paraphrase Bismarck’s quote (I think it was him): “politics is like making sausages, best not to see how they are actually created”. With the 24/7 news cycle, Twitter, etc. etc. aren’t a lot of us being a little precious now that we have been exposed to the actual machinations of high-stakes politics, as practised for thousands of years? At least none of these consenting adults was _literally_ knifed!
– That previous remark was aimed at passive political observers/commentators. For those who had a more personal stake in Rudd’s longevity, I sympathize. However, seeing as most of us on this forum have a personal stake in the ALP’s longevity in government, I think what happened was shocking, painful but ultimately should work out for the best. Just my own passive POV.
– Rudd’s obviously a highly intelligent fella, which I hope has leavened his shock at what just happened, given that he did a very similar thing about 3.5 years ago to Kim Beazley.
– Given this post’s now-standard lambasting of the “commentariat”, dare we ask how culpable we – the blogatariat – are in the current telescoping of political careers? Just as much 24/7 slicing and dicing of every utterance, nervous tic and fumble occurs on the Informal Interwebs as any other media organ, often overseen by people just as keen to persuade and influence as any media baron. Though I admit the Interwebs might want to do more than just bolster its own power.
– And … (drum roll) … would Menzies/Hawke/Churchill/Roosevelt/Mandela/Jesus have stood a snowball’s chance in hell of prospering in this hothouse, where pedestals are attacked even while being erected? Or can any protean force bend the times to his/her will? Gillard strikes me as being similar in ability and force to Keating – the smartest person in the room, but in her case lacking the compulsion to ram that fact down the throat of everyone present. More important than being the first female Australian PM, she seems like the right person for a difficult job – national leader in the 21st century …
All in all, glad I got on the ALP at $1.55 yesterday
Sorry for dribbling on, but a 4.30am start and 3 Coopers at the end does that …
Sam Newman on the Footy Show is currently dressed in drag as Julia Gillard, so I might take refuge in front of my PC …
Riffing on the above comments and a few thoughts of my own:
– to paraphrase Bismarck’s quote (I think it was him): “politics is like making sausages, best not to see how they are actually created”. With the 24/7 news cycle, Twitter, etc. etc. aren’t a lot of us being a little precious now that we have been exposed to the actual machinations of high-stakes politics, as practised for thousands of years? At least none of these consenting adults was _literally_ knifed!
– That previous remark was aimed at passive political observers/commentators. For those who had a more personal stake in Rudd’s longevity, I sympathize. However, seeing as most of us on this forum have a personal stake in the ALP’s longevity in government, I think what happened was shocking, painful but ultimately should work out for the best. Just my own passive POV.
– Rudd’s obviously a highly intelligent fella, which I hope has leavened his shock at what just happened, given that he did a very similar thing about 3.5 years ago to Kim Beazley.
– Given this post’s now-standard lambasting of the “commentariat”, dare we ask how culpable we – the blogatariat – are in the current telescoping of political careers? Just as much 24/7 slicing and dicing of every utterance, nervous tic and fumble occurs on the Informal Interwebs as any other media organ, often overseen by people just as keen to persuade and influence as any media baron. Though I admit the Interwebs might want to do more than just bolster its own power.
– And … (drum roll) … would Menzies/Hawke/Churchill/Roosevelt/Mandela/Jesus have stood a snowball’s chance in hell of prospering in this hothouse, where pedestals are attacked even while being erected? Or can any protean force bend the times to his/her will? Gillard strikes me as being similar in ability and force to Keating – the smartest person in the room, but in her case lacking the compulsion to ram that fact down the throat of everyone present. More important than being the first female Australian PM, she seems like the right person for a difficult job – national leader in the 21st century …
All in all, glad I got on the ALP at $1.55 yesterday
Sorry for dribbling on, but a 4.30am start and 3 Coopers at the end does that …
patrickb, your absurd ramblings re history and precedent, both of which are of no consequence whatsoever, are tiresome. LO is providing a good description of how the world actually is, as opposed to how it seems to be in your head. The former is interesting, the latter merely a medical curiosity.
BBB
patrickb, your absurd ramblings re history and precedent, both of which are of no consequence whatsoever, are tiresome. LO is providing a good description of how the world actually is, as opposed to how it seems to be in your head. The former is interesting, the latter merely a medical curiosity.
BBB
Mark, you’ve captured the bewilderment and sadness I feel even given the rise of our first, highly capable female prime minister. This morning’s speech by Rudd was tortured but very moving. I felt his decency and defiance of politics driven by factions over fundamental decency. He was not without flaws that contributed to his demise, and I have often been a critic of his government on climate, but I do feel he was in part defeated by a constructed media snowball effect that cut him down for his inability to articulate in brief moments what actually drove him. It was telling that, at work today as we all gathered around the live web feed, there was a sense of impatience, as if he was just going on too long. I wish him well, and hope the ultimate result of this blood-letting will have been worth it for Australia.
Mark, you’ve captured the bewilderment and sadness I feel even given the rise of our first, highly capable female prime minister. This morning’s speech by Rudd was tortured but very moving. I felt his decency and defiance of politics driven by factions over fundamental decency. He was not without flaws that contributed to his demise, and I have often been a critic of his government on climate, but I do feel he was in part defeated by a constructed media snowball effect that cut him down for his inability to articulate in brief moments what actually drove him. It was telling that, at work today as we all gathered around the live web feed, there was a sense of impatience, as if he was just going on too long. I wish him well, and hope the ultimate result of this blood-letting will have been worth it for Australia.
I don’t think Gillard is as beholden to the NSW Right as Rudd was. This time next year I think she’ll have a freer hand and they’ll be much diminished.
I don’t think Gillard is as beholden to the NSW Right as Rudd was. This time next year I think she’ll have a freer hand and they’ll be much diminished.
Great. Abbott wants to take us back to the halcyon days of Howardism and now according to Bernice @ 73, Gillard wants to introduce Accord ver. 8. Governing in consultation with Paul Howes, Joe de Bruyn and whoever is running the ACTU these days … what a recipe for success when union density is currently <15% in the private sector.
Anyone in Canberra want to develop a political platform for the 21st century? Anyone?
Great. Abbott wants to take us back to the halcyon days of Howardism and now according to Bernice @ 73, Gillard wants to introduce Accord ver. 8. Governing in consultation with Paul Howes, Joe de Bruyn and whoever is running the ACTU these days … what a recipe for success when union density is currently <15% in the private sector.
Anyone in Canberra want to develop a political platform for the 21st century? Anyone?
I remember how long it took the US to get rid of Nixon. One of the strengths of our system is that parties can decide that leaders are past their use by date and replace them very quickly.
In this case it is easy to blame the media, mining moguls or Sussex street but the real reasons Rudd fell were a combination of inappropriate management style, unnecessarily complex policies and the feedback members were getting from their electorates.
Gillard has been very careful with her wording so far so it will be interesting to see what she actually does in practice. She has quite rightly left herself plenty of room to move. Some of the people gloating at the moment may realize later that this wasn’t a very smart thing to do.
Interesting times. One of the things I really enjoy is watching Julia being interviewed by Kerry O’Brian.
I remember how long it took the US to get rid of Nixon. One of the strengths of our system is that parties can decide that leaders are past their use by date and replace them very quickly.
In this case it is easy to blame the media, mining moguls or Sussex street but the real reasons Rudd fell were a combination of inappropriate management style, unnecessarily complex policies and the feedback members were getting from their electorates.
Gillard has been very careful with her wording so far so it will be interesting to see what she actually does in practice. She has quite rightly left herself plenty of room to move. Some of the people gloating at the moment may realize later that this wasn’t a very smart thing to do.
Interesting times. One of the things I really enjoy is watching Julia being interviewed by Kerry O’Brian.
Oh Mark. Really. It was definitely the right time. I thought it weeks ago, that if they were going to move on Rudd they needed to do it pretty quickly. An Abbott/ Gillard contest is a fight made in heaven, they probably unwittingly set themselves up for such a firey showdown years ago. The die-hard red-head and the incredulous, misogenist pugilist. Question Time gold! We can of course Amen, be forever grateful that Kevin did a marvellous job in helping Maxine get rid of Howard. Tanks be. But he was a hopeless Prime Minister, hopeless. Yes he did some good things, as any decent human being would after the inhumanity of many of the Howard years, but as he found himself hunkering down more and more, getting paranoid and losing popularity he lost all steam. He was breathtakingly boring to listen to too.
Oh Mark. Really. It was definitely the right time. I thought it weeks ago, that if they were going to move on Rudd they needed to do it pretty quickly. An Abbott/ Gillard contest is a fight made in heaven, they probably unwittingly set themselves up for such a firey showdown years ago. The die-hard red-head and the incredulous, misogenist pugilist. Question Time gold! We can of course Amen, be forever grateful that Kevin did a marvellous job in helping Maxine get rid of Howard. Tanks be. But he was a hopeless Prime Minister, hopeless. Yes he did some good things, as any decent human being would after the inhumanity of many of the Howard years, but as he found himself hunkering down more and more, getting paranoid and losing popularity he lost all steam. He was breathtakingly boring to listen to too.
In today’s headache-inducing blitzkreig of twittering, talkbacking, television panelling and online opining, Rudd’s heart-breaking and very human final farewell provided blessed relief.
Here he was at last as a flesh-and-blood man, a passionate and decent labour man, a social democrat and the hero who ended the blight of Howardism. He may have been a poor communicator, a lousy delegator and a control freak, but there surely must now be no doubting his decency and sound intentions.
Away from all the red-in-tooth-and-claw politicking and the media noise-making, here was a moment in which to feel truly human. My colleagues gathered around the kitchen television at work and watched his halting speech in silence.
No doubt the realpolitik afficianados among us will see it as sentimental and trite, but that was more real to me than anything else I have seen these last months.
In today’s headache-inducing blitzkreig of twittering, talkbacking, television panelling and online opining, Rudd’s heart-breaking and very human final farewell provided blessed relief.
Here he was at last as a flesh-and-blood man, a passionate and decent labour man, a social democrat and the hero who ended the blight of Howardism. He may have been a poor communicator, a lousy delegator and a control freak, but there surely must now be no doubting his decency and sound intentions.
Away from all the red-in-tooth-and-claw politicking and the media noise-making, here was a moment in which to feel truly human. My colleagues gathered around the kitchen television at work and watched his halting speech in silence.
No doubt the realpolitik afficianados among us will see it as sentimental and trite, but that was more real to me than anything else I have seen these last months.
Mark,
Agree with the thrust of your article but cannot agree that the RSPT was intended by Rudd as a progressive reform of the taxation system.
Rudd wanted to quickly get the budget back into surplus to save his ‘sound economic manager’ credentials from being besmirched by Abbott’s ‘addicted to spending and debt’ line.
It was a typical Rudd stuff up: a poorly thought out quick fix gone wrong.
Mark,
Agree with the thrust of your article but cannot agree that the RSPT was intended by Rudd as a progressive reform of the taxation system.
Rudd wanted to quickly get the budget back into surplus to save his ‘sound economic manager’ credentials from being besmirched by Abbott’s ‘addicted to spending and debt’ line.
It was a typical Rudd stuff up: a poorly thought out quick fix gone wrong.
Mark
yours is a disappointing post in that you concentrated on manner of Rudds removal but not only ignored cause of Rudds removal ie Labor’s election losing POV of 35% , but also ignored which Groups were responsible for that 35% POV which is reely where Westminister System is at risk
To beleive as you do that Labor was not heading for route in marginals on actual curent Polling is unrealistic To believe as you do that total labor right faction throughout oz made there decision OTHER THAN on (current and forcast) dire Labor politcal polling assesments is also unreelistic All oxogen for any Labor “message” was drowned out in RSPT debate , public had stopped listening Rudds aproval had dropped 60%
Having not accepted Labors dire politcal prospects in marginals , your article wrongly worried about ‘power brokers’ who only carried out a needed and corect decision (to replace Rudd) for th Labor Party to avoid a rout for Labors benefit !
so that Labor could hav a decent opportunity to win with a Labor’s ‘message’ with needed amended polisys(CC and RSPT) that WOULD be heard , your article should hav addressed WHY Labor ( a very competant Govt) found itself in this position
which leads questons of Democracy in a 24/7 News age , how much oxygen Govts can get to inform public of important issues , many complex vs a 24/7 over supplied competitive Media who want ratings , sensationalism , and with Murdoch etc to additionaly peddle politcal bias What is future of any reform Govt in this 24/7 Age…(I think Julia may overcome it , hense need to make her PM to that Labor survives)
further its fair to say Govt also kicked some own goals that led to rout poll numbers , especially on CPRS in strategy positioning in dumping dead horse turnbull Bill but not replacing it with a newly created one and in perseption of how RSPT was not subject to Mining Co consultation
furthermore no discussion has been made of effect of Greens Party critisism of Rudd Govt taking votes , and just where they would hav goen had ther been no Greens Party seeing drift is from “left left ‘ labor voters
Mark
yours is a disappointing post in that you concentrated on manner of Rudds removal but not only ignored cause of Rudds removal ie Labor’s election losing POV of 35% , but also ignored which Groups were responsible for that 35% POV which is reely where Westminister System is at risk
To beleive as you do that Labor was not heading for route in marginals on actual curent Polling is unrealistic To believe as you do that total labor right faction throughout oz made there decision OTHER THAN on (current and forcast) dire Labor politcal polling assesments is also unreelistic All oxogen for any Labor “message” was drowned out in RSPT debate , public had stopped listening Rudds aproval had dropped 60%
Having not accepted Labors dire politcal prospects in marginals , your article wrongly worried about ‘power brokers’ who only carried out a needed and corect decision (to replace Rudd) for th Labor Party to avoid a rout for Labors benefit !
so that Labor could hav a decent opportunity to win with a Labor’s ‘message’ with needed amended polisys(CC and RSPT) that WOULD be heard , your article should hav addressed WHY Labor ( a very competant Govt) found itself in this position
which leads questons of Democracy in a 24/7 News age , how much oxygen Govts can get to inform public of important issues , many complex vs a 24/7 over supplied competitive Media who want ratings , sensationalism , and with Murdoch etc to additionaly peddle politcal bias What is future of any reform Govt in this 24/7 Age…(I think Julia may overcome it , hense need to make her PM to that Labor survives)
further its fair to say Govt also kicked some own goals that led to rout poll numbers , especially on CPRS in strategy positioning in dumping dead horse turnbull Bill but not replacing it with a newly created one and in perseption of how RSPT was not subject to Mining Co consultation
furthermore no discussion has been made of effect of Greens Party critisism of Rudd Govt taking votes , and just where they would hav goen had ther been no Greens Party seeing drift is from “left left ‘ labor voters
An outstanding analysis – with which I find myself in almost total agreement.
An outstanding analysis – with which I find myself in almost total agreement.
Although it galls to have party hacks and unions decide who runs the country, we can all agree that Kevin was the worst – THE worst – PM in Australian history.
Even a blind man living in a tree in Guam would have done a better job than that tufthunter.
Although it galls to have party hacks and unions decide who runs the country, we can all agree that Kevin was the worst – THE worst – PM in Australian history.
Even a blind man living in a tree in Guam would have done a better job than that tufthunter.
Stay classy, AC.
Stay classy, AC.
Look at the Newspoll primary vote figures at the end of Howard’s first term and re election. The Liberal Party primary is represented first.
Newspoll 12-14 June 1998 37 40
Newspoll 26-28 June 1998 34 45
Newspoll 10-12 July 1998 37 40
Newspoll 24-26 July 1998 35 41
Newspoll 7-9 August 1998 39 39
Newspoll 14-16 August 1998 44 39
Newspoll 28-30 August 1998 40 40
Newspoll 4-6 September 1998 41.5 41.5
Under the Labor Partys current formula that would spell a panic attack and a change of leader.
Look at the preferred PM figure in the leadup to the 1998 figures. Under the current Labor formula that would lead to something akin to a meltdown. Howards figure first followed by Beazley then the uncommitteds.
12-14 June 1998 35 36 29
26-28 June 1998 32 38 30
10-12 July 1998 37 36 27
24-26 July 1998 31 39 30
7-9 August 1998 37 38 25
14-16 August 1998 41 36 23
28-30 August 1998 39 37 24
4-6 September 1998 39 36 25
11-13 September 1998 39 39 22
18-20 September 1998 42 37 2
Here are Rudds last two preferred PM polls, Rudd’s figures are first.
28-30 May 2010 49 33 18
18-20 June 2010 46 37 17
That represents a damaged leader and the tossing out of a first term PM.
If people want to buy the “shocking internal polling” sales pitch then that is up to them but I would take it with a grain of salt. Here is a link to Andrew Bolt’s blog supposedly showing the results of the dreaded Labor internal polling.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/how_labor_would_have_lost_under_rudd/
As pointed out by some commentors some of the seats on the Labor list actually belong to the Coalition. I would hardly be hanging my hat on information of that quality.
I was and am no fan of Rudd but feel what the party did yeaterday were for reasons other than electoral necessity. The rubbish about internal polling and Gillard being offended are imho just smoke screens to make the whole thing look more a bit more palatable to some. They wanted to get rid of him and they did. If Gillard manages to scrape over the line this time then no doubt her turn will come and she will be replaced by one of the right wing pin up boys pulling the strings behind the scenes at the moment. Using this example as a precedent they won’t need much of an excuse either.
Look at the Newspoll primary vote figures at the end of Howard’s first term and re election. The Liberal Party primary is represented first.
Newspoll 12-14 June 1998 37 40
Newspoll 26-28 June 1998 34 45
Newspoll 10-12 July 1998 37 40
Newspoll 24-26 July 1998 35 41
Newspoll 7-9 August 1998 39 39
Newspoll 14-16 August 1998 44 39
Newspoll 28-30 August 1998 40 40
Newspoll 4-6 September 1998 41.5 41.5
Under the Labor Partys current formula that would spell a panic attack and a change of leader.
Look at the preferred PM figure in the leadup to the 1998 figures. Under the current Labor formula that would lead to something akin to a meltdown. Howards figure first followed by Beazley then the uncommitteds.
12-14 June 1998 35 36 29
26-28 June 1998 32 38 30
10-12 July 1998 37 36 27
24-26 July 1998 31 39 30
7-9 August 1998 37 38 25
14-16 August 1998 41 36 23
28-30 August 1998 39 37 24
4-6 September 1998 39 36 25
11-13 September 1998 39 39 22
18-20 September 1998 42 37 2
Here are Rudds last two preferred PM polls, Rudd’s figures are first.
28-30 May 2010 49 33 18
18-20 June 2010 46 37 17
That represents a damaged leader and the tossing out of a first term PM.
If people want to buy the “shocking internal polling” sales pitch then that is up to them but I would take it with a grain of salt. Here is a link to Andrew Bolt’s blog supposedly showing the results of the dreaded Labor internal polling.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/how_labor_would_have_lost_under_rudd/
As pointed out by some commentors some of the seats on the Labor list actually belong to the Coalition. I would hardly be hanging my hat on information of that quality.
I was and am no fan of Rudd but feel what the party did yeaterday were for reasons other than electoral necessity. The rubbish about internal polling and Gillard being offended are imho just smoke screens to make the whole thing look more a bit more palatable to some. They wanted to get rid of him and they did. If Gillard manages to scrape over the line this time then no doubt her turn will come and she will be replaced by one of the right wing pin up boys pulling the strings behind the scenes at the moment. Using this example as a precedent they won’t need much of an excuse either.
She was drafted and she will serve well. End of story. Labor will have a better chance in my view with her to create a mandate, as much as a victory.
But it is not the end of the story, Corin. Gillard may go down well in voterland, but the surprising urgent way she was elevated may not go down well at all. My wife doesn’t follow politics, and neither do her friends – but they appear to be indignant at the way Rudd was dispatched. That’s one of the things many commenters are pointing out. We don’t know how this will play with voters. Show me the raw polling numbers, with means and standard deviations, not Shamahan guff from the OO.
To paraphrase Mark: 24/7 media narratives are bad for you. Let’s have a nice hot cup of Slow The Fuck Down, so we can consider exactly What The Fuck Happened. Trying to putting it all behind us with “End of story” is dumb. Jeez, this feels like one explaining to a small child why she can’t have that cute puppy in the window…
Predictions? I got none. I just hope and pray Andrew Elder is right. Gillard devours Abbott in the elections, later gets into a fight with the queasy quartet (Feeney, Farrell, Shorten and Arbib) that helped her to the PMship, and destroys them utterly. As in “crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women” level of destruction. But in a completely non-sexual way, of course.
She was drafted and she will serve well. End of story. Labor will have a better chance in my view with her to create a mandate, as much as a victory.
But it is not the end of the story, Corin. Gillard may go down well in voterland, but the surprising urgent way she was elevated may not go down well at all. My wife doesn’t follow politics, and neither do her friends – but they appear to be indignant at the way Rudd was dispatched. That’s one of the things many commenters are pointing out. We don’t know how this will play with voters. Show me the raw polling numbers, with means and standard deviations, not Shamahan guff from the OO.
To paraphrase Mark: 24/7 media narratives are bad for you. Let’s have a nice hot cup of Slow The Fuck Down, so we can consider exactly What The Fuck Happened. Trying to putting it all behind us with “End of story” is dumb. Jeez, this feels like one explaining to a small child why she can’t have that cute puppy in the window…
Predictions? I got none. I just hope and pray Andrew Elder is right. Gillard devours Abbott in the elections, later gets into a fight with the queasy quartet (Feeney, Farrell, Shorten and Arbib) that helped her to the PMship, and destroys them utterly. As in “crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women” level of destruction. But in a completely non-sexual way, of course.
This was the best thing that could have happened to Kevin and his family. He set the bar too high for himself. By the set of his mouth and the look in his eyes he was heading for a breakdown.
I think he’s a good bloke, had the best of intentions but lacked the EQ and some other skills needed for the job. What’s been done is for the best and I can’t see any kinder way that it could have been done.
One has to admire the terrible efficiency of it all. Like when I had a large splinter go way in under my nail and before I knew what was happening the Doc just bored into the quick with the tweezers and hoiked it out. When you come down off the ceiling the relief is enormous. I hope Kevin had a really good sleep last night.
This was the best thing that could have happened to Kevin and his family. He set the bar too high for himself. By the set of his mouth and the look in his eyes he was heading for a breakdown.
I think he’s a good bloke, had the best of intentions but lacked the EQ and some other skills needed for the job. What’s been done is for the best and I can’t see any kinder way that it could have been done.
One has to admire the terrible efficiency of it all. Like when I had a large splinter go way in under my nail and before I knew what was happening the Doc just bored into the quick with the tweezers and hoiked it out. When you come down off the ceiling the relief is enormous. I hope Kevin had a really good sleep last night.
The opening paras of Julia’s speech were of considerable interest, containing an important message that went over the heads of the media pack, which is reporting only on the sweat and biffo, contemptuously dismissing everything else as just “spin”.
Julia outlined her values, derived from her family experience, and said quite emphatically that it will be these family values of hard work, respect etc that will guide her into the future. It was a personal declaration of secular Australian values, clearly distinguishing herself from Kevin’s god-bothering. Very welcome.
And last night on the 7.30 Report it was fascinating to watch her grapple Kerry and repeatedly wrestle him to the ground on the antithetical framing of his questions, and in the end, make him laugh at a red-head joke. This is a seriously competent woman, way outside the mould, and I think our bull-roaring media pack is in for a few surprises…
And just to throw some fuel on the fem debate above, Julia does need some fashion advice…Bronwyn Bishop’s recent sledge about Julia’s David Jones jacket might have gone over the heads of most men (ooo look, cat-fight) but it struck home to many women voters of a certain age, for whom “looking good” in the top job matters.
Julia will get that professional advice, as part of the Lodge package, just as the Silver Bodgie, and Anna Keating, did. But I sincerely hope she hangs on to her handsome hairdresser and remains a red-head.
The opening paras of Julia’s speech were of considerable interest, containing an important message that went over the heads of the media pack, which is reporting only on the sweat and biffo, contemptuously dismissing everything else as just “spin”.
Julia outlined her values, derived from her family experience, and said quite emphatically that it will be these family values of hard work, respect etc that will guide her into the future. It was a personal declaration of secular Australian values, clearly distinguishing herself from Kevin’s god-bothering. Very welcome.
And last night on the 7.30 Report it was fascinating to watch her grapple Kerry and repeatedly wrestle him to the ground on the antithetical framing of his questions, and in the end, make him laugh at a red-head joke. This is a seriously competent woman, way outside the mould, and I think our bull-roaring media pack is in for a few surprises…
And just to throw some fuel on the fem debate above, Julia does need some fashion advice…Bronwyn Bishop’s recent sledge about Julia’s David Jones jacket might have gone over the heads of most men (ooo look, cat-fight) but it struck home to many women voters of a certain age, for whom “looking good” in the top job matters.
Julia will get that professional advice, as part of the Lodge package, just as the Silver Bodgie, and Anna Keating, did. But I sincerely hope she hangs on to her handsome hairdresser and remains a red-head.
Mark, the Dismissal prompted a pang of shame from Fraser, enough for a referendum to amend the constituion.
I think it would be a good idea if Gillard decided to import the British/Canadian model of leadership elections.
@ 8
Tell me, LO, apart from the spin (`communications’) what evidence do you have that Team Rudd was lacking in any of these other areas?
I know you’ll just blame Captain Queeg Rudd for his inherently poor leadership, what with his whipping of the fee fees of the poor maligned staffers, but why should any of us with a hint of objectivity believe Martin Ferguson as Rudd’s negotiator was any worse than he’ll be as Gillard’s negotiator? I think I’ll wait until the historians compare the Hawke/Keating era reforms to the Rudd RSPT.
(And I hope you’re not about to jump on the “Ken Henry must also go” bandwagon. Purifying a simple party for the national good is one thing…)
@ 25
Heh, why do I feel that Corin here, he/she of “It is easier for Gillard to backflip on ETS than Rudd” has only discovered their love of the conscientious Great Australian Labor Movement now that they thinks their version of ever-so-Green-tinted neoliberalism has been installed in the leadership.
Gillard will be a success in my eyes if the new government makes it clear its actions are sourced from the previous one. That is isn’t backflipping on the RSPT, only putting in the amendments that were always in the pipeline.
Fuck the idea of Julia backflipping and then running on how awesome she is. I’ll consider voting informal if Barack Gillard pulls that stunt.
Trenton @ 87, mark my words, from now on in only conservative Liberal leaders are immune from this type of media pile on. That was the Howard precedent.
I don’t want to give any credit to moderate Liberals, but Turnbull was obviously a victim of the same dynamic as Rudd.
Abbott is in the Opposition leader’s chair for as long as he wants it (I don’t believe he’ll be catapulted onto the treasury benches. Can’t contemplate that.)
Mark, the Dismissal prompted a pang of shame from Fraser, enough for a referendum to amend the constituion.
I think it would be a good idea if Gillard decided to import the British/Canadian model of leadership elections.
@ 8
Tell me, LO, apart from the spin (`communications’) what evidence do you have that Team Rudd was lacking in any of these other areas?
I know you’ll just blame Captain Queeg Rudd for his inherently poor leadership, what with his whipping of the fee fees of the poor maligned staffers, but why should any of us with a hint of objectivity believe Martin Ferguson as Rudd’s negotiator was any worse than he’ll be as Gillard’s negotiator? I think I’ll wait until the historians compare the Hawke/Keating era reforms to the Rudd RSPT.
(And I hope you’re not about to jump on the “Ken Henry must also go” bandwagon. Purifying a simple party for the national good is one thing…)
@ 25
Heh, why do I feel that Corin here, he/she of “It is easier for Gillard to backflip on ETS than Rudd” has only discovered their love of the conscientious Great Australian Labor Movement now that they thinks their version of ever-so-Green-tinted neoliberalism has been installed in the leadership.
Gillard will be a success in my eyes if the new government makes it clear its actions are sourced from the previous one. That is isn’t backflipping on the RSPT, only putting in the amendments that were always in the pipeline.
Fuck the idea of Julia backflipping and then running on how awesome she is. I’ll consider voting informal if Barack Gillard pulls that stunt.
Trenton @ 87, mark my words, from now on in only conservative Liberal leaders are immune from this type of media pile on. That was the Howard precedent.
I don’t want to give any credit to moderate Liberals, but Turnbull was obviously a victim of the same dynamic as Rudd.
Abbott is in the Opposition leader’s chair for as long as he wants it (I don’t believe he’ll be catapulted onto the treasury benches. Can’t contemplate that.)
http://mumble.com.au/
Peter Brent gives a good crtique on why people shouldn’t be taken in by the spin attempting to explain why this particular political ambush had to take place.
http://mumble.com.au/
Peter Brent gives a good crtique on why people shouldn’t be taken in by the spin attempting to explain why this particular political ambush had to take place.
Well said Down & Out … there was a fair bit of that talk about a good man done down, even amongst those who aren’t that engaged or sympathetic to the ALP. It would be nice to think that Gillard will eviscerate Abbott and then the ALP right. I won’t be holding my breath for the latter though.
It occurred to me again this morning that I have spent almost my entire political life denied the chance to say anything more positive on the morning after an election than “it could have been worse I suppose”. The arguable exception was in December 1972, when I was just 14 and still seven years too young to even vote. I was still too young in 1975 to help vote back Gough Whitlam and by 1977 I did so holding my nose. From tha following day forth I never voted formally again.
Well said Down & Out … there was a fair bit of that talk about a good man done down, even amongst those who aren’t that engaged or sympathetic to the ALP. It would be nice to think that Gillard will eviscerate Abbott and then the ALP right. I won’t be holding my breath for the latter though.
It occurred to me again this morning that I have spent almost my entire political life denied the chance to say anything more positive on the morning after an election than “it could have been worse I suppose”. The arguable exception was in December 1972, when I was just 14 and still seven years too young to even vote. I was still too young in 1975 to help vote back Gough Whitlam and by 1977 I did so holding my nose. From tha following day forth I never voted formally again.
Heh, Grace Pettigrew, I see you’re already blocking out all the reports about Gillard going further to the right of Rudd on asylum seekers.
I hope for your sake your Leftliberal fee fees aren’t hurt by the Teh Great Progressive pissing all over a `secular’ humane approach to boatpeople.
Heh, Grace Pettigrew, I see you’re already blocking out all the reports about Gillard going further to the right of Rudd on asylum seekers.
I hope for your sake your Leftliberal fee fees aren’t hurt by the Teh Great Progressive pissing all over a `secular’ humane approach to boatpeople.
Agree with all sorts of comments on this thread.
.
Bernice makes some excellent points , Corin’s comments explain the hard edged reality of factional power play and many others are a bit sooky about the fact a favoured person has been brutally sacrificed for the greater good – as perceived by a self selected few.
.
Trenton at 92 links to a very sleazy phenomenon- the blanket denial that a plot hatched by the numbers men occurred.
Why the attempts to deny this happened? The frankly weird stories that the actions were initiated by the caucus members?
If the party wants to demonstrate that the party comes first- as they effectively have – then why pretend this isn’t the case?
Personally I don’t then interpret this a threat to democracy – it is a threat to political actors who are perceived to be performing poorly. .
Agree with all sorts of comments on this thread.
.
Bernice makes some excellent points , Corin’s comments explain the hard edged reality of factional power play and many others are a bit sooky about the fact a favoured person has been brutally sacrificed for the greater good – as perceived by a self selected few.
.
Trenton at 92 links to a very sleazy phenomenon- the blanket denial that a plot hatched by the numbers men occurred.
Why the attempts to deny this happened? The frankly weird stories that the actions were initiated by the caucus members?
If the party wants to demonstrate that the party comes first- as they effectively have – then why pretend this isn’t the case?
Personally I don’t then interpret this a threat to democracy – it is a threat to political actors who are perceived to be performing poorly. .
I’m an eye for an eye kind of guy.
“Twiggy” Forrest’s heart on a plate and;
Hugh Morgan’s balls in a blender.
Either will do me fine.
Fran, I will never see your comments in the same light again. Sorry, you lost my respect. Think about it!
Fran, I will never see your comments in the same light again. Sorry, you lost my respect. Think about it!
The national secretary of the Australian Labor Party sent internal polling figures to the (insane, reactionary) commentariat figure who was most influential in the attempted Liberal coup against Howard at APEC in 2007?
The details of the coup yesterday will not be pretty when the inevitable tell-all is published.
And Latham talks!
The national secretary of the Australian Labor Party sent internal polling figures to the (insane, reactionary) commentariat figure who was most influential in the attempted Liberal coup against Howard at APEC in 2007?
The details of the coup yesterday will not be pretty when the inevitable tell-all is published.
And Latham talks!
If you’ve observed the increasingly haunted look of despair in Christina Keneally’s eyes then you know what Gillard is in for. Once the mates make you a hand puppet you’re stuck there.
We need to stop referring to “the right of the ALP” because this proposes that there is a left and centre. The rot iniated by Keating is complete. The ALP now manages in capital’s interests better than the Libs. All that remains is the sort of cultural/identity politics that Marr got so worked up about.
If you’ve observed the increasingly haunted look of despair in Christina Keneally’s eyes then you know what Gillard is in for. Once the mates make you a hand puppet you’re stuck there.
We need to stop referring to “the right of the ALP” because this proposes that there is a left and centre. The rot iniated by Keating is complete. The ALP now manages in capital’s interests better than the Libs. All that remains is the sort of cultural/identity politics that Marr got so worked up about.
Well I regret that I’ve lost your respect Ootz, but nthat is the way it was. In 19878 Wran broke the printers’ strike, producing scab ballots and I couldn’t even enter a polling place without breaking TU principle. All through the 1980s the ALP was trying to smash unions — the BLF most notably — and eviscerate working conditions through The Accord and so again, it was simply not possible to vote for the ALP without voting to crush unions and solidarising with the boss class explicitly.
In 1991 we got to vote for invading Iraq. In 1993-96 for Keating’s recession and the flogging off of public assets. In 1998 Beazley ran on Keatings’ program and in 2001 he endorsed Howard on border control. in 2004 — Latham … good grief
Well I regret that I’ve lost your respect Ootz, but nthat is the way it was. In 19878 Wran broke the printers’ strike, producing scab ballots and I couldn’t even enter a polling place without breaking TU principle. All through the 1980s the ALP was trying to smash unions — the BLF most notably — and eviscerate working conditions through The Accord and so again, it was simply not possible to vote for the ALP without voting to crush unions and solidarising with the boss class explicitly.
In 1991 we got to vote for invading Iraq. In 1993-96 for Keating’s recession and the flogging off of public assets. In 1998 Beazley ran on Keatings’ program and in 2001 he endorsed Howard on border control. in 2004 — Latham … good grief
Fran #93:
You mean you breached democratic centralist discipline on the Spartacist policy of giving “savagely critical support” to Labor in the 1980 Federal election? And you weren’t asked to engage in self-criticism over such an anarchist left-sectarian error?
Fran #93:
You mean you breached democratic centralist discipline on the Spartacist policy of giving “savagely critical support” to Labor in the 1980 Federal election? And you weren’t asked to engage in self-criticism over such an anarchist left-sectarian error?
“The ALP now manages in capital’s interests better than the Libs. All that remains is the sort of cultural/identity politics that Marr got so worked up about.”
Exactly. The highlight for the ABC in anything Gillard had to say was ‘negotiation’ about the RSPT and of course it was in the context of this being a crisis that MUST be resolved.
There is only one thing that Labor has going for them now, and that is Tony Abbott.
“The ALP now manages in capital’s interests better than the Libs. All that remains is the sort of cultural/identity politics that Marr got so worked up about.”
Exactly. The highlight for the ABC in anything Gillard had to say was ‘negotiation’ about the RSPT and of course it was in the context of this being a crisis that MUST be resolved.
There is only one thing that Labor has going for them now, and that is Tony Abbott.
Fran, your memory is faulty. There was no election in 1991. There was an election in 1990, held well before Iraq invaded Kuwait and so well before the first gulf war.
Anyway, back OT. Mark’s point is that it is a shocking thing to casually dispose of a first term PM as if he is a disposable razor. It’s a very respectable conservative argument about not trashing our institutions for ephemeral benefit.
But does it really set a dangerous precdent. Rudd was unique in that he was the first PM to have no personal or ideological backing in his wm party. He had no capital to draw on, no favours to call in, no friends to stick by him. There may not be another like him.
Fran, your memory is faulty. There was no election in 1991. There was an election in 1990, held well before Iraq invaded Kuwait and so well before the first gulf war.
Anyway, back OT. Mark’s point is that it is a shocking thing to casually dispose of a first term PM as if he is a disposable razor. It’s a very respectable conservative argument about not trashing our institutions for ephemeral benefit.
But does it really set a dangerous precdent. Rudd was unique in that he was the first PM to have no personal or ideological backing in his wm party. He had no capital to draw on, no favours to call in, no friends to stick by him. There may not be another like him.
While the generalisation contained in this passage is true, this generalisation does not encompass the process that resulted in Rudd’s demise.
Certainly, polls played their part. A sequence of polls are not static but rather signify a locus of popularity tracked over time.
Even an unfavourable locus over time does not usually result in a political decapitation. And it is unlikely to have been the only cause of the fundamental erosion of caucus support for Rudd. Brian in another thread mentioned that Rudd was left with a rump of 30 caucus supporters. The other 80 or so remember the past, perceive the present (by, among other means, scrutinising the polls) and project into the future.
These 80 or so were driven by a range of motives. Prolongation of their parliamentary careers was doubtless one of the more important of these motives.
These parliamentarians make a career of keeping their fingers on the electoral pulse. This obsession doesn’t make them infallible. Far from it.
But outsider observers would be foolish to conclude that these professional politicians were all stampeded into a self-destructive act by the power of the media.
While the generalisation contained in this passage is true, this generalisation does not encompass the process that resulted in Rudd’s demise.
Certainly, polls played their part. A sequence of polls are not static but rather signify a locus of popularity tracked over time.
Even an unfavourable locus over time does not usually result in a political decapitation. And it is unlikely to have been the only cause of the fundamental erosion of caucus support for Rudd. Brian in another thread mentioned that Rudd was left with a rump of 30 caucus supporters. The other 80 or so remember the past, perceive the present (by, among other means, scrutinising the polls) and project into the future.
These 80 or so were driven by a range of motives. Prolongation of their parliamentary careers was doubtless one of the more important of these motives.
These parliamentarians make a career of keeping their fingers on the electoral pulse. This obsession doesn’t make them infallible. Far from it.
But outsider observers would be foolish to conclude that these professional politicians were all stampeded into a self-destructive act by the power of the media.
The lesson to draw from this being that whilst it is highly desirable that Labor Prime Ministers and Premiers not be creatures of the factions, the reality of the ALP is that Labor leaders need to have some kind of functional relationship with the factions, or with people who know how to manage relations with the factions. Somebody like Neville Wran in NSW, or in a different way Peter Beattie in Queensland (both successful and long-standing Premiers) might be a model for how to get the balance right.
The lesson to draw from this being that whilst it is highly desirable that Labor Prime Ministers and Premiers not be creatures of the factions, the reality of the ALP is that Labor leaders need to have some kind of functional relationship with the factions, or with people who know how to manage relations with the factions. Somebody like Neville Wran in NSW, or in a different way Peter Beattie in Queensland (both successful and long-standing Premiers) might be a model for how to get the balance right.
Excellent article, Mark. The bit about setting a dangerous precedent sent chills down my spine. This was not just another leadership challenge. Even more disturbing than the notorious Dismissal, it bore all the hallmarks of a coup. The only thing missing was the tanks rumbling down the main street.
Excellent article, Mark. The bit about setting a dangerous precedent sent chills down my spine. This was not just another leadership challenge. Even more disturbing than the notorious Dismissal, it bore all the hallmarks of a coup. The only thing missing was the tanks rumbling down the main street.
Sam said:
That’s quite right. I messed up the composition of that sentence. It should have been included in 1993.
Sam said:
That’s quite right. I messed up the composition of that sentence. It should have been included in 1993.
The revolting cheer squad at News Corp can’t help themselves. “No CPRS without public consultation” they crow (i.e. that means never, thanks to the poisoning of public opinion by, you guessed it, news corp and mining company funded bullshit organisations like the IPA) and “negotiation” with mining companies. Meanwhile, Twiggy Forrest celebrates his second coup.
I feel nothing but despair.
The revolting cheer squad at News Corp can’t help themselves. “No CPRS without public consultation” they crow (i.e. that means never, thanks to the poisoning of public opinion by, you guessed it, news corp and mining company funded bullshit organisations like the IPA) and “negotiation” with mining companies. Meanwhile, Twiggy Forrest celebrates his second coup.
I feel nothing but despair.
Something like that Paul, Yes … Within the org, I was seen as something of an ultra …
Something like that Paul, Yes … Within the org, I was seen as something of an ultra …
Here is another perspective.
John Howard was undoubtedly the most influential Australian politician since Gough Whitlam. Perhaps, it can be argued, he brought about more institutional change than any leader since Billy Hughes.
Along the way, Howard blighted the political careers of several would-be ALP PMs. He also goaded the ALP into elevating a loose cannon like Mark Latham to its leadership. In short, one of the institutions that Howard changed was the ALP.
To beat the Howard government, it has often been argued, the ALP had to out-Howard Howard. Rudd was the man for the job and he did it successfully.
Howard also changed the Liberal Party, effectively destroying its liberal wing, rendering it unelectable under normal circumstances.
But circumstances would never be normal while Rudd (the bizarro-world Howard) led the ALP.
The removal of the abnormal Rudd represents a return to the kind of political normality that allows the ALP to beat the deeply abnormal Abbott-led Liberal Party.
Here is another perspective.
John Howard was undoubtedly the most influential Australian politician since Gough Whitlam. Perhaps, it can be argued, he brought about more institutional change than any leader since Billy Hughes.
Along the way, Howard blighted the political careers of several would-be ALP PMs. He also goaded the ALP into elevating a loose cannon like Mark Latham to its leadership. In short, one of the institutions that Howard changed was the ALP.
To beat the Howard government, it has often been argued, the ALP had to out-Howard Howard. Rudd was the man for the job and he did it successfully.
Howard also changed the Liberal Party, effectively destroying its liberal wing, rendering it unelectable under normal circumstances.
But circumstances would never be normal while Rudd (the bizarro-world Howard) led the ALP.
The removal of the abnormal Rudd represents a return to the kind of political normality that allows the ALP to beat the deeply abnormal Abbott-led Liberal Party.
In the backwash of this act of bastardry we’ll see piles of bullshit from the usual bullshitters. A few of examples:
-Private polling revealed that Labor was in a worse position than the public polls suggested. Bullshit, I agree with The Piping Shrike that this is about control of the party, not an impending election loss that wasn’t going to happen.
-Rudd lacked conviction and was ‘Howard-lite’. If and when the details are revealed about the mecahnics of the last few months, it will be revealed that the ‘backflips’ for which Rudd was so widely criticised were engineered by the very people that destroyed him, the very people to whom Gillard is beholden. It should be also clear that unlike Howard, Rudd genuinely believed in making a difference and nearly had a breakdown trying.
-Rudd was loathed by his staff and he was an egotistical control freek. Which is why his staff were openly weeping during his farewell speech.
-The media had nothing to do with this – of course the media’s central role in all this has been airbrushed from the record. The Canberra press gallery are about as self reflective as a cardboard box, and now they’ve achieved their victory they’ll become even more spiteful and vindictive towards whover they think is not right wing enough.
In the backwash of this act of bastardry we’ll see piles of bullshit from the usual bullshitters. A few of examples:
-Private polling revealed that Labor was in a worse position than the public polls suggested. Bullshit, I agree with The Piping Shrike that this is about control of the party, not an impending election loss that wasn’t going to happen.
-Rudd lacked conviction and was ‘Howard-lite’. If and when the details are revealed about the mecahnics of the last few months, it will be revealed that the ‘backflips’ for which Rudd was so widely criticised were engineered by the very people that destroyed him, the very people to whom Gillard is beholden. It should be also clear that unlike Howard, Rudd genuinely believed in making a difference and nearly had a breakdown trying.
-Rudd was loathed by his staff and he was an egotistical control freek. Which is why his staff were openly weeping during his farewell speech.
-The media had nothing to do with this – of course the media’s central role in all this has been airbrushed from the record. The Canberra press gallery are about as self reflective as a cardboard box, and now they’ve achieved their victory they’ll become even more spiteful and vindictive towards whover they think is not right wing enough.
Fran, at least you could put the money where your mouth is. Contribute your electoral $ 1.00 to the Greens or an independent if you don’t agree with party politics. It is a democratic right after all. For all its warts and and nose hair, some good people fought very hard for our right to vote and still fight in other parts of the world to do so. Or are you just participating here for entertainment value?
OT, anyone who has gone through it themselves, can recognise what happened to the former PM. Burnout, all the signs where there and a few political commenter have picked it up. It occurred to me a few days ago when I heard once again his line “…I have to work harder ….”. What is an organisation to do when its leader is in self destruction mode and wont or can’t listen?
Fran, at least you could put the money where your mouth is. Contribute your electoral $ 1.00 to the Greens or an independent if you don’t agree with party politics. It is a democratic right after all. For all its warts and and nose hair, some good people fought very hard for our right to vote and still fight in other parts of the world to do so. Or are you just participating here for entertainment value?
OT, anyone who has gone through it themselves, can recognise what happened to the former PM. Burnout, all the signs where there and a few political commenter have picked it up. It occurred to me a few days ago when I heard once again his line “…I have to work harder ….”. What is an organisation to do when its leader is in self destruction mode and wont or can’t listen?
It’s always about control of the party. That is a given.
What isn’t a given is how 80 members of the caucus formed the opinion that dumping Rudd was worth all the pain and angst.
The press gallery has no vote in the ALP Caucus.
It’s always about control of the party. That is a given.
What isn’t a given is how 80 members of the caucus formed the opinion that dumping Rudd was worth all the pain and angst.
The press gallery has no vote in the ALP Caucus.
Paul, quite right.
And for those who decry the (IMO exaggerated) role of the media in bringing down Rudd, it was the media, or more precisely, his media strategy, via Sunrise, that brought him up. Rudd ran for PM outside his own party, by building his own profile, the way US politicians do. That made him very vulnerable to the forces that brought him down.
Paul, quite right.
And for those who decry the (IMO exaggerated) role of the media in bringing down Rudd, it was the media, or more precisely, his media strategy, via Sunrise, that brought him up. Rudd ran for PM outside his own party, by building his own profile, the way US politicians do. That made him very vulnerable to the forces that brought him down.
Good piece, Mark. My heart went out to Rudd. But the real problem is this eternal present. Its the media culture that has to change, not the ALP culture, which has been like this for a very long time. I don’t see how the former can be done. Information technology makes it impossible. We have to live with spooked politicians forever, whatewver the party. Instead of deep consibered thought, which gone wrong, can be slowly disastrous, we’re stuck with a culture of instant chaos which can’t fail to have an impact on our political institutions.
Good piece, Mark. My heart went out to Rudd. But the real problem is this eternal present. Its the media culture that has to change, not the ALP culture, which has been like this for a very long time. I don’t see how the former can be done. Information technology makes it impossible. We have to live with spooked politicians forever, whatewver the party. Instead of deep consibered thought, which gone wrong, can be slowly disastrous, we’re stuck with a culture of instant chaos which can’t fail to have an impact on our political institutions.
Nickws@94: “Heh, Grace Pettigrew, I see you’re already blocking out all the reports about Gillard going further to the right of Rudd on asylum seekers. I hope for your sake your Leftliberal fee fees aren’t hurt by the Teh Great Progressive pissing all over a `secular’ humane approach to boatpeople.”
You are a very unhappy little vegemite, aren’t you? This is not the first time you have launched an addled attack on my posts, projecting onto me some weird fantasy about who I am. What on earth does “leftliberal fee fees” mean?
Nickws@94: “Heh, Grace Pettigrew, I see you’re already blocking out all the reports about Gillard going further to the right of Rudd on asylum seekers. I hope for your sake your Leftliberal fee fees aren’t hurt by the Teh Great Progressive pissing all over a `secular’ humane approach to boatpeople.”
You are a very unhappy little vegemite, aren’t you? This is not the first time you have launched an addled attack on my posts, projecting onto me some weird fantasy about who I am. What on earth does “leftliberal fee fees” mean?
Ootz said:
Oh I’ve done more than that. In 2007 I leafletted areas around marginal booths in Benelong, where I live, against Howard. I helped out The Greens putting up posters and on the day I ferried supplies arouind and worked the booths for the entire day. I assisted with GetUp! and Your Rights at Work as well. I did donate cash too.
In the recent Bradfield by-election I again assisted and did scrutineering for The Greens.
And at apt moments, I advocate to fellow staff and within my other cirtcles of people on the issues. Some may think that this is a good enough reason to vote Green/ALP … and this time I will be voting against extractive industry/media control of the state, which IMO, trumps all other issues — even asylum seekers and the ALP’s failure on climate change.
Ootz said:
Oh I’ve done more than that. In 2007 I leafletted areas around marginal booths in Benelong, where I live, against Howard. I helped out The Greens putting up posters and on the day I ferried supplies arouind and worked the booths for the entire day. I assisted with GetUp! and Your Rights at Work as well. I did donate cash too.
In the recent Bradfield by-election I again assisted and did scrutineering for The Greens.
And at apt moments, I advocate to fellow staff and within my other cirtcles of people on the issues. Some may think that this is a good enough reason to vote Green/ALP … and this time I will be voting against extractive industry/media control of the state, which IMO, trumps all other issues — even asylum seekers and the ALP’s failure on climate change.
“The press gallery has no vote in the ALP Caucus.”
Thanks for enlightening me on that particular matter, Katz. Without your ability to state the bleeding obvious with an of infinite superiority I would have been forever under a terrible misapprehension.
“The press gallery has no vote in the ALP Caucus.”
Thanks for enlightening me on that particular matter, Katz. Without your ability to state the bleeding obvious with an of infinite superiority I would have been forever under a terrible misapprehension.
@111 – yes Adrian, and also, the “explosive Rudd temper” of this “deeply angry man” who is the “real Rudd” was also MIA yesterday. I saw a dignified man of great integrity at that last presser; and not the volatile, foul-tempered, foul-mouthed volcano that all these s***ar** journos kept telling us for years is “the real Rudd”.
That’s how fiendish that Mr Rudd is. It’s so fiendish how we never, ever saw that “explosive Rudd temper”, not even on the day he was pole-axed by his own party…
@111 – yes Adrian, and also, the “explosive Rudd temper” of this “deeply angry man” who is the “real Rudd” was also MIA yesterday. I saw a dignified man of great integrity at that last presser; and not the volatile, foul-tempered, foul-mouthed volcano that all these s***ar** journos kept telling us for years is “the real Rudd”.
That’s how fiendish that Mr Rudd is. It’s so fiendish how we never, ever saw that “explosive Rudd temper”, not even on the day he was pole-axed by his own party…
What we need to do is get some of this analyses that many bloggers like Mark, Possum, Mumbles, Shrike have written into the MSM.
What we need to do is get some of this analyses that many bloggers like Mark, Possum, Mumbles, Shrike have written into the MSM.
This is an exaggeration—and it ignores the fact that a certain Edward Gough Whitlam was likewise as much of a non-factional creature as Rudd. Hell, the closest thing to an internal party base for Gough was an Anti-Left backlash! Hence much of the fun of his tenure.
I’ll take the original proposition for Rudd’s leadership—Anti-Howardism—any day of the week over ALP factional poilitics as normal.
Because with the exception of the leaders of the Labor governments of ’41-`49 and ’83-`96 it probably isn’t a good thing to have a Labor PM who lives and breathes factional politics. We should actually hope Gillard moves towards a Rudd-like attitude RE mate-ism.
No, Grace Pettigrew, it’s the second time I’ve launched an ‘addled attack’ on you, if by addled you mean my criticism of your weird, anachronistic rant against Rudd for him not being a Protestant (or not being Protestant enough).
I have no doubt that when Julia starts trumpeting her Methodism (she’s an electorally ambitious leader; she’s Welsh; she’s never identified as Atheist AFAICT; do the maths) you won’t have a single thing to say about her religiosity.
So, as to my rude non-sequitur-question-which-actually-goes-to-the-heart-of-your-Leftliberalism: what of Gillard supposedly embracing an Arbib plan to kick the refugees in order to win Western Sydney votes? Isn’t it worth noting that would have an impact on the cultural politics of the new government, moreso than the initial attraction of having a female PM?
The simplistic feelings of a somewhat apathetic Leftliberal such as yourself (haven’t you noticed that 99% of the discussions here are about process and policy, not about cultural day dreaming?).
Hell, I don’t hate Gillard, and always wanted her to be the first female PM. Don’t care for the identity politics people who support her at the expense of the ALP, though. They’re merely sleepwalking into the hands of the factional warlords (that includes the SDA and the NSW Right!) who designed the coup.
This is an exaggeration—and it ignores the fact that a certain Edward Gough Whitlam was likewise as much of a non-factional creature as Rudd. Hell, the closest thing to an internal party base for Gough was an Anti-Left backlash! Hence much of the fun of his tenure.
I’ll take the original proposition for Rudd’s leadership—Anti-Howardism—any day of the week over ALP factional poilitics as normal.
Because with the exception of the leaders of the Labor governments of ’41-`49 and ’83-`96 it probably isn’t a good thing to have a Labor PM who lives and breathes factional politics. We should actually hope Gillard moves towards a Rudd-like attitude RE mate-ism.
No, Grace Pettigrew, it’s the second time I’ve launched an ‘addled attack’ on you, if by addled you mean my criticism of your weird, anachronistic rant against Rudd for him not being a Protestant (or not being Protestant enough).
I have no doubt that when Julia starts trumpeting her Methodism (she’s an electorally ambitious leader; she’s Welsh; she’s never identified as Atheist AFAICT; do the maths) you won’t have a single thing to say about her religiosity.
So, as to my rude non-sequitur-question-which-actually-goes-to-the-heart-of-your-Leftliberalism: what of Gillard supposedly embracing an Arbib plan to kick the refugees in order to win Western Sydney votes? Isn’t it worth noting that would have an impact on the cultural politics of the new government, moreso than the initial attraction of having a female PM?
The simplistic feelings of a somewhat apathetic Leftliberal such as yourself (haven’t you noticed that 99% of the discussions here are about process and policy, not about cultural day dreaming?).
Hell, I don’t hate Gillard, and always wanted her to be the first female PM. Don’t care for the identity politics people who support her at the expense of the ALP, though. They’re merely sleepwalking into the hands of the factional warlords (that includes the SDA and the NSW Right!) who designed the coup.
Adrian, I’m not interested in a slanging match. I’m interested in a reasoned discussion.
Here is my argument:
Here is my tagline:
I believe it is relatively easy for most to detect the difference. One of them contains an argument and evidence.
Adrian, I’m not interested in a slanging match. I’m interested in a reasoned discussion.
Here is my argument:
Here is my tagline:
I believe it is relatively easy for most to detect the difference. One of them contains an argument and evidence.
@ 120, no, because those writers want to write for people with attention spans. MSM writers want to get onto TV and radio.
The ABC is launching a new 24 hr TV newschannel, so I’m afraid that side is winning the war on analysis.
@ 120, no, because those writers want to write for people with attention spans. MSM writers want to get onto TV and radio.
The ABC is launching a new 24 hr TV newschannel, so I’m afraid that side is winning the war on analysis.
@NickWS That’s a pretty narrow-minded view.
@NickWS That’s a pretty narrow-minded view.
Indeed Katz, somehow we have to reconcile two different views of the ALP right – they are merciless head kickers who will do anything to get and keep a hold on power and they are sheep, frightened and addled by the media into stampeding their own leader off a cliff only months short of an election. Does not add up at all. Bill Shorten may be from the right but he has been a very decent minister in his portfolio though hamstrung by the traditional lack of interest in and funding for disability. One thing he is not is an addle-pated fool.
Indeed Katz, somehow we have to reconcile two different views of the ALP right – they are merciless head kickers who will do anything to get and keep a hold on power and they are sheep, frightened and addled by the media into stampeding their own leader off a cliff only months short of an election. Does not add up at all. Bill Shorten may be from the right but he has been a very decent minister in his portfolio though hamstrung by the traditional lack of interest in and funding for disability. One thing he is not is an addle-pated fool.
It adds up perfectly well. Bullies (i.e. people who like sinking the boot into asylum seekers, welfare recipients, etc.) are frequently also cowards (i.e. people who lack the bottle to stand up to the mining industry for the sake of good public policy).
It adds up perfectly well. Bullies (i.e. people who like sinking the boot into asylum seekers, welfare recipients, etc.) are frequently also cowards (i.e. people who lack the bottle to stand up to the mining industry for the sake of good public policy).
Katz @ 110. Spot on.
Katz @ 110. Spot on.
Rudd’s RSPT was by no means the only way to tax the mining industry. Neither should it be assumed that opposing Rudd’s RSPT is synonymous with mollycoddling the mining industry.
Rudd’s tax proposal would have been an administrative nightmare and by no means the most effective means of achieving Rudd’s quite reasonable ambitions. This breakdown at the level of execution became Rudd’s signture.
Rudd’s RSPT was by no means the only way to tax the mining industry. Neither should it be assumed that opposing Rudd’s RSPT is synonymous with mollycoddling the mining industry.
Rudd’s tax proposal would have been an administrative nightmare and by no means the most effective means of achieving Rudd’s quite reasonable ambitions. This breakdown at the level of execution became Rudd’s signture.
Katz
Adrian, I’m not interested in a slanging match. I’m interested in a reasoned discussion.
Here is my argument:
“What isn’t a given is how 80 members of the caucus formed the opinion that dumping Rudd was worth all the pain and angst.”
Well I take NO notice of NON labor suporters here/elsewhere using Julia’s promotion as a blatant GUISE to simply make anti Labor rants (of Labor is ‘lurchin to ‘right’ and selective but irelevant NSW ‘right’ rants)
Politcs Labor style is about ‘numbers’ both personally and for th Partys survival ….(trending poll numbers) AND polisy outcomes (seeing its a left Reformist Party
only) Massive majority of Labor’s 115 elected “professional” politcans made a decision , and there was no fightback by Rudd suporters emphasing this massive majority reality
They know what there own marginal seat polling was telling them , a rout , and for outsider amaturs to claim they know otherwise without any evidense is laughable Decision pro Julia was correct , so that a Labor Govt can be returned & not Abbot
It may not be pretty , but this is reel World where actualy WHO will be Govt is at stake I feel for Rudd personaly as in many ways it seems unfair but govt is what counts
What issues caused Labor dire situation (requiring Labor to hav to make this sad but justified decision) and th MSN role in it is diferent issue
ps/ What Julia will do re Assylum seekers , CPRS and RSPT we damn well do not know yet and for bloggers here to state in advance what she will do as “a fact” is partisien blinkered
Katz
Adrian, I’m not interested in a slanging match. I’m interested in a reasoned discussion.
Here is my argument:
“What isn’t a given is how 80 members of the caucus formed the opinion that dumping Rudd was worth all the pain and angst.”
Well I take NO notice of NON labor suporters here/elsewhere using Julia’s promotion as a blatant GUISE to simply make anti Labor rants (of Labor is ‘lurchin to ‘right’ and selective but irelevant NSW ‘right’ rants)
Politcs Labor style is about ‘numbers’ both personally and for th Partys survival ….(trending poll numbers) AND polisy outcomes (seeing its a left Reformist Party
only) Massive majority of Labor’s 115 elected “professional” politcans made a decision , and there was no fightback by Rudd suporters emphasing this massive majority reality
They know what there own marginal seat polling was telling them , a rout , and for outsider amaturs to claim they know otherwise without any evidense is laughable Decision pro Julia was correct , so that a Labor Govt can be returned & not Abbot
It may not be pretty , but this is reel World where actualy WHO will be Govt is at stake I feel for Rudd personaly as in many ways it seems unfair but govt is what counts
What issues caused Labor dire situation (requiring Labor to hav to make this sad but justified decision) and th MSN role in it is diferent issue
ps/ What Julia will do re Assylum seekers , CPRS and RSPT we damn well do not know yet and for bloggers here to state in advance what she will do as “a fact” is partisien blinkered
Nickws@121: my my, you are keeping tabs on me.
I had not seen that particular linked rant before. I was referring to a different addle-pated personal attack of yours, but I will leave the archive search to you.
“when Julia starts trumpeting her Methodism…”. LOL.
As for the rest of your misdirected and bespittled rant, you are jumping at shadows and I pity your fear.
Nickws@121: my my, you are keeping tabs on me.
I had not seen that particular linked rant before. I was referring to a different addle-pated personal attack of yours, but I will leave the archive search to you.
“when Julia starts trumpeting her Methodism…”. LOL.
As for the rest of your misdirected and bespittled rant, you are jumping at shadows and I pity your fear.
Senexx, do you want any of the people you list sitting on Barrie’s couch of a Sunday morning?
Senexx, do you want any of the people you list sitting on Barrie’s couch of a Sunday morning?
Grace Pettigrew @ 130, trust me, that thread with it’s two contributions by me attacking your strangely pro-Protestant ‘Atheism’ is the only interaction I’ve ever had with you on the comments sections of this blog. And as you responded to my linked post back in March, 2009 I think I can say without fear of contradiction that, yes, you had seen what I wrote.
You’re right if your’re making light of the fact she is actually nominally a ‘”non-practising Baptist” and “not religious”, as attributed to her spokesperson by Wikipedia.
Otherwise, Grace Pettigrew, do you really mean to say you’re willing to bet Gillard won’t have a photo-op or campaign appearance with religious types, or she won’t invoke the heritage of her British Christian Socialism ala “we’re more Methodist than Marx”?
This is a woman who refused to answer a religious questionnaire given to federal Parliamentarians by The Age, IIRC. I know that as I distinctly remember only Nicola Roxon and one other minister (not Gillard) identifies as having no religion whatsoever.
Now I know why I don’t have anything to do with you.
You know sweet bugger all about politics. Or culture.
Grace Pettigrew @ 130, trust me, that thread with it’s two contributions by me attacking your strangely pro-Protestant ‘Atheism’ is the only interaction I’ve ever had with you on the comments sections of this blog. And as you responded to my linked post back in March, 2009 I think I can say without fear of contradiction that, yes, you had seen what I wrote.
You’re right if your’re making light of the fact she is actually nominally a ‘”non-practising Baptist” and “not religious”, as attributed to her spokesperson by Wikipedia.
Otherwise, Grace Pettigrew, do you really mean to say you’re willing to bet Gillard won’t have a photo-op or campaign appearance with religious types, or she won’t invoke the heritage of her British Christian Socialism ala “we’re more Methodist than Marx”?
This is a woman who refused to answer a religious questionnaire given to federal Parliamentarians by The Age, IIRC. I know that as I distinctly remember only Nicola Roxon and one other minister (not Gillard) identifies as having no religion whatsoever.
Now I know why I don’t have anything to do with you.
You know sweet bugger all about politics. Or culture.
“Rudd’s RSPT was by no means the only way to tax the mining industry”
yes , he could taken Hawke’s more basic model on Oil , but tax proceeds wuld be less than under Rudds RSPT (Supa profits ar much higher with Miners so a progessive tax system was proposed to maximise this reality)…whether angst worth it , well
“Rudd’s RSPT was by no means the only way to tax the mining industry”
yes , he could taken Hawke’s more basic model on Oil , but tax proceeds wuld be less than under Rudds RSPT (Supa profits ar much higher with Miners so a progessive tax system was proposed to maximise this reality)…whether angst worth it , well
Corin @25: “It’s a movement not a single moment in time.”
That is a most interesting thought. A movement. A process?
The ETS appears to have been at the heart of 2 leadership spills (Turnbull and Rudd), a massive split in the Liberal party, a huge rise and subsequent fall in PM popularity, and heated debate online.
“It’s a movement not a single moment in time.”
Perhaps you are right? Where to next?
Corin @25: “It’s a movement not a single moment in time.”
That is a most interesting thought. A movement. A process?
The ETS appears to have been at the heart of 2 leadership spills (Turnbull and Rudd), a massive split in the Liberal party, a huge rise and subsequent fall in PM popularity, and heated debate online.
“It’s a movement not a single moment in time.”
Perhaps you are right? Where to next?
“Perhaps you are right? Where to next?”
REALITY
read preceding post of Labor Outsider at #24 ,
and not non Labor suporter’s ruse of using Julia’s promotion as a cloak for anti Labor rants
“Perhaps you are right? Where to next?”
REALITY
read preceding post of Labor Outsider at #24 ,
and not non Labor suporter’s ruse of using Julia’s promotion as a cloak for anti Labor rants
Riffing off the comparisons further up the thread with the Hawke/Hayden leadership struggle of the 1980s, in the far left circles plugged into the Victorian ALP Hard Left circles I moved in at the time, Hawke was our bete noir and we took a dim view of his accession to the leadership in 1983. I have said this before in other discussions but it has long since become clear that Hawke did more progressive things than Hayden would have been either willing to do (given his Old Labor prejudices on the environment) or able to do (given that he would not have won as many elections as Hawke) and did not do aynthing to upset the left which would not have been done by Hayden (or any other conceivable Labor PM at that time), and which Hayden would have done less politically skilfully than Hawke.
Riffing off the comparisons further up the thread with the Hawke/Hayden leadership struggle of the 1980s, in the far left circles plugged into the Victorian ALP Hard Left circles I moved in at the time, Hawke was our bete noir and we took a dim view of his accession to the leadership in 1983. I have said this before in other discussions but it has long since become clear that Hawke did more progressive things than Hayden would have been either willing to do (given his Old Labor prejudices on the environment) or able to do (given that he would not have won as many elections as Hawke) and did not do aynthing to upset the left which would not have been done by Hayden (or any other conceivable Labor PM at that time), and which Hayden would have done less politically skilfully than Hawke.
Ron @135: “Perhaps you are right? Where to next?…REALITY…read preceding post of Labor Outsider at #24″
Actually, I was going somewhere quite different, Ron. LO@24 was talking about Rudd’s style and the polling figures. I don’t dispute that, but I was trying to step back a bit and look at the overall pattern.
We have had an incredible amount of upheaval recently on the topic of climate change and the ETS. It has split parties and cost leaders their positions, and caused major swings in the polling. All in a quite concentrated period of time, historically speaking (2 years or less).
“Where to next?” Surely we aren’t going to explain it away solely on the political style of Rudd and Turnbull? I think we are in the midst of a major turning-point in thinking.
Perhaps those two may not have been effective leaders, for their time, because they didn’t manage to bring everyone with them. However, they may have been political visionaries, to some degree, who saw the transition coming but were just a little too far in front of their parties and the electorate? As such, they may have both played an important role in Australia’s transition process?
As many have said here, we are driven by the daily news cycle, with the endless need for volatility and scuttlebutt to drive the media machine. Step back, and we might see the sweep of history and something more significant taking place?
Ron @135: “Perhaps you are right? Where to next?…REALITY…read preceding post of Labor Outsider at #24″
Actually, I was going somewhere quite different, Ron. LO@24 was talking about Rudd’s style and the polling figures. I don’t dispute that, but I was trying to step back a bit and look at the overall pattern.
We have had an incredible amount of upheaval recently on the topic of climate change and the ETS. It has split parties and cost leaders their positions, and caused major swings in the polling. All in a quite concentrated period of time, historically speaking (2 years or less).
“Where to next?” Surely we aren’t going to explain it away solely on the political style of Rudd and Turnbull? I think we are in the midst of a major turning-point in thinking.
Perhaps those two may not have been effective leaders, for their time, because they didn’t manage to bring everyone with them. However, they may have been political visionaries, to some degree, who saw the transition coming but were just a little too far in front of their parties and the electorate? As such, they may have both played an important role in Australia’s transition process?
As many have said here, we are driven by the daily news cycle, with the endless need for volatility and scuttlebutt to drive the media machine. Step back, and we might see the sweep of history and something more significant taking place?
A major turning point in thinking…..I would say so!
The world has been at a group of crossroads for years!!
9-11 was a statement of unsustainability!!! People don’t like exploitation!!!!
A major turning point in thinking…..I would say so!
The world has been at a group of crossroads for years!!
9-11 was a statement of unsustainability!!! People don’t like exploitation!!!!
Hey, I know, why don’t we all get really really angry!??!
Hey, I know, why don’t we all get really really angry!??!
PN @ 126: “It adds up perfectly well. Bullies (i.e. people who like sinking the boot into asylum seekers, welfare recipients, etc.) are frequently also cowards (i.e. people who lack the bottle to stand up to the mining industry for the sake of good public policy).”
–> This is the concept of fascists hiding behind fascists! They hunt in packs and packs only!
PN @ 126: “It adds up perfectly well. Bullies (i.e. people who like sinking the boot into asylum seekers, welfare recipients, etc.) are frequently also cowards (i.e. people who lack the bottle to stand up to the mining industry for the sake of good public policy).”
–> This is the concept of fascists hiding behind fascists! They hunt in packs and packs only!
Still smiling here and enjoying the northern hemisphere weather with the fantastic news from Canberra. Opened some excellent French champagne last night. Yum.
I know some of you feel an obligation to defend Rudd because you foolishly voted for him and vocally supported him. I can understand that your faces are burning with the shame of having been deceived by the fellow.
So I’m proposing a moratorium on finger pointing. I won’t ridicule you for this huge mistake now that the cretin has gone. You can all come in from the cold now, assured that we won’t embarrass you.
Just, please, don’t fuck up again next time. Vote wisely.
Still smiling here and enjoying the northern hemisphere weather with the fantastic news from Canberra. Opened some excellent French champagne last night. Yum.
I know some of you feel an obligation to defend Rudd because you foolishly voted for him and vocally supported him. I can understand that your faces are burning with the shame of having been deceived by the fellow.
So I’m proposing a moratorium on finger pointing. I won’t ridicule you for this huge mistake now that the cretin has gone. You can all come in from the cold now, assured that we won’t embarrass you.
Just, please, don’t fuck up again next time. Vote wisely.
Hey, AC, what sort of “Champagne”?
Hey, AC, what sort of “Champagne”?
LOL. Champagne Champagne.
Well-spotted. This bodes well for your powers of observation. Don’t get fooled again, amigo.
LOL. Champagne Champagne.
Well-spotted. This bodes well for your powers of observation. Don’t get fooled again, amigo.
I don’t think anyone loves this stuff except warped people but Julia is a better communicator, manager and symbol of values.
Unlike Mark, I think MySchool and the education workplace changes are the best thing the Govt has done so far. They need to free schools more and empower principals even more. This is not anti-Left indeed I’d say it is promoting social mobility and surely that is a left wing ideal.
I don’t think anyone loves this stuff except warped people but Julia is a better communicator, manager and symbol of values.
Unlike Mark, I think MySchool and the education workplace changes are the best thing the Govt has done so far. They need to free schools more and empower principals even more. This is not anti-Left indeed I’d say it is promoting social mobility and surely that is a left wing ideal.
I’m coming down on the side of Katz, Su, Gracr and Labor Outsider on all this, after originally being appalled be the destabilising campaign run in the media, with obvious help from ALP right insiders. Sure it’s very uncomfortable to see the baddies (like News Ltd, the press gallery, the NSW Right and AWU, much less Twiggy and the Minerals gang) gloat and triumph.
But it seems clear enough now that they were reflecting unease rather than necessarily creating it (always excepting the tireless Shanahan, who is probably ignored by professional ALP pollies anyway). Nothing concentrates the mind of Caucus members like the prospect of losing their seat. Rudd would still be a hero to many for slaying Howard, but that counts for little compared with survival. 3/4 of members prepared to vote against him is pretty telling. Not all of them would be Nervous Nellies.
Still, it does seem extraordinary. Apart from despatching Howard, he led us through the GFC with barely a ripple compared with the rest of the OECD countries. And the Apology. The media deserves blame in another respect for running with Abbott’s non-stories about insulation deaths and school building ripoffs. They were always hyperbole and should’ve been tackled head-on but weren’t. Rudd’s attempts to remain aloof and allow Garrett to be made a scapegoat were damned silly, as was the abandonment of ETS till 2013. That’s when his approval plummeted, and has never recovered. It doesn’t matter that the advice might have come from elsewhere. It was Rudd’s decision not to explain it and not to use the Senate impasse to go on hammering opponents on it. Letting them wear the blame, even actually bringing out the double dissolution stick might have gone better.
I know the strategy was to try to bring the agenda back to the strong points of their achievements. But it suffered from the ignorance of public and political dynamics. Here he was perhaps a little too dependent on advisers divorced from the process.
I don’t think we should be too hasty to condemn Gillard. She didn’t implement this coup, only entering it very late and refusing to comment publicly. And her comments so far, though open to almost any interpretation, do not confirm a lurch to the Right or appeasement of the Minerals Council. Throughout her career she has been careful not to step too far ahead of public consensus, but that does not mean she won’t try to persuade the public to her beliefs. As I mentioned elsewhere that approach is very much in the Dunstan tradition, and that is probably what she was nurtured on in SA.
And I am encouraged that her political hero is Nye Bevan, who introduced Britain’s national health system. I’ve just read a bio of another Welshman, Lloyd George, who, although a rogue in his personal life and viewed by many as ‘supping with the devil’, was a great achiever. If she turns out anything like those models, and she originated from similar appalling poverty and inequality, I think she’ll do all right.
I feel for the sorrow and anger over this, but Labor does need to go on, not merely for members’ survival but to torch the remains of Howardism which are still very prevalent.
I’m coming down on the side of Katz, Su, Gracr and Labor Outsider on all this, after originally being appalled be the destabilising campaign run in the media, with obvious help from ALP right insiders. Sure it’s very uncomfortable to see the baddies (like News Ltd, the press gallery, the NSW Right and AWU, much less Twiggy and the Minerals gang) gloat and triumph.
But it seems clear enough now that they were reflecting unease rather than necessarily creating it (always excepting the tireless Shanahan, who is probably ignored by professional ALP pollies anyway). Nothing concentrates the mind of Caucus members like the prospect of losing their seat. Rudd would still be a hero to many for slaying Howard, but that counts for little compared with survival. 3/4 of members prepared to vote against him is pretty telling. Not all of them would be Nervous Nellies.
Still, it does seem extraordinary. Apart from despatching Howard, he led us through the GFC with barely a ripple compared with the rest of the OECD countries. And the Apology. The media deserves blame in another respect for running with Abbott’s non-stories about insulation deaths and school building ripoffs. They were always hyperbole and should’ve been tackled head-on but weren’t. Rudd’s attempts to remain aloof and allow Garrett to be made a scapegoat were damned silly, as was the abandonment of ETS till 2013. That’s when his approval plummeted, and has never recovered. It doesn’t matter that the advice might have come from elsewhere. It was Rudd’s decision not to explain it and not to use the Senate impasse to go on hammering opponents on it. Letting them wear the blame, even actually bringing out the double dissolution stick might have gone better.
I know the strategy was to try to bring the agenda back to the strong points of their achievements. But it suffered from the ignorance of public and political dynamics. Here he was perhaps a little too dependent on advisers divorced from the process.
I don’t think we should be too hasty to condemn Gillard. She didn’t implement this coup, only entering it very late and refusing to comment publicly. And her comments so far, though open to almost any interpretation, do not confirm a lurch to the Right or appeasement of the Minerals Council. Throughout her career she has been careful not to step too far ahead of public consensus, but that does not mean she won’t try to persuade the public to her beliefs. As I mentioned elsewhere that approach is very much in the Dunstan tradition, and that is probably what she was nurtured on in SA.
And I am encouraged that her political hero is Nye Bevan, who introduced Britain’s national health system. I’ve just read a bio of another Welshman, Lloyd George, who, although a rogue in his personal life and viewed by many as ‘supping with the devil’, was a great achiever. If she turns out anything like those models, and she originated from similar appalling poverty and inequality, I think she’ll do all right.
I feel for the sorrow and anger over this, but Labor does need to go on, not merely for members’ survival but to torch the remains of Howardism which are still very prevalent.
AC @ 141:
AC, I’m not pointing my finger at you
AC @ 141:
AC, I’m not pointing my finger at you
This thread has distilled down to some really interesting views from Corin, Elise, Don Wigan and Paul Norton. I have generally been in agreement with Corin all the way through but accept that most of the posters have been venting which is understandable.
Elise’s view of the bigger picture in regards to the ETS is inspired. Timothy Leary couldn’t have done better of “outside looking in” and I mean that as a great compliment.
I agree with Don Wigan that we need to wait and see what Julia does. I have a good feeling about her being more capable than Kevin and winning the next election but I am sceptical about her greenness. I am happy for voters to flock to the Greens but I am hoping Julia gives them reason to preference Labour.
This thread has distilled down to some really interesting views from Corin, Elise, Don Wigan and Paul Norton. I have generally been in agreement with Corin all the way through but accept that most of the posters have been venting which is understandable.
Elise’s view of the bigger picture in regards to the ETS is inspired. Timothy Leary couldn’t have done better of “outside looking in” and I mean that as a great compliment.
I agree with Don Wigan that we need to wait and see what Julia does. I have a good feeling about her being more capable than Kevin and winning the next election but I am sceptical about her greenness. I am happy for voters to flock to the Greens but I am hoping Julia gives them reason to preference Labour.
Anecdotal evidence only but in the last few days in my arenas everyone from playgroup mums to teachers to school janitors have not had a good thing to say about Gillard and what happened. Everyone I have spoken to has been disgusted and think Gillard is an opportunist and no better. All have been sicked by the backrrom deals. I think when you see a school janitor angrily denounce it alongside stay at home mums at playgroup then you realise that the public are more switched on and have more of a moral compass than given credit for. The acts of the last few days are wrong and lets hope Guillard is thrown out.
Anecdotal evidence only but in the last few days in my arenas everyone from playgroup mums to teachers to school janitors have not had a good thing to say about Gillard and what happened. Everyone I have spoken to has been disgusted and think Gillard is an opportunist and no better. All have been sicked by the backrrom deals. I think when you see a school janitor angrily denounce it alongside stay at home mums at playgroup then you realise that the public are more switched on and have more of a moral compass than given credit for. The acts of the last few days are wrong and lets hope Guillard is thrown out.
Yep Spana, can’t find any staff or parents at MySchool (sic) with a kind word for Julia either.
Yep Spana, can’t find any staff or parents at MySchool (sic) with a kind word for Julia either.
My mistake. When I first looked, it seemed to be a pinkie. My condolences!
My mistake. When I first looked, it seemed to be a pinkie. My condolences!
I’m watching Kerry and Tone’s on ABC and all I can see is ears.
I’m watching Kerry and Tone’s on ABC and all I can see is ears.
Nickws@132: I still have no idea what you mean by my “leftliberal fee fees”, my “blocking out…asylum seekers”, my “apathetic cultural day-dreaming”, or my “pro-protestant atheism” and the “SDA” etc references in the previous thread. You must be thinking of someone else.
“Now I know why I don’t have anything to do with you.”
Good. Now shove off and don’t darken my door again.
Go Julia.
Nickws@132: I still have no idea what you mean by my “leftliberal fee fees”, my “blocking out…asylum seekers”, my “apathetic cultural day-dreaming”, or my “pro-protestant atheism” and the “SDA” etc references in the previous thread. You must be thinking of someone else.
“Now I know why I don’t have anything to do with you.”
Good. Now shove off and don’t darken my door again.
Go Julia.
Don Wigan @145
Yep. That’s when the bubble burst. Punters don’t like smartie pants. It reminds them of their own inadequacies.
Like I said way back on 7 June 2010 before this imbroglio brewed up:
Don Wigan @145
Yep. That’s when the bubble burst. Punters don’t like smartie pants. It reminds them of their own inadequacies.
Like I said way back on 7 June 2010 before this imbroglio brewed up:
Since you’re quoting yourself, it’s a pity that you were wrong, Katz.
Since you’re quoting yourself, it’s a pity that you were wrong, Katz.
Do tell, Adrian.
Do tell, Adrian.
I went wading through Vexnews and found this piece on a Canberra Times article back in March. The second comment is interesting too.
I went wading through Vexnews and found this piece on a Canberra Times article back in March. The second comment is interesting too.
Katz, the point is that they got rid of Rudd because they thought he was going to win the election not because they thought he was going to lose it.
Rudd was on track to win the next election – look at the latest Morgan poll. As Abbott came under more scrutiny, Labor’s vote would probably have risen as the contrast with Rudd as a steady hand became more apparent.
Remember the health debate.
The problem for the plotters was that if Rudd got back in he would have a mandate that no amount of hysterical media coverage and mining ads could overcome.
Katz, the point is that they got rid of Rudd because they thought he was going to win the election not because they thought he was going to lose it.
Rudd was on track to win the next election – look at the latest Morgan poll. As Abbott came under more scrutiny, Labor’s vote would probably have risen as the contrast with Rudd as a steady hand became more apparent.
Remember the health debate.
The problem for the plotters was that if Rudd got back in he would have a mandate that no amount of hysterical media coverage and mining ads could overcome.
“They”?
“They” were the Caucus members who want to hang on to their seats.
The Caucus were the only “they” directly responsible for axing Rudd.
Why would “they” indicate to the machine men that they desired to put themselves at more electoral peril than they were already?
All the conspiracy theories are crushed by this central fact.
“They”?
“They” were the Caucus members who want to hang on to their seats.
The Caucus were the only “they” directly responsible for axing Rudd.
Why would “they” indicate to the machine men that they desired to put themselves at more electoral peril than they were already?
All the conspiracy theories are crushed by this central fact.
The plotters were already leaking to the media back in March, long before the RSPT was introduced in May.
The plotters were already leaking to the media back in March, long before the RSPT was introduced in May.
I don’t know if you’ve read the thread entitled ‘How the coup against Kevin Rudd unfolded’, but it answers your questions.
I don’t know if you’ve read the thread entitled ‘How the coup against Kevin Rudd unfolded’, but it answers your questions.
No it doesn’t.
The plotters proposed.
The Caucus disposed.
No it doesn’t.
The plotters proposed.
The Caucus disposed.
Look Katz, I’m sorry if you can’t see the obvious. Try reading the post again because it certainly explains why they disposed.
Look Katz, I’m sorry if you can’t see the obvious. Try reading the post again because it certainly explains why they disposed.
And why was that?
PS. Why is irrelevant until one understands how.
A parallel: Many people may have wanted JFK dead. Most of them only got what they wanted if they didn’t do it.
And why was that?
PS. Why is irrelevant until one understands how.
A parallel: Many people may have wanted JFK dead. Most of them only got what they wanted if they didn’t do it.
Because by the time they were given a choice they had no choice.
I also note that you’ve ignored my central point about why this happened – maybe you don’t live in NSW.
Anyway I’ve got things to do, we’ll see who is right soon enough. Actually I hope I’m wrong.
Because by the time they were given a choice they had no choice.
I also note that you’ve ignored my central point about why this happened – maybe you don’t live in NSW.
Anyway I’ve got things to do, we’ll see who is right soon enough. Actually I hope I’m wrong.
I’m a little mystified by how my place of residence influenced the nature of the ouster of Kevin Rudd.
I’m a little mystified by how my place of residence influenced the nature of the ouster of Kevin Rudd.
I was thinking that it might give you some additional insight into the nature of the backroom hacks that disposed of Kevin Rudd, as the only rational explanation for NSW ALP politics is that given a choice between losing power and lose an election, they will lose an election every time.
Which is why we have the revolving door of leaders until they find one who will do their bidding. As Nathan Rees and others have found out, you either do as you are told or someone else will replace you. Too bad if the electorate recognise this stinking pile of debris for what it is.
I am sure that Julia Gillard doesn’t have to be told this twice.
I was thinking that it might give you some additional insight into the nature of the backroom hacks that disposed of Kevin Rudd, as the only rational explanation for NSW ALP politics is that given a choice between losing power and lose an election, they will lose an election every time.
Which is why we have the revolving door of leaders until they find one who will do their bidding. As Nathan Rees and others have found out, you either do as you are told or someone else will replace you. Too bad if the electorate recognise this stinking pile of debris for what it is.
I am sure that Julia Gillard doesn’t have to be told this twice.
But what power does the NSW Right wield over the large majority of caucus members who are neither from NSW nor of the Right?
But what power does the NSW Right wield over the large majority of caucus members who are neither from NSW nor of the Right?
Fear and faction loyalty Katz. The stinking, cynical manipulations of Arbib do not require large scale persuasion, just uncertainty. The vast majority of the members of caucus have one favour or another pledged to somebody for their pre-selection.
Fear and faction loyalty Katz. The stinking, cynical manipulations of Arbib do not require large scale persuasion, just uncertainty. The vast majority of the members of caucus have one favour or another pledged to somebody for their pre-selection.
But not necessarily the NSW Right.
If even a sizable minority of the Caucus calculated that their electoral fortunes were better served by sticking with Rudd then it is likely that Rudd’s incumbency would have been defended, as was Beazely’s when Rudd challenged him. Beazely lost 39 to 49.
But not necessarily the NSW Right.
If even a sizable minority of the Caucus calculated that their electoral fortunes were better served by sticking with Rudd then it is likely that Rudd’s incumbency would have been defended, as was Beazely’s when Rudd challenged him. Beazely lost 39 to 49.
Katz – under normal federal circumstances you’d be right. We are not talking normal circumstances. The confected panic, aided and abetted by internal Labor party sources fed off itself. Arbib specialises in pulling those kinds of stunts.
It’s a herd mentality that takes over in those situations. Remember, Beazley had polled poorly for a long time in comparison to Rudd and leadership speculation was rife during his whole term. If there was ever a reluctant draftee, it was Beazley himself who must have been almost relieved when Rudd finally stepped up.
Katz – under normal federal circumstances you’d be right. We are not talking normal circumstances. The confected panic, aided and abetted by internal Labor party sources fed off itself. Arbib specialises in pulling those kinds of stunts.
It’s a herd mentality that takes over in those situations. Remember, Beazley had polled poorly for a long time in comparison to Rudd and leadership speculation was rife during his whole term. If there was ever a reluctant draftee, it was Beazley himself who must have been almost relieved when Rudd finally stepped up.
Arbib has to go.
Arbib has to go.
In today’s Fin, Pamela Williams confirms that the AWU’s Paul Howes and Bill Ludwig were directly phoning MPs on Wednesday night.
In today’s Fin, Pamela Williams confirms that the AWU’s Paul Howes and Bill Ludwig were directly phoning MPs on Wednesday night.
Of course there was lots of phoning. Shorten was in on it too. But it doesn’t alter the fact (well at least not disputed) that 84 out of 112 were prepared to dump their leader, one who was a hero until recently. No doubt favours were called in and some were leaned on, but that’s still a pretty huge percentage.
My own guess, which Labor Outsider claimed is fact anyway, is that there were a lot seriously pissed off with his management and leadership style. He was untouchable while his personal popularity (always a lot higher than Labor’s primary support) remained at stellar levels. When that crashed so suddenly along with Labor primary support there were two factors: a possibility of losing and the perception that Rudd’s style, so aloof from the kicking and scratching was actually giving Abbott an impression of traction. The frustration just added to it.
Politics is pretty brutal. I’m not talking about the overblown hyperbole at Parliament House. But you don’t let your opponent get away with bullshit attacks without sinking the boot in yourself when you have the chance. It seems madness (to me now anyway) for Rudd to imagine he could somehow be above all that. Finding jobs for Dolly and Tip was bizarre. Their careers were wholly partisan and they’d be unlikely to change their spots or think better of Rudd because of it. Nor would the public buy the image that Rudd was above politics, though perhaps to his misfortune he was. Tim Fischer, a thoroughly decent humanitarian I could accept.
And his reluctance to move on the ABC the same. Sure it would be nice to put the ABC above partisan politics but it’s not going to happen too easily. You’ll still have to have people truly dedicated to the ABC’s independent culture. And people, especially political people will make judgements about THESE people’s politics. And so it goes on.
Leaving the culture warriors in place, Scott as Manager and various others to keep going with this News Ltd agenda was inviting trouble. Hey Adrian, how big a part do you think Rudd’s ‘hands off’ strategy played in the mess we have in ABC News? I’m pretty confident Julia will not continue that nonsense, even if she’s quiet until she’s got her mandate. The Howardistas will go.
Most of Labor’s factional warlords who have emerged a little this week are an ugly lot. But they don’t make mischief just for the sake of it or to preserve their base. They’ve got a much stronger interest in survival, as have caucus members.
I don’t buy the Kerr analogy, but there is one interesting parallel with Rudd and Gough. Several of Gough’s stuff-ups occurred because he relied heavily on advisers. He might have avoided some troubles if he had had more confidence in some of the blue-collar numbers men like Fred Daly or Clyde Cameron. Rudd seems to have done similar.
Of course there was lots of phoning. Shorten was in on it too. But it doesn’t alter the fact (well at least not disputed) that 84 out of 112 were prepared to dump their leader, one who was a hero until recently. No doubt favours were called in and some were leaned on, but that’s still a pretty huge percentage.
My own guess, which Labor Outsider claimed is fact anyway, is that there were a lot seriously pissed off with his management and leadership style. He was untouchable while his personal popularity (always a lot higher than Labor’s primary support) remained at stellar levels. When that crashed so suddenly along with Labor primary support there were two factors: a possibility of losing and the perception that Rudd’s style, so aloof from the kicking and scratching was actually giving Abbott an impression of traction. The frustration just added to it.
Politics is pretty brutal. I’m not talking about the overblown hyperbole at Parliament House. But you don’t let your opponent get away with bullshit attacks without sinking the boot in yourself when you have the chance. It seems madness (to me now anyway) for Rudd to imagine he could somehow be above all that. Finding jobs for Dolly and Tip was bizarre. Their careers were wholly partisan and they’d be unlikely to change their spots or think better of Rudd because of it. Nor would the public buy the image that Rudd was above politics, though perhaps to his misfortune he was. Tim Fischer, a thoroughly decent humanitarian I could accept.
And his reluctance to move on the ABC the same. Sure it would be nice to put the ABC above partisan politics but it’s not going to happen too easily. You’ll still have to have people truly dedicated to the ABC’s independent culture. And people, especially political people will make judgements about THESE people’s politics. And so it goes on.
Leaving the culture warriors in place, Scott as Manager and various others to keep going with this News Ltd agenda was inviting trouble. Hey Adrian, how big a part do you think Rudd’s ‘hands off’ strategy played in the mess we have in ABC News? I’m pretty confident Julia will not continue that nonsense, even if she’s quiet until she’s got her mandate. The Howardistas will go.
Most of Labor’s factional warlords who have emerged a little this week are an ugly lot. But they don’t make mischief just for the sake of it or to preserve their base. They’ve got a much stronger interest in survival, as have caucus members.
I don’t buy the Kerr analogy, but there is one interesting parallel with Rudd and Gough. Several of Gough’s stuff-ups occurred because he relied heavily on advisers. He might have avoided some troubles if he had had more confidence in some of the blue-collar numbers men like Fred Daly or Clyde Cameron. Rudd seems to have done similar.
@173
Don, the figure is a bit misleading. It’s very clear from all the reports that many MPs only joined the Gillard bandwagon because they felt they had no choice. Had Rudd survived, his leadership would have been crippled.
See my discussion in this post:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/06/25/how-the-coup-against-kevin-rudd-unfolded/
@173
Don, the figure is a bit misleading. It’s very clear from all the reports that many MPs only joined the Gillard bandwagon because they felt they had no choice. Had Rudd survived, his leadership would have been crippled.
See my discussion in this post:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/06/25/how-the-coup-against-kevin-rudd-unfolded/
I think the figure of 84 came from me and I got it from Tony Wright of The Age telling Madonna King on local radio here that, “Some say that the figure was as high as 84 out of 112.” The more reliable scenario was that Gillard supporters had at least 70 whereas Rudd could at best get 30 or a little more. So you could say 70/30 with about 12 in doubt.
And that’s only what we’ve been told by the numbers people. So 84 is speculative and actually unlikely.
I think the figure of 84 came from me and I got it from Tony Wright of The Age telling Madonna King on local radio here that, “Some say that the figure was as high as 84 out of 112.” The more reliable scenario was that Gillard supporters had at least 70 whereas Rudd could at best get 30 or a little more. So you could say 70/30 with about 12 in doubt.
And that’s only what we’ve been told by the numbers people. So 84 is speculative and actually unlikely.
Agreed, Brian and Mark. 84 is very likely at the outer perimeter, and 70-30 is more likely. But even 70-30 is huge – not even a close contest. And this against a hero of so many in Labor – the man who beat Howard and ended our misery.
It doesn’t add up that this sort of backlash could be engineered by a few Machievellis. Read an article from Shaun Carney in tThe Age this morning which seemed to agree with my hypothesis.
Of course, it doesn’t destroy the fact that it’s a nasty business, and Rudd deserved a better fate. But taking the pragmatic view: nobody, at least no leader, can be divorced from the partisan nature of politics. Jack Strocchi might have got that right about Rudd. And if a break had to be made, it was better that it be done swiftly. As Brian said on another post nobody from News Ltd and their mates would have expected anything but a drawn-out public battle for the post. My view remains with Katz, Su, Grace, Corin and others. They’ve made the best of a difficult situation.
There is also a cruel irony. I think Rudd’s the only one who could have beaten Howard in 07. Gillard was the best candidate, but her left faction origins would not have allowed her the leadership then. In addition Howard could have Swift-boated her, being then relatively unknown, probably based on some of her student spats with Christopher Pyne. Rudd’s impeccable life and achievements were immune from that approach. Now it’s Rudd’s style that raises problems, and Gillard, a proven success, who offers a solution.
Agreed, Brian and Mark. 84 is very likely at the outer perimeter, and 70-30 is more likely. But even 70-30 is huge – not even a close contest. And this against a hero of so many in Labor – the man who beat Howard and ended our misery.
It doesn’t add up that this sort of backlash could be engineered by a few Machievellis. Read an article from Shaun Carney in tThe Age this morning which seemed to agree with my hypothesis.
Of course, it doesn’t destroy the fact that it’s a nasty business, and Rudd deserved a better fate. But taking the pragmatic view: nobody, at least no leader, can be divorced from the partisan nature of politics. Jack Strocchi might have got that right about Rudd. And if a break had to be made, it was better that it be done swiftly. As Brian said on another post nobody from News Ltd and their mates would have expected anything but a drawn-out public battle for the post. My view remains with Katz, Su, Grace, Corin and others. They’ve made the best of a difficult situation.
There is also a cruel irony. I think Rudd’s the only one who could have beaten Howard in 07. Gillard was the best candidate, but her left faction origins would not have allowed her the leadership then. In addition Howard could have Swift-boated her, being then relatively unknown, probably based on some of her student spats with Christopher Pyne. Rudd’s impeccable life and achievements were immune from that approach. Now it’s Rudd’s style that raises problems, and Gillard, a proven success, who offers a solution.
I partly agree with Don above but I don’t agree that Kevin was the only one who could have beaten Howard. He was the candidate Howard would least have wanted, but I suspect that by November 2007 people had had enough. Even many Liberals wanted to see the back of him. They just didn’t have the conviction to roll him and install Costello, and Costello didn’t want a hospital pass from people who had snubbed him earlier.
Gillard would almost certainly have won. It’s even possible she’d have won more convincingly than Rudd did as it would have seemed a greater change. It’s hard to know these things with hindsight. I don’t think the right were ready to have her though.
I partly agree with Don above but I don’t agree that Kevin was the only one who could have beaten Howard. He was the candidate Howard would least have wanted, but I suspect that by November 2007 people had had enough. Even many Liberals wanted to see the back of him. They just didn’t have the conviction to roll him and install Costello, and Costello didn’t want a hospital pass from people who had snubbed him earlier.
Gillard would almost certainly have won. It’s even possible she’d have won more convincingly than Rudd did as it would have seemed a greater change. It’s hard to know these things with hindsight. I don’t think the right were ready to have her though.
Agreed, Fran. Dan Cass makes the argument that what really won the 2007 election was the AWU’s Your Rights At Work campaign. If the Labor Right had been willing to have her (yeah, a big if), chances are that Gillard would have romped it in at least as well as Rudd did.
I was certainly disappointed when she decided to swing her numbers behind Rudd in 2007 instead of standing herself, although it did break the Right’s stranglehold on the reins. And despite what the Right may think they were up to this week, I’m not convinced that Gillard has signed off in toto on their agenda. They needed her this week, not the other way around.
Agreed, Fran. Dan Cass makes the argument that what really won the 2007 election was the AWU’s Your Rights At Work campaign. If the Labor Right had been willing to have her (yeah, a big if), chances are that Gillard would have romped it in at least as well as Rudd did.
I was certainly disappointed when she decided to swing her numbers behind Rudd in 2007 instead of standing herself, although it did break the Right’s stranglehold on the reins. And despite what the Right may think they were up to this week, I’m not convinced that Gillard has signed off in toto on their agenda. They needed her this week, not the other way around.
Don and Fran, Gillard was not all that well known in 2007, had limited portfolio experience, none in economic portfolios and was associated with Medicare Gold, which was good policy but successfully turned into a scare campaign by the Howardistas, because it was poorly sold.
Gillard’s biographer says that she is a problem solver rather than a source of policy ideas. I have severe reservations about her understanding of school education, in fact I don’t think she understands it at all.
My hope though is that she can set an environment where ideas flower in her ministry. The word is that ministers actually liked attending cabinet meetings she chaired in Rudd’s absence. That is really saying something. Patrick Weller, whose academic expertise is cabinet government, says that democracies everywhere try to limit what goes to cabinet and handle issues through alternative structures such as specific purpose cabinet committees.
I understand Crean was a good ‘chairman of the board’, better than Beasley for example. I’m hoping Gillard will follow suit.
Don and Fran, Gillard was not all that well known in 2007, had limited portfolio experience, none in economic portfolios and was associated with Medicare Gold, which was good policy but successfully turned into a scare campaign by the Howardistas, because it was poorly sold.
Gillard’s biographer says that she is a problem solver rather than a source of policy ideas. I have severe reservations about her understanding of school education, in fact I don’t think she understands it at all.
My hope though is that she can set an environment where ideas flower in her ministry. The word is that ministers actually liked attending cabinet meetings she chaired in Rudd’s absence. That is really saying something. Patrick Weller, whose academic expertise is cabinet government, says that democracies everywhere try to limit what goes to cabinet and handle issues through alternative structures such as specific purpose cabinet committees.
I understand Crean was a good ‘chairman of the board’, better than Beasley for example. I’m hoping Gillard will follow suit.
tigtog, I agree that Gillard will be her own person and be the one doing the moving and shaking, as it were. Much will be made of her selection of ministers, though, which we await with interest.
tigtog, I agree that Gillard will be her own person and be the one doing the moving and shaking, as it were. Much will be made of her selection of ministers, though, which we await with interest.
The number I heard tossed around before the momentum really got going was 60 out of 115. I think a lot of MPs concluded that to keep Rudd was to keep a very tarnished leader, had he survived a challenge. Worth recalling that a lot of MPs, and indeed, Ministers, didn’t really know what was going on until 10.30pm when Rudd gave his press conference.
I think it’s also worth questioning whether the middle of the night in the midst of a febrile atmosphere is optimal for decision making.
I agree that Gillard will not be a puppet.
Reflecting on all this over the past few days, it does seem to me right to say that Rudd was too ambitious in what he tried to do, badly organised, and possibly close to burnout. However, I’d present as an alternative to overthrowing him what I suggested on another thread:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/06/26/assessing-julia-gillard-as-pm/#comment-894355
But I’m still very concerned about what direction will now be taken on asylum seekers and climate change.
The number I heard tossed around before the momentum really got going was 60 out of 115. I think a lot of MPs concluded that to keep Rudd was to keep a very tarnished leader, had he survived a challenge. Worth recalling that a lot of MPs, and indeed, Ministers, didn’t really know what was going on until 10.30pm when Rudd gave his press conference.
I think it’s also worth questioning whether the middle of the night in the midst of a febrile atmosphere is optimal for decision making.
I agree that Gillard will not be a puppet.
Reflecting on all this over the past few days, it does seem to me right to say that Rudd was too ambitious in what he tried to do, badly organised, and possibly close to burnout. However, I’d present as an alternative to overthrowing him what I suggested on another thread:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/06/26/assessing-julia-gillard-as-pm/#comment-894355
But I’m still very concerned about what direction will now be taken on asylum seekers and climate change.
Brian, the selection of ministers will be key, totally. Apply the Peter Principle to Conroy and boot him up a notch for a start, pleeeeaaaaase.
Brian, the selection of ministers will be key, totally. Apply the Peter Principle to Conroy and boot him up a notch for a start, pleeeeaaaaase.
182 – problem is, tigtog, that Conroy’s a member of the Victorian Right who were among the big proponents of the leadership change! It would be nice to see him moved, but I suspect he’ll be kept in that portfolio because it would be very difficult for anyone else to get across the Teltstra/NBN issues which are very complex.
I think Tanya Plibersek would be very good in education, Combet in IR.
But I suspect that if Rudd gets foreign affairs, Stephen Smith will be in education.
Generally, I suspect she’ll privilege continuity. It might be more a reflection of her own judgements and priorities what cabinet we get after the election.
182 – problem is, tigtog, that Conroy’s a member of the Victorian Right who were among the big proponents of the leadership change! It would be nice to see him moved, but I suspect he’ll be kept in that portfolio because it would be very difficult for anyone else to get across the Teltstra/NBN issues which are very complex.
I think Tanya Plibersek would be very good in education, Combet in IR.
But I suspect that if Rudd gets foreign affairs, Stephen Smith will be in education.
Generally, I suspect she’ll privilege continuity. It might be more a reflection of her own judgements and priorities what cabinet we get after the election.
Mark, that’s why I said boot Conroy UP a notch – I know he’s too much of a heavyweight to be kicked OUT of Cabinet. Give him one of the ministries that has dignitas up the wazoo but less potential for crippling essential infrastructure. Kate Lundy knows more about Telstra/NBN than he ever did, give her Communications.
Agreed on Plibersek and Combet.
Can’t help but wonder whether someone who said that having Rudd as Foreign Minister might not be that good a look for the new govt, his face popping up with all those world leaders overseas, might not have had a point. But where else would they use him? Maybe Health – Roxon appears to be strugging there?
Mark, that’s why I said boot Conroy UP a notch – I know he’s too much of a heavyweight to be kicked OUT of Cabinet. Give him one of the ministries that has dignitas up the wazoo but less potential for crippling essential infrastructure. Kate Lundy knows more about Telstra/NBN than he ever did, give her Communications.
Agreed on Plibersek and Combet.
Can’t help but wonder whether someone who said that having Rudd as Foreign Minister might not be that good a look for the new govt, his face popping up with all those world leaders overseas, might not have had a point. But where else would they use him? Maybe Health – Roxon appears to be strugging there?
I agree about 2007 and the YRAW campaign, tigtog, but note that it wasn’t the AWU in the driver’s seat for it—the campaigns were run out of each State’s Labor Council with ACTU money, and with the time and energy of a very large number of otherwise non-activist, non-ALP supporting unionists in their own workplaces. It’s worth noting too that Labor Councils include many many more unions than are affiliated to State Labor Parties, and I know in my State a few of those unions are actively hostile to the Parliamentary ALP. The FBEU, for instance, and the Teachers’ Fed.
I can’t stomach a serious argument that Your Rights At Work gives the AWU some kind of special claim to Labor’s numbers. If it does, they really ought to get in the queue.
I agree about 2007 and the YRAW campaign, tigtog, but note that it wasn’t the AWU in the driver’s seat for it—the campaigns were run out of each State’s Labor Council with ACTU money, and with the time and energy of a very large number of otherwise non-activist, non-ALP supporting unionists in their own workplaces. It’s worth noting too that Labor Councils include many many more unions than are affiliated to State Labor Parties, and I know in my State a few of those unions are actively hostile to the Parliamentary ALP. The FBEU, for instance, and the Teachers’ Fed.
I can’t stomach a serious argument that Your Rights At Work gives the AWU some kind of special claim to Labor’s numbers. If it does, they really ought to get in the queue.
Liam, you’re right that it was the ACTU I was thinking of. Brane to fingers slippage moment there.
Not a claim that I meant to make. My point was only that Kevin didn’t win 07 all on his own, he rode the back of a huge groundswell of grassroots Labor activism that he had nothing to do with coordinating.
Liam, you’re right that it was the ACTU I was thinking of. Brane to fingers slippage moment there.
Not a claim that I meant to make. My point was only that Kevin didn’t win 07 all on his own, he rode the back of a huge groundswell of grassroots Labor activism that he had nothing to do with coordinating.
She didn’t have enough numbers to win then. She wouldn’t have taken enough numbers to win herself, and given them to Rudd.
She didn’t have enough numbers to win then. She wouldn’t have taken enough numbers to win herself, and given them to Rudd.
“But I’m still very concerned about what direction will now be taken on asylum seekers and climate change.”
Yeah a bit wait and see. Up to now she’s never seriously rocked the boat, but I’m hoping that she’ll gently take the mainstream to where we need to be. When she was shadow Immigration Minister (post-Tampa) it seemed as if she was bringing Labor closer to the Howard position. What she was really doing was neutralising boat people as an issue.
To Howard, brutalising the boat people was merely collateral damage. The main game was beating up a bit of rage and belting Labor over the head with it. Gillard took some of the wind out of that. And I hope you will all fondly remember how she sunk Ruddock. It started to fade as an issue, and race politics lost the middle ground after the Cronulla riots. Abbott’s not going to get it back there.
So I’m optimistic she’ll get there, albeit gradually. She won’t wander too far ahead of the pack but she’ll try to change the mainstream positioning.
“But I’m still very concerned about what direction will now be taken on asylum seekers and climate change.”
Yeah a bit wait and see. Up to now she’s never seriously rocked the boat, but I’m hoping that she’ll gently take the mainstream to where we need to be. When she was shadow Immigration Minister (post-Tampa) it seemed as if she was bringing Labor closer to the Howard position. What she was really doing was neutralising boat people as an issue.
To Howard, brutalising the boat people was merely collateral damage. The main game was beating up a bit of rage and belting Labor over the head with it. Gillard took some of the wind out of that. And I hope you will all fondly remember how she sunk Ruddock. It started to fade as an issue, and race politics lost the middle ground after the Cronulla riots. Abbott’s not going to get it back there.
So I’m optimistic she’ll get there, albeit gradually. She won’t wander too far ahead of the pack but she’ll try to change the mainstream positioning.
@Anna Winter, very true. I guess I was just disappointed that she didn’t have the numbers.
@Anna Winter, very true. I guess I was just disappointed that she didn’t have the numbers.
@184 – Rudd in health would make a lot of sense, tigtog, because I think he’s really intimately familiar with the issues from the development of the reform plans. Anyway, if Gillard was talking to him today, I wouldn’t be surprised if we hear about the reshuffle tomorrow.
@184 – Rudd in health would make a lot of sense, tigtog, because I think he’s really intimately familiar with the issues from the development of the reform plans. Anyway, if Gillard was talking to him today, I wouldn’t be surprised if we hear about the reshuffle tomorrow.