The year wasn’t very old when we had the first ALP leadership speculation story, courtesy of Bob Hawke’s endorsement of Julia Gillard’s tenure as Prime Minister. Whether or not the former PM was very helpful to the current PM is highly questionable, given that he accompanied his praise of her qualities and abilities with a call to reduce union influence in the party, something now more commonly associated with Kevin Rudd’s push for party democratisation (and, no doubt, his dislike of the AWU).
This, then, prompted a rebuttal from Gillard, which was (over?)-interpreted as evidence that her leadership rests on a slender thread of support, support from the self-same right wing union forces.
There have also been reports that those supporting the PM might seek to resolve the endless leadership speculation by bringing on a vote of confidence, though history does not suggest this would in fact be a particularly deft political move.
Many of the stories about imminent Rudd moves have been confected. Yet, and this is a paradox of politics, the continued speculation itself becomes a political fact, and cruels Federal Labor’s chances of communicating a positive message (or indeed, any message).
From what I can glean, the prospect of a Rudd restoration was real towards the middle of last year, but then receded, in part because Kevin’s own ego appeared to start floating skywards like a untethered balloon. Gillard’s stocks recovered around APEC, but then plummeted again after the ALP National Conference and the reshuffle.
Word around the traps now is that the Rudd balloon may be re-inflating.
Again, there is much murk in all this, and clear agendas from both press and pollies. But then, there’s also no question that the self-inflicted wounds of the ALP continue to fester, and that the polling shows a dire prospect for the party, particularly in Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia.
The Euro-crisis, and the spectre of GFC#2 (as if GFC#1 ever went away), adds another dimension to what really is a situation of extreme fluidity and uncertainty.
There are only two paths out of this for the Labor party.
The first is the ‘steady as she goes’ road, which if it is to be effective now that the political debate over the carbon price has effectively disappeared, would require genuine unity in the federal caucus.
The second is the Rudd restoration, followed by an embrace of Bob Katter and a goodbye to Andrew Wilkie, and probably in short order by an election (“mandate needs to be renewed, Australian people do not like the minority parliament, etc”). The calculation here is that a return to Rudd would force a Liberal leadership challenge. Tony Abbott is a one trick pony, with very weak polling, and his strategy is entirely dependent on Gillard as his opponent.
This really does go to show that Labor’s plight is of its own making. It’s clear by now that there’s no depth of support for the Coalition per se, and still less for its Leader, in the electorate.
The horns of this dilemma, though, are that if Labor itself does not heal its own wound, and do so cleanly, it will continue to infect every other part of the body politic.
Personally as poor as Gillard has been it would be stupid for them to go back to Rudd. It would only confirm in the minds of most they’re a complete rabble and that they don’t know what they’re doing. The chiefs have made their bed and need to lie in it regardless.
Whilst Rudd wasn’t much better than Gillard I would think his only hope of getting the leadership back would be in opposition and then for Shorten to knock him off if they look like getting back into government.
What disappoints me most is in this whole four years in govt Labor have acted like they weren’t ready for govt, that they’re in opposition and have let the Libs/media dictate the terms. The big shift to the Right has been an abject disaster and the party needs a good clean out once back in opposition.
It’s hard to disagree J_de_M
Ugh, too early in the year for this.
Let’s upend this steaming over-stirred pot back over the heads of the meeja who keep serving up this slop —
– who’d like to speculate on whether Gillard’s tenure as ALP leader will outlast the current CEOs of which major news outlets — she’s already seen off Harto from News Ltd and Brian McCarthy from Fairfax (remember him? Neither do I!)
Two down, who’s next…??
Forget Rudd, the major share of his support comes from the Coalition. This so called speculation is like a dog chasing it’s tail.. it aint gunna happen….just amusement for onlookers who have nothing better to contribute.
My take on Gillard is that she is growing in the job and showing outstanding skills at getting things done in a hung parliament. I expect Gillard and Labor will continue to get things done during the coming 12 months and go into 2013 as one of the most productive governments we have had had for a long time.
By contrast, Abbott is going in the opposite direction. He has sprouted a whole lot of lies that are going to catch up with him well before the next election. (Think his claims about the carbon tax destroying the economy.)
Part of the reason Gillard struggled at the last election is that she couldn’t claim credit for the good job Labor did during the GFC was that the credit belonged to Rudd, not her. If she is replaced the party will face the same problem. Gillard’s skills have been a key part of the productivity of the Labor party.
Think about how much credit Labor could take for the things Labor has done after the party has got rid of the person responsible.
MSM commentators and their ilk will try and beat up challenges in 2012 to feed their addiction to blood sports. Labor should only start taking serious interest in the polls if they are still weak in 12 months time.
Got it pretty right, John D.
Speculation will likely continue right up till the election in late 2013, but it may slow down after July next year when it dawns on most people that the world won’t end with carbon pricing. Especially so as compensation kicks in.
It’ll be a while yet before opinion polls control the political agenda, which is no bad thing and maybe the bonus we got from minority government.
She’ll see off a few more yet.
I know that Journos have to write about something and the good old leadership issue is an easy topic, but do they really think the ALP Caucus is that stupid?
No matter how bad the polling is going, unless Gillard is charged and found guilty of an offence forcing her to resign from parliament, changing the PM again is guaranteed electoral suicide. Bugger all up side and shed loads of downside.
@5 yup JohnD “growing in the role” is a phrase that occurred to me — whereas, Rudd shrank away from so many things (and I speak as someone who would’ve been quite happy to see Rudd stay on as PM, and go on to win the 2010 election, which I am quite certain he would’ve done).
As the months roll by, I have become steadily more gruntled with Prime Minister Gillard. My initial reaction to her as PM was something close to loathing, which gave way to deep distrust & suspicion, followed by grudging respect and, lately, less and less grudgingly, actual respect.
The mountains of spittle-flecked vitriol that has been directed her way has gone some way to winning my respect for her. Anyone who can induce sheer apoplexy in a RWDB has got to be worth a second look!
I’m with Jacques. Labor has made an awful hash of its time in office, behaving as if it is still in Opposition and jumping at every shadow fabricated by Abbott and the blood lusters of the mainstream media.
Their best bet at this stage is toughing it out with Gillard. The nervous nellies on the backbench also need to retire their Kev-will-save-us fantasy and put a cork in it with the Murdoch media. Those hacks will encourage and feed on all the non-members’ bar big noting.
Abbott is a flake and an opportunist. The media knows that, but loves the contest too much to actually make that the story. Sooner or later that WILL be the story. But the nervous nellies in the ALP will have to grow a spine first and STFU.
I agree with JohnD. Julia Gillard is a remarkable woman both for what she has achieved and for holding in her anger at the bastardry directed at her.
Rudd was a good campaigner but a poor leader. How could he lead a government while offending nearly everyone who ‘was’ the government? I can’t believe anyone would still admit to suporting him.
It would not surprise me in the least if Gillard leads Labour to victory in the next election but a Turnbull led COALition will make it very difficult.
“Labor’s plight is of its own making” only partly. It is also working in opposition to a completely corrupt media. It will only make headway when it faces the fact that the media is the real enemy and starts hitting back at it.
What “word around the traps” has it that Rudd’s balloon is re-inflating? That sounds the silliest of silly season talk. Rudd is yesterday’s man. Everybody knows that, probably including Rudd himself. Of course that doesn’t stop Rudd from destabilizing Gillard, not for his good, but for her bad, just for shits and giggles.
Gillard will probably stay PM until the next election (there are no certainties) which Labor will probably lose and she will be succeeded either by Combet or Shorten.
If Labor wins (not impossible but unlikely) Gillard will with great pleasure dump Rudd and not a few other dead woods.
Yeah. Gillard has shown she’s a stayer around the back turn and will lope home in the straight with daylight to second place while Abbott is being shot behind a screen somewhere else on the track.
Gillard fights the fight better than she talks the fight.
She has a tin ear for the sound bite. Her public rhetoric is appalling.
Gillard has given herself maximum time to repair Labor’s almost terminal electoral plight. However, I wonder whether she has the means communication skills to convince voters to accept Labor’s pitch for return to the Treasury benches.
@13 AKN: ‘Gillard has shown she’s a stayer around the back turn and will lope home in the straight with daylight to second place while Abbott is being shot behind a screen somewhere else on the track.’
Where in the polls is there any sign of that? If Tony Abbott doesn’t get eaten by sharks during one of his daring, hairy-chested swimming exploits (if only!), he is still sitting on top of a landslide. Or are you just being ironic?
Megan, I don’t do polls. They are rubbish. They ask people fantasy questions about what they might do in a two party preferred vote at some time in the future before candidates are known. My view of Gillard, and I’m no fan, is that she’s in for the win next time around based on knowledge of the electorate and toxic Australian media culture.
Speculating about this game as a zero sum Kev v. Julia deathcage match is fairly pointless, even if it appears to be a necessity for people desperately in need of reassurance about various themes close to their hearts.
Though it is kind of touching that Gillard has supporters willing to beat their chests about how she is all powerful & Rudd is finished. You want the truth? Thanks to NewsPoll Julia Gillard is an otherwise accomplished PM who just doesn’t have much control over what will happen, she can’t banish any major player with the flick of her hand.
IMO Rudd will only become leader before the next election if Bill Shorten brings her down, and caucus decides they don’t want to be lead by an untested outsider who never did the hard yards as a parliamentary staffer or as an Opposition MP (sorry, labour movement traditionalists.)
I dare anyone to tell me the Canberra chess game isn’t full of moves that lead to that conclusion.
Mr Denmore: Some time during the last 12 months Julia has realized that “jumping at every shadow fabricated by Abbott and the blood lusters of the mainstream media.” was doing no good and they needed to get on with doing things that Labor supporters think are important.
Julia seems to have also accepted that this may be her only term as prime minister and has decided that she should concentrate on achieving things she considers worthwhile even if it does mean driving the Abbott’s of the world into a frothing frenzy.
It is worth remembering the long term difference Whitlam made in his short term in office compared with John whatsisname and the long years of his grey sludge version of politics.
@17 – Nickws, presumably you’re thinking that Shorten’s recent promotion was an attempt to forefend that. It may be. I doubt the stories about her losing the allegiance of several right wing Ministers are entirely unfounded, and I’d also point out – contra Sam and others – that the ‘Canberra Chess Game’ is real, if opaque. This stuff is not all invented by the press, not by a long shot, and I don’t think it’s just the proverbial disgruntled back-benchers mouthing off in bars.
Having said that, I agree most of the speculation is pointless. My point is to point out that the speculation itself is highly damaging, and again, most of it is due to Labor’s own errors (and there’s more than enough blame to go around across supporters of both Gillard and Rudd), and that if the government is to have a real hope, it should be resolved one way or another.
In a way, the cleanest resolution would have been for Rudd to have left politics, and I suspect that’s what the mob that deposed him thought would happen and hoped for.
I think this is a key point and not an unreasonable assumption. I suspect they wouldn’t have toppled him if they knew he wouldn’t resign at least at the next election. But now there must be a few MPs wondering just how long Rudd will hang around for and if it would better for the party for him to be PM rather than having him sit on the sidelines with everyone knowing he wants another go.
Like others I’d take my cues from jdm’s early comment and agree that what happens with a still finely poised situation is going to be very contingent on what happens domestically and offshore in the run up to the next election.
The public cant possibly be seriously thinking of a vote for Abbott- am as mystified by the polls as ever, given the way things have turned out since Howard’s demise.
This isn’t meant as a criticism- if Australians want to do what the poms did, trusting the local Cameron laird, and follow the US, where the weird fantasies of the T party right hold sway, there’s not much I can do about it.
The best I can do is shore up my resources for a rainy day, if the lunacy is terminal, hope I survive the intractable, serial stupidity of my fellows long enough to have a laugh if they do get burned by their naive faith in tabloid msm and politicians.
Not only was that bound to be seen as the case, Mark, but I’m convinced that Gillard decided that since the framing of the reshuffle was going to be viewed as her castling around herself, she should embrace the narrative. So she ran with it.
Hence Kim Carr being dumped from the Cabinet, hence Chris Evans losing IR and not being given an equivalent portfolio.
Castling.
Thing is the core anti-Rudd plotters were almost certainly nothing but a handful of backbenchers and parly secs until they finally got the big mo, and then it all came together and they suddenly collected important frontbenchers plus a silent majority of caucus. As Liam put it, “they got even Albo to swear he was with them all along, after the fact.”
I don’t have much faith in them to be a group of wise men about either Gillard, Rudd, or Shorten’s merits as leader. Not that this will stop them from having a decent shot at deposing Gillard before the next election.
Then it call comes down to whether Shorten is capable of convincing the non-plotter contingent of factional convenors and swing MPs that he is physically and mentally up to the task of leading. Man is the weakest looking non-Latham leadership contender I’ve ever seen, doesn’t matter if he has won the Q&A mock election several times now.
I don’t think we should be surprised that federal Labor leadership speculation is rampant in this era. That’s a function of the eighties leaders leaving a Big Picture vortex behind them when their respective terms as benevolent dictators came to an end.
Interesting, Nickws. A Shorten elevation would be a most unwise resolution.
I’d like to see how Abbott would perform subject to the pressure, disrespect and outright hatred dished out by much of the media to Gillard every day of the week.
We all remember how he dramatically unhinged when asked a simple question by Channel 7′s Mark Riley. A question, mind you, that had been sent to his office hours previously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUdPabnXUNA
But, of course, it will not happen. They will continue to cocoon him in teflon and cotton wool. Every Liberal leader always has an easier run from the media. And as Liberal leaders go, none has had a freer ride than Abbott.
Which is just as well for him. It’s like keeping a man who can’t swim and is afraid of water in a compound in the Outback…
And then there’s the old 7.30 Report interview, Cuppa.
Terangeree,
Did you, like me, find it interesting that within weeks of O’Brien scoring that ‘Gotcha!’ from Abbott his impending departure from the 7.30 Report was announced?
Of course the fact that Abbott stood to benefit from O’Brien’s being replaced by the Coalition smoocher, Chris Uhlmann, was purely coincidental.
At the risk of of raising the Andrew Elder spectre again (yes Fran, I realise he was once a Liberal, but so too was Don Dunstan briefly. It doesn’t mean he’s incapable of independent thought.) I’d refer to his post on the reshuffle.
http://andrewelder.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/reshuffle.html
It makes the point that the changes have been made (specifically Combet and Shorten, but others too such as Plibersek) where they can inflict maximum damage on the opposition in addition to promoting the government’s advantages.
Shorten has been put in IR precisely for that strategy – it has little to do with trying to contain his fairly transparent ambition and ego. And to give him his due, he has done pretty well in junior roles so far.
The superficiality of the constant opinion polls is nowhere better shown than in the polls reaction to the reshuffle. The average punter wouldn’t know who had been given what in the reshuffle. Maybe they’d heard of ‘poor Kim Carr’ for the first time.
Any polling reaction based on that is proof positive that it is merely media noise (which was universally hostile) and essentially means nothing among the disengaged.
But then throughout the Howard Years and the Rudd era, polling and media reaction were everything. A majority of the pollies on both major parties still dance to that tune.
It is to the credit of the minority government, Gillard and the independents that they have understood that achieving things is more important.
…
Yerbut…Mark, I can’t shake the feeling that you are constructing the speculation as non-agentic in origin here. As in “the bombs fell on Indochina”….who dropped them??
Who is doing the speculating? Why are they speculating? Cui bono?
The answers are…(I think) the media…mebbe some backbenchers, and, in the non-agentic way you have characterised the speculating…you too, mate! If “the speculation itself is highly damaging”, and you are constructing it as non-agentic, I feel like you’re partially complicit in the “highly damaging” “speculation”, because you’re actually contributing to it; while, through silence, erasing your own agency in the matter (and omitting the agency of others)!
Sorry if this is an uncharitable depiction…but speculation requires speculators, it don’t happen by itself!
Agree w Katz. It’s easy – in the Lord of the Flies style permanent media dump on Gillard – to miss the fact that she’s a terrible political communicator. Much better at policy, and clearly a genius at negotiating.
One thing Rudd showed – when you ig the Meeja and talk over the top to the people in ways they respond to – the meeja eventually has to pipe down.
The recent re-shuffle has put some very good communicators into the Labor front line. If Rudd as FA sticks to his script of occasional comments, then Shorten, Plibersek, Roxon, Combet et al should enhance Gillard and should represent a pretty formidable team for 2012. Look good, sound good, exude authority, establish a sense of confidence….
It is interesting that the whaling thingo seems to have been nipped in the bud pretty effectively. Rather than linger longer and go on, and on. Mind you still early days, though.
James P Cannon was once a Republican. Not everyone starts in the best place. People can change. I get that. The question is — what does one learn from one’s political activity?
Although it may have seemed so, I wasn’t specifically damning Andrew Elder. I was simply refraining from accepting his credentials to be a referee for others. I’ve yet to read anything from him that qualifies him as especially insightful. Count me agnostic on Mr Elder. If I thought he’d said something especially silly, I’d have said so by now.
Cuppa/Terangeree I had forgotten about that Kerry O’Brien interview back in May 2010; a classic. Since then Abbott has avoided all indepth media interviews as far as I can recollect – how we miss KO’B.
After Julia Gillard did a full Q&A last July I queried the ABC about offering equal time to Tony Abbott and they responded that they had but the offer had been declined. One thing about the US nomination process, they certainly get to grill the nominees and, hiding from the media is certain death.
Some of Andrew Elder’s stuff is insightful, but I think that he tends to gild the lily a tad because he despises Abbott so much (which is quite understandable). There’s no necessary contradiction between Gillard trying to contain ambitions or plots of Shorten and thinking he would do a good job in IR. Politicians tend to play both sides of the coin.
@28 – Merc, I think the OP speaks for itself. I’d only add that if you ignore the speculation, it won’t go away. My point, as I’ve said, is to highlight ways in which the ALP could make it go away. I’m not confident they will opt for one.
The speculation is largely mischief created by Rudd and his count-them-on-hand supporters to make life as difficult for Gillard as possible. The media laps it up either because it suits their ideological assault on the Government or because they have the emotional maturity of a 17 year old football fan who lives for seeing some biffo.
This speculation might just become self-fulfilling and succeed in fatally undermining Gillard (who, as others point out, doesn’t help her cause with her lamentable communications non-skills) but if so it won’t be Rudd who moves in to the Lodge.
Merc @ 8
That’s a healthy,open-minded approach to the situation, Merc. The majority are probably reacting at a slower pace than that, but I’m hoping they might gradually have come around by late 2013.
Yes, I’d agree with Mark that Abbott and Peta Credlin are not among his favourites. Where I’d disagree with Fran about whether he has any special insight is on this: he’s the first specialising in politics that is convinced that most of the appalling polling (for Labor) is by-and-large an unengaged reaction to media noise, and perhaps related to that point that Gillard will win in 2013.
If his predictions are right, I’d suggest that will show some insight that’s missing from most other MSM reporters (possibly excepting Paul Bongiorno and Mega George) and bloggers.
Time will answer that one.
There is Andrew Elder’s opinion on the reshuffle and also Crikey’s Bernard Keane:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/12/13/a-dumb-reshuffle-puts-spotlight-back-on-gillards-woes/
Don, I’ve made this point before, but the best argument against the polling plight of Labor being primarily due to media noise (though it doesn’t help) is the extraordinary levels of support Kevin Rudd and Labor enjoyed from 2007 through til 2009. It’s not as though there was a kinder, gentler media that suddenly turned feral (though the sheer volume of hatred and misogyny for Gillard is qualitatively significant). But Labor governments are always going to face a hostile media to greater or lesser degree, until the day when the media stops being dominated by corporate interests, and I’m not sure that day is coming.
Point taken, Mark, but to cite your most recent example that the ministerial reshuffle was a setback to the gradual improvement in polling support:
If it was, I’d suggest that it was merely a reaction to the fake media outrage about the shuffle ‘failure’. Superficial at best. Do you think most voters know or even care what ministers got what, or perhaps more important, just why it is a failure? Surely it is a noise reaction.
If we must use the polls, and less than halfway through the term of office they are hardly reliable, the Newspoll quaterly trend suggests a gradual improvement since the low point of July when scaring the nation about the carbon tax was at its peak.
Most people either dislike or fear change -so some of that reaction was related to that, and the uncertainty generated by Abbott. People are likely to be conditioned to the changes in the next 6 months, firstly by the benefits and tax changes.
Assuming the government can continue the current economic and employment record, which is something of a beacon in an uncertain OECD world, there’s every reason to expect support to continue rising.
Queensland and NSW are currently starting from a very low base, but aside from regional unpopularity (to some extent generated by state Labor failures), I’d expect an improvement over time with the economic outlook a little better in both states.
Leadership is much less relevant than continuing to deliver on reform.
Adding to what Mark said in his post I’d just like to add too that a hostile MSM didn’t stop Labor winning the ’07 election comfortably, in which John Howard lost his own seat, the first PM to do so in about 80 years.
Their level of influence is often overstated.
Jacques de Molay said:
I agree. The MSM is a predisposing factor, in part because the major parties, but most especially, the ALP, pander to its whims. If the ALP took a more robust approach, developing clear and coherent principles and policies, explaining them simply and inviting those who disagreed to vote against them, then the “influence” of the MSM would be quite marginal.
The trouble is that the ALP became infatuated with its high poll numbers in mid-2009 and in a desperate and futile bid to keep them began its traditional exercise in pandering (over the CPRS and asylum seekers for example) and apologising for its acts (the BER, HIP), lending authority where it shouldn’t. That wasn’t the only driver of their policy of course, but it was in the mix and that greatly empowered the shock jocks and the tabloids.
Australias embassingly slow Internet coupled with Chinas anouncement on plans to tackle carbon emissions means Tony Abbott is political DEADUS MEATUS!
..AND THAT, FOLKS, IS THE ONLY STORY OF 2012!
Fancy using Australian deaths to try and score political momentum over the NBN behemoth: where is the outrage from the journalists of this country I ASK YOU… I THOUGHT THIS WAS A DEMOCRACY!
WHERE IS OUR DEMOCRACY GOING WHEN AUSTRALIAN DEATHS CAN BE USED, UNCHALLENGED, FOR POLITICAL MOMENTUM!???!
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY DISGRACEFUL BEHAVIOUR FROM A ONCE PROUD LIBERAL PARTY AND I DEMAND HE BE CHALLENGED TO PULL HIS HEAD IN AND ACT HONOURABLY!!
THIS IS AUSTRALIA FOR JEEBUSS SAKE!
THE LIBS HAVE A LEADERSHIP PROBLEM WHEN THEY SINK THIS LOW AND CAN STILL LOOK YOU IN THE EYE: LIBERAL VOTERS SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEIR PARTY FOR SUCH FILTH AND DEMAND CHANGE!
NO ONE IS A WINNER WHEN SUCH DISTASTEFUL AND UTTERLY MORALLY WRONG COMMENTARY IS ALLOWED TO PASS WITHOUT THE BATTERING OF AN EYELID… NO WONDER WE ALL EMBRACE WAR SO WILLINGLY!
I CRY WHOLEHEARTEDLY AT A WORLD WHERE THIS PASSES FOR CHEAP, MEANINGLESS CHATTER THAT DOESN’T HURT ANYONE! WORDS COUNT AND, MORESO, WHAT LEADERS SAY MATTERS: WHAT IS STATESMANSHIP AGAIN?
–>>THOSE WHO REFUSE TO LEARN ARE DOOMED!
SOME RHODES SCHOLAR… THAT TONY ABBOTT IS A COMPLETE EMBARRASSMENT TO THAT ESTABLISHMENT IS THE UNDERSTATEMENT OF ALL UNDERSTATEMENTS!
;^<
Mark said:
You know, the largest tax break to private industry here in Germany was legislated by Schroeder’s SPD/Greens government– it was also the time when the most overseas weapons’ sales were sanctioned.
What has this got to do with Labor? Well, I propose to you, that the reason Labor are hounded by corporate interests in the press is because it works. The Resource Tax being the most recent example. If they would have just stuck to their guns they’d have a bit more breathing space now. Keven Rudd’s handling of the Liberal Party under Turnbull is another great lesson about how not to do it.
There’s a lovely little Teutonic saying, which goes, “If you want to eat with the wolves, you have to howl with them too.”
What exactly does the teutonic mean, tho, in this case?
You know, political debate in Australia is not based on reality, but perception. The voting public have a perception of what the Labor and the Liberal Parties are and the politicians do as well. When in fact, this perception is at best historical and at worst hucksterism. Listen to Abbot carry on about Labor like he’s still at university and it’s 1975?! Or the debate about same-sex marriages. (Not the debate itself, but they way in which it is carried out!)
When are we going to see a political actor speak about how things actually are today and not try to frame issues to reach tactical minority focus groups strategically.
Actually, the question is pretty simple. How are politicians, which are the representatives of their communities improving their communities? How do we organise ourselves together in such a way that communities are improved?– because that’s the function of politicians, to answer those questions. They’re not their to make arbitrary decisions about the distribution of wealth, to answer the question about whether or not its moral to tax rich people? or to make individuals feel better, they’re in parliament to improve the communities which they represent.
PS. Kiethy, Teutonic?– No idea.
hUH, SOUNDS GOOD BUT AND I WILL BE USING IT!! [-->>YOINK!]
@41 – that’s true, I think, Fran, but the problem is that they don’t appear to have mastered the art of communicating above the heads of the media, even after they’ve eschewed the feeding of the beast for its own sake.
Keithy, the Teutons were some sort of German mob.
Tacitus wrote a thing or two about it: Teutons ….. Deutsche/Deutschland ….. that particularly mob is legendary for obliterating one of the earliest invading imperial forces in Northern Europe amongst their woods – pretty hardcore German.
Tend to agree with Joe “…… political debate in Australia is not based on reality, but perception.” The ‘Real Politic’ is such that Julia is better off, for re-election purpose, to face Toni as say Malcolm or who ever with half a brain in the opposition. So after all maybe teh leadership challenge is convenient for all. It gives Julia her best chance for re-election, keeps Tony in the running and sells headlines, win-win-win.
I have every confidence the Australian People will not elect a Tony Abbott as their Head Hocho, just as they have, in their wisdom, not elected a Mark Latham.
It would be ethically shocking, to be sure, but if it comes down to it I’d prefer Shorten on those election debate stages against the monk, not a Gillard who can’t overcome her polling deficit.
He is an admirer of Lyndon Baines Johnson, you know.
Okay, you obviously need to believe that. But it’s most unlikely to be a reason for the process playing out the way it is.
I feel bad for the Gillard fans who somehow think they’re supporting Paul Keating when he was fighting his way back to the surface against all hope. That is just not what we have before us. ‘Tis magical thinking to believe otherwise.
And as for Mark’s OP observation about Ruddd getting too cocky, unless he’s privvy to internal party gossip then I think he’s relying on the news reports that went into detail about what Rudd had said seemingly off the record to a bunch of journos at a social event after Labor’s conference, ala “Fuck the future.”
Off. The. Record. Conversation.
This is bigger than any single group of MPs. This is national elite groupthink at work, and it’s groupthink that is happy to ignore the etiquette that has traditionally been adhered to among the political/media establishment.
Yes, and it doesn’t seem to do him any harm.
This is why I don’t want an electorally uncompetitive person leading Labor to the next election—Tony Abbott winning a landslide mandate despite everything he has hanging off him, that is dramatically worse than him merely winning and governing for a term or two. The way politics is carried out in this country would be changed forever by an Abottslide.
If that can be avoided then steps must be taken to avoid it.
Mark@19: “In a way, the cleanest resolution would have been for Rudd to have left politics, and I suspect that’s what the mob that deposed him thought would happen and hoped for.”
I disagree with this, mark. They could not have survived a by-election then, or now, and the counters knew it. And much as the MSM hates to admit it, and the party might try to ignore it, Rudd has been a superlative Foreign Minister. He should stay where he is, despite the rumblings.
He was right on the money (and very early, off his own bat) on both Libya and Fukoshima. His work on Burma etc has been top notch too (in alliance with Hilary, an alliance that might have interesting future implications). And because China rat-f*cked him in Copenhagen, they are wary of him now. He is in a good place, I reckon.
It is undeniable that he is “messing with heads” but it keeps him and the press amused. The thing is to treat it for what it is, head-gaming. I think Gillard knows this, which is why she mostly lets him get on with the job. There is nobody else who could do the job better on the current front bench.
Why ditch a good ministerial performer just because he keeps the press gallery looking like fools? Its a long time until the next election.
grace, I’m not saying that I think that should have happened, but that I think that’s what the coup plotters expected – not that he would leave and cause a by-election, but that he would not contest the 2010 election (which they were anticipating they would win with a majority).
Rudd was not gotten rid of because of the polls but despite them.
The machine men clearly used a hopelessly compromised internal poll ( which had no support from any public poll) to remove Rudd.
They needed to get rid of him because after another comfortable election win would have meant they would be close to redundant.
The problem was their understanding of politics was woeful. No-one could explain properly why Rudd was axed and they then had to try to avoid most of the successful policies under him because he was axed.
The only way Gillard will be replaced will be by the machine men changing their preferences. Rudd will never again be leader.
Nickws, I share your apprehension about an Abbottslide.
This may be a bit off the topic, but is anybody concerned about Martin Ferguson sooling the spooks onto so-called “environmental activists”? It seems to me to be a very “Liberal” sort of thing to do.
Although, old Martin, having never had to make a case for his own preselelection, has never really struck me as a particularly democratic sort person.
One rumour I’ve heard is that Anna Bligh is holding off calling the state election in Queensland until May, in the hope that Julia Gillard will get toppled in the interim. Anyone heard something similar?
Wood Duck @56, I’m concerned but not surprised. One of the most worrying aspects of the affair is that the AFP has outsourced the spooking to a private investigation firm which is not subject to the accountability requirements (such as they are) that the AFP and ASIO have to comply with.
@Terry 57
Dunno how having Bill Shorten in the Lodge is gunna help Bligh, but I am sure she knows what she is doing.
Sam @59, it’s the AWU that calls the shots in the Bligh government, but I’m sure they think they know what they’re doing.
I heard she was holding out a faint hope for the return of Kevin, but that may have been wishful thinking
Apparently Bob Brown is no longer prepared to talk to Julia. Maybe he is trying to force the leadership issue?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-11/brown-dumps-gillard-meetings/3767020
Re 62:
Brown’s got what he wanted out of his regular cuddle with Julia – a carbon tax and infinite boondoggle subsidies for renewables. There’s nothing left to negotiate over in this term. He’s probably figured that it’s time to get out of the tent and become a bomb thrower again. That will suit Gillard too.
The new paradigm!
Shorten in the lodge? No, no, a thousand times no. Not after this. [*]
Until he recants this view, I’m never going to vote for a government he leads, if it ever occurs. “Above the line” for the Greens; dunno what I’d do for the Reps yet. With this policy, Shorten’s being a true, machine-made, cemented tantalum, niobium and tungsten carbide annealed with carbon steel tool. $243 far too low, even with the $100 a fortnight “rent subsidy” on top.
[* The quotation is from The Australian, but the link is to a Crikey article that quotes it. I don't have log in details for the Oz, and I'd rather not pass on the link.]
Nick and Mark,
You’re scared of an Abbott-slide? Why? Is there a precedent?
Surely the Australian people can have, what the Australian people want? We deserve nothing less…
(I mean, let’s start solving real problems and stop managing perceptions! Can you believe the headlines coming from Mitt Romney, He ‘likes being able to fire people.’ That’s politics US style. Hahahahaa. And this guy could be Pretzeldente.)
Down and out of Sai Gon,
Shorten’s a fuckwit, what would a yuppie like him know about what goes on out in the real world? Gillard’s said similiar before too. That’s one of the biggest problems with the ALP these days, if there isn’t the potential for votes in it (what are the unemployed going to do vote for the Libs?) they don’t give a shit.
Seriously they need to blow the ALP up and just start again.
As I said, Jacques: I haven’t made up my mind about the lower house in such a situation. Vote informal or preference the Libs? I prefer the former; you may get a laugh out of the scrutineers and counters if you graffiti the ballot paper in a sufficiently amusing way, and you don’t have to preference the Libs. I don’t have to worry about a fine, because I will definitely be using my Senate vote.
I’ve said it before, and it’s true: there’s a word for people like Shorto – TORIES.
This is a good analysis Mark. I think my gut feeling is that, either if Gillard continues in office or if Rudd somehow gets his old job, the leadership speculation, tension and undermining will continue. The same is true if Shorten gets the position because he was closely involved in Rudd’s downfall and Rudd will never forgive him. This whole saga is eerily reminiscent of the Peacock-Howard feud that plagued the Liberal Party in the 1980s only for the most part that was all done when the party was in opposition wheres the Labor Party is now in government.
I think the factional bosses and poll-driven opportunists who knifed Rudd did a huge disservice to both the party and the nation when they carried out their vile deeds because they helped establish this kind of environment where the leader is consistently undermined and then plotted against. Gillard and the factional bosses, after scheming against and undermining Rudd, are now largely reaping the kind of culture they sowed.
It’s a sad state of affairs for a party that was once so reluctant to undermine their leader that, during the time of Simon Crean, a huge bloc of them were reluctant to get rid of him because he hadn’t been given a fair chance to lead the party into an election. I thought at the time that this type of mentality was damaging to the party because it prevented the kind of leadership change that was necessary when an underperforming leader needed to be deposed. Now the pendulum seems to have swung too far the other way whereby they get rid of a leader with the slightest provocation instead of being prepared to unite behind their leader when the going gets tough.
I intensely dislike Bill Shorten -he is a craven opportunist whom, like his great mate Paul Howes, is all for selling out for Labor’s traditional constituencies and taking the most politically expedient road for his own cheap political self-promotion, People often compare him to Hawke but at least Hawke seemed to have a deep sense of compassion and a moral compass that Shorten seems to lack -as evidenced by Hawke’s principled and uncompromising stands against racism, apartheid and so on. I said to a friend recently that I’d sooner vote for Sarah Palin than a Labor Party under Bill Shorten and that remains the case. Ditto Paul Howes. If Gillard does go and Rudd doesn’t return, it’d be good to get someone like Craig Emerson or Greg Combet get the guernsey. But I have a feeling that Bill will make sure he gets his self-serving day in the sun before anything else positive can happen
Mark, As a conservative, I always find it amusing when the Left insist on underestimating Abbott, despite the field evidence.
You suppose that a return to Rudd, who saw off Turnbull, would require the Coalition returning to Turnbull. You say Tony is a one-trick pony. Yet Tony saw off Turnbull and Rudd and deprived Gillard of her majority. Obviously Turnbull is the Left’s preferred Coalition leader for various reasons, but he could never deliver his party double digit two-party-preferred leads .
Abbott’s personal ratings, by comparison, are of little consequence.
Au contraire, Christopher, most lefties I know prefer Abbott as opposition leader because Turnbull (not being a lunatic) is actually electable. Abbott is the coalition’s Latham, only even worse.
The Australia constitution has been rotten. The principal of the most democratic country is the majority wins over minority. However in Australia, there are a small group of Greens and the three independents have became the power in Labor government, so the carbon tax, mine tax driven by them, it will be cost Labor in the next election, but Julia Gillard and Labor do nothing to avoid the landslide victory of Coalition in the next election, even some member has done something wrong as Craig Thomson, they have to protect although they know the poll descending badly.
The cabinet reshuffle just helped Gillard government rid for while the Kevin Rudd wing, but the dilemma is still being there, God save the Labor!