The latest thread on the Federal ALP’s dramas this week has got rather long, and since things happened today, here’s a new roundtable. Gillard announces new ministry: obviously Bob Carr is the big story, but some of the changes in portfolio are also interesting.
Key changes
Bob Carr
Previously: Former NSW premier
Now: Minister for Foreign Affairs designateRobert McClelland
Previously: Minister for Emergency Management
Now: BackbencherCraig Emerson
Previously: Minister for Trade
Now: Minister for Trade and CompetitivenessBrendan O’Connor
Previously: Minister for Human Services; Minister Assisting for School Education (outer ministry)
Now: Minister for Small Business; Minister for Housing; Minister for HomelessnessNicola Roxon
Previously: Attorney-General
Now: Attorney-General; Minister for Emergency ManagementKate Lundy
Previously: Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister; Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Now: Minister for Sport; Minister for Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting for Industry and InnovationDavid Bradbury
Previously: Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer
Now: Assistant Treasurer; Minister Assisting for DeregulationJason Clare
Previously: Minister for Home Affairs and Justice
Now: Minister for Home Affairs; Minister for Justice; Minister for Defence MaterielKim Carr
Previously: Minister for Manufacturing; Minister for Defence Materiel
Now: Minister for Human Services
McLelland is said to be considering his options with respect to remaining in politics.
Bob Carr, representing
NSWall states and territories in international fora.Cue boring lectures about US politics.
Hope he swings a few NSW voters anyway.
Interesting line up. McClelland’s demotion thoroughly deserved I believe-not because he supported Rudd, but because he is simply not Cabinet material.
Apart from being arguably Australia’s least distinguised Attorney-General (and there’s some competition for that gong imo), his interview on a recent 7.30 Report consisted of an extended whinge (paraphrase here-can’t find lin) that although he supported Rudd being demoted in June 2010 in favour of Julia Gillard, now he supported Rudd because he hadn’t retained the Attorney-General spot when the PM reshuffled Cabinet earlier.
I mean-plenty of people do in fact change their minds and allegiances for a whole lot less I suppose-but publicly whinging that the PM had been mean to him wha wha wha, and therefore he was going to repay her by withdrawing his support for her, was simply embarrassing.
Really good to see Kate Lundy get promoted! Though I wish she got Conroy’s spot – unlike Conroy she has actually a background in IT.
Presumably there’s some nervous shuffling happening in Canberra around McLelland – Twitterverse says there’ll be a press conference at 3:30pm.
How is Bob Carr to FA a good thing? I wouldn’t have thought the strong reminder of the NSW Labor govt at the next election would be helpful.
If I was McCelland I would go to the cross benches – then again as the son of a Whitlam minister he is probably been the beneficiary of Labor Kulture all his life.
Do you think the Bob Carr move was planned for some time? As I understand it Gillard was maneouvring to sack Rudd anyway. I was surprised initially that Emerson was made acting Foreign Minister and not Smith (easier to take the toy away if you weren’t expecting to keep it in the first place). Maybe the only difference last week’s hub-bub made was to have Mark Arbib resigned from the Senate after Rudd’s handing over DFAT rather than before.
And perhaps we might see Mark Arbib return via a lower house seat in the not too distant future – how about Barton?
Mumble’s view:
BTW I hear bloggers will be subjected to the News Media Council if they get 15 000 hits a year.
Thats virtually everybody.
Bob Carr “Previously: Former NSW premier”. No, that’s previously with Macquarie Bank. Just what the Labor Party needs in Cabinet, someone in touch with the one percent.
Annabel Crabb has just tweeted announcement that McLelland will stay on as Member for Barton.
Like the others here, I can’t see the value in Carr as FM. He really did typify the NSW Disease. He’s probably the most overrated “emeritus” in the country at the moment. One only has to pass by his blog to read the most appalling and vacuous dreck.
I dont live in NSW, and have no idea whether he’s considered to predate NSWitis, or as the seed of it.
My reservation is that he’s so completely US focussed. Aside from that, Im not overly vexed.
Fran @ 11 – I suspect he’s generally popular (outside of NSW) and he does know how to win elections. Also the government doesn’t need to worry about votes in the lower house now when the FM travels since Abbott does n’t like giving out pairs.
Carr is perceived to be pre-”NSW-Labor-disease”. Certainly the most popular premier in recent NSW history. Going from Arbib to Carr is a signal of a rewind for Labor in NSW, so it’s decent electoral strategy. Queensland is an electoral basket-case at the moment, and the timing may be right for a NSW-led Labor recovery. Whether he is a good FM? Meh – the general population don’t care.
It looks like the ducks have been in a row for a while. Rudd challenges, loses, is demoted. Arbib quits. Carr drafted. Quite neat and tidy really.
Maybe he can escape taint by association, even though he was basically responsible for the problems his successors (who lacked his political skills) inherited.
Still he’s such a boring tosser these days.
I agree. Carr was smart enough to get out before things got bad in NSW, but the rot started under him. His populism and failure to reform a bloated bureaucracy, not to mention the relationship betwen State Labor and developers, made things all the harder for his successors.
Under Carr NSW benefitted from a host of financial windfalls – Sydney Olympics with Commonwealth picking up much of the infastructure tab, GST revenues ahead of schedule, record stamp duty revenue – none of which was of Carr’s doing. Yet the money was all spent with precious little to show for it, and toll road deals that NSW will be paying off for a long time. Then there was the posturing to various minorities.
Carr was a skillfull dealer and persuader, but a manager he was not. Still the role of FM is only to posture and speak well, so Carr might be quite suited to it.
I’ve got a friend who’s a julia supporter and the moment she heard about Carr she said “Well, Julia’s jumped the shark now”. That’s a poll of one, of course. But there are lots of people in NSW who are much less fond of Bob Carr than Bob Carr is of himself.
Interesting the speculation about Arbib, but I don’t see Julia letting her key lieutenant piss off into retirement so that she can listen to Bob Carr expatiate on the US Civil War. The reshuffle shows Julia is good at revenge and good at keeping her friends very close. Can’t see her letting Arbib go unless she had no choice.
absolutely Carr was responsible for many of NSW’s problems.
I did hear that a couple of factors contributing to the desire to make Carr the Minister for Foreign Affairs were that he might be taller than Obama and he had read some books about American presidents. This probably means that he can name them all, just like some Australians can name Melbourne Cup winners.
Anyway, his appointment will ensure that our foreign policy will remain well and truly in lockstep with that of the USA.
There’s no chance of that changing anyway is there? (ALP or LNP in government)
Could the NSW Premier yet stymie the Gillard/Carr manoeuvre?
Would he?
I’ve always considered Carr a pompous windbag. The journos seem to be saying this is a masterstroke by Gillard and that it shows her authority. I just shrug my shoulders.
Wood Duck, I can name all the Melbourne Cup winners. BTW, Windbag actually won the Cup in 1925.
Ambigulous@21
My understanding is that things changed after Bjelke-Joh broke with convention in appointing Albert Field to a Senate vacancy created by the resignation of a Labor Senator. Albert Field was nominally Labor but was not the choice of the Qld Labor Party. My understanding is echoed in Wikipedia namely that the Field fiasco prompted an amendment to the Constitution requiring that casual Senate vacancies be filled by a member of the same party.
What’s most interesting about the ministerial shuffle is how well Julia has rewarded her supporters (particularly those prepared to slime on her behalf) and finely judged her revenge. She couldn’t afford to make it look like a purge, but she had to make an example of someone and McClelland was the obvious candidate because he wasn’t as prominent as the others and, maybe, with his Labor pedigree could be trusted not to resign from Parliament.
She may not be a policy wonk, she may not be much of a communicator, but when it comes to internal party politics, she’s a champ. If only Rudd had been this good.
I can’t think of anything good to say about the new cabinet. But it can all implode if Thompson falls – still a possibility, his case has to be decided soon.
Pompous windbag just about sums it up. The fact that most journos and sundry IPA types think he can just about walk on water, tells you all you need to know about him if you don’t live in NSW.
If you live in NSW just travel on a train or bus in peak hours.
GEOFF – Even if Thomson was charged with something tomorrow (just assuming) his trial wouldn’t be for at least 18 months (more if his lawyers know how to drop anchor).
However, I strongly suspect that Julia’s decision to piss off Wilkie may, at some stage, come back to haunt her, big-time.
Fine @ 22 – pompous windbag sounds like an appropriate skill for the foreign minister
On the positive side of the Carr appointment, it does at least give the figurative bird to The Murdochracy. Whatever I think of Carr, anything that annoys The Murdochracy and #theirABC can’t be all bad.
If this was a cunning stunt planned by Gillard (and I’d like to think so) then she gets back one brownie point.
Wow. Bob Carr, Foreign Minister’s a bit of a shock.
I don’t know what to think, really…
My first impression is that in as far as he is really quite a conservative labor politician, I’m not a big fan. On the other hand, because I really want Labor to win the next election, I’m going to concentrate on his positive characteristics– I think Bob Carr is a very good politician, in as far as he has excellent political sense (I think he’ll make the transition to national politics look easy) and will add a lot to the cabinet. He knows how to play in a team and he knows how to make an argument. It’s also an important step for Labor, because they need a strong character from NSW and Sydney to oppose Abbott (and that other twit, Hockey).
What do people think of Chris Bowen?
Still a bit shell-shocked though. Well, this is it for Gillard, it’s going to be 18mths of adrenaline from here on in for her. I guess, it’s a typical Gillard solution, as this is an organisational master-stroke. She’s not about crashing through, or leading from the front– she’s going for the full-court press. Slowly and, I hope surely, the player-vs-player comparison will take it’s toll on the Liberal party. It really is starting to llok like a handy cabinet of ministers.
‘Apalling and vacuous dreck’ Fran?
For sure it’s not the best blog on the planet but to dis it so savagely…..you must have apallingly high standards.
I find Bob’s blog consistently and reasonably interesting.
I don’t see how Bob Carr sticking his snout into the world’s diplomatic fleshpots is going to save the Gillard government.
Neither am I. Despite not being in NSW to me he seemed to be akin to what was wrong with the NSW ALP, arrogant, dismissive and keen on privatisation. He hates the Greens with a passion too, I remember reading a link from his blog not that long ago where he accused them of being all spin or something. It would seem the irony was lost on him.
So is Carr the first minister appointed from outside parliament since federation? Or was Holt appointed by Menzies before he re-entered parliament?
From memory Debus and Fahey are the last two minsters to have been appointed as soon as they entered parliament but I’m pretty sure they had been sworn in first. They had certainly been elected first.
Katz,
The world’s fleshpots are not important. We should leave that to Clinton, she can cause more than enough havoc, by herself! I think Carr will be able to promote Australia’s relations with Asia, which should be the main foreign policy task.
More importantly, I think he’s a handy addition to the cabinet.
Jacques de Molay, yeah, but he was a pretty good Premier. Best we’ve had for a while in NSW. Pretty good record on many issues.
The reports of the inevitable demise of the Gillard Government have been greatly exaggerated.
Bob Carr is well hooked into all sorts of circles. eg He bought up real estate in the area of the world considered likely to best survive climate change – LONG before it became common knowledge – and while the prices were still very low. Smart chap.
Bob Carr is there to ride shotgun on the Labor right especially NSW right. The maggotts of NSW only got loose after he resigned as premier. He’ll do a good job. He’s a realist and knows how to look afer the mates as well as himself – the Eastern suburbs tunnel was pushed through by him (owned by the Maq Bank) and his current position with he Macq Bank testifies to this. Top decision by Gillard.
Perhaps we’ll see a change in the Australian’s government towards Julian Assange? Can only hope!
http://bobcarrblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/julian-assange-and-an-australian-charter-of-rights/
Yes, it most definitely is “apalling and vacuous dreck”, and if he’s there to “ride shotgun on the NSW right”, it’s only to make sure they stay as far right as possible.
For example, his thoughts on <a href="http://bobcarrblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/tent-embassy-demo/"indigenous people":
Translation: Shut up, shut up, shut up! You’ve got all you’re ever going to get, stop complaining! The failure of assholes like me and Howard to make things better is actually your fault.
An area of conflict for Gillard and Carr. Will Carr simply remain silent now he is beholden to her?
I think there’s a very good chance that Gillard wil change her mind on this issue– the real problem is that Assange has unfortunately become somewhat of a domestic issue in US politics. That means, until he is forgotten, he will have to count his blessings every day he’s a free man. Gillard will hope and prey that Assange isn’t extradited to the US. David Hicks in guantanamo was bad enough for the Howard government, the general public will have even less understanding for Assange being put into the US extraordinary rendition program.
The fact of the matter is, that while Manning committed a criminal act, Assange didn’t. He embarrassed the US, by showing people a side of their foreign policy, which they could no longer ignore– but that, in itself is not a crime.
Thomas Paine: “…beholden to her”?
What evidence do you have about the direction of the beholden-ness?
29 Fran
That’s it all right, Fran. She drove a truck through News Ltd and Fairfax (Grattan and Coorey) and the ABC. Most of them had already gone to the trouble of saying this would have been a masterstroke if she hadn’t blown it, and how good Carr would have been.
Egg meet face.
While there is no direct evidence on the public record, the continual hints that Rudd may have been deliberately provoked into a challenge and the swiftness of the choreography still suggests to me that this moved was planned for some time.
Rudd must be overjoyed that his lobbying for a seat will ended up being enjoyed by someone from the NSW right. But the people I really feel sorry for is the UN Security Council. What on earth did they do in a past life to have to listen to lectures by Bob Carr?
Carr will be okay as FM. What I don’t get is why Gillard needlessly lied about it from Tuesday to Thursday. That is not an example of someone having the political smarts. Especially when her biggest problem is credibility, whether created by the Oz and the shock-jocks or by herself.
I have never seen in any indications that Bob Carr had any particular interest in Asia. His only interest seems to be the US and some reading of popular US history.
Does he know any languages other than English? I guess that has never been a requirement for an Australian Foreign Minister.
Gareth Evans reckoned Carr would be good because Carr knew where the countries of the world were situated on the globe.
Now, I know there are some dumb people in politics, but there can’t have been many who were that dumb. I mean, this isn’t America.
Correct. There are hardly any foreign ministers where speaking another language is a requirement. Even in a country like Germany, where learning at least and often three language is part of secondary schooling.
Like most people in charge of large international organisations, the government has advisors and specialists.
Lloyd@ 31 said of Bob Carr’s blog:
[I find Bob’s blog consistently and reasonably interesting.]
As always, YMMV, but I’m yet to see a single thing there that you wouldn’t expect from some nameless hack writing for the Oz. His stuff on the Australia Day police attack on the PM and subsequent media beat up (pun intended) was particularly dreadful tosh.
Outside Anglophone countries the idea of a monolingual Foreign Minister is almost unheard of. Not so long ago many English politicians would at least pretend to speak French – but attitudes have changed.
However the ability to speak another language or working for some period overseas does point to an interest in and knowledge of other cultures. I have to say I am little bit confused as to what particular knowledge or insight Bob Carr will bring to the job of Foreign Minister.
I am sure he will do the job fine – its pretty hard to fail at it after all – but I just don’t see why he is a stand out choice that overshadows the rest of the cabinet in any way.
You might find this recent summary of his views instructive
http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/
Actually most of them seem fairly much like commonsense, especially his remarks about the bizarreness of the anti-China sabre-rattling during Obama’s visit. Since it is such common sense presumably it was being done for reasons rather than sensible foreign policy. As such it will be outside Carr’s ability to alter. He will have to drop these intelligent views.
Paul, he was only offered the f.m. job by Gillard on Thursday.
Maybe others were approached as well. That is what happens when a position needs to be filled. Not to say he was not sounded out for a position in the Senate, earlier.
She did not lie at all.
Given Carr’s position on the treatment of Assange shouldn’t he as FM thus take the opportunity to rush to the UK and lobby that he not be extradited?
Maybe some media questions to Carr on his blog position and his intentions as FM?
I think Carr would be a good foreign minister and I seriously doubt he’s completely US-centric or knows nothing about Asia. In fact, maybe he knows more than Rudd? You know, about those countries in Asia other than China?
Also, what’s this shit about Gillard having no policy depth?
Grey, what rubbish!
I wonder what foreign language these foreign ministers from non-English speaking countries tend to speak? Fact is: even in a country like Germany, you can’t study at university without being able to at least read English. (And there are, I’m guessing, 120mill+ German native speakers in central Europe.)
Whatever you think about Carr, I don’t think anyone’s ever been able to ‘muzzle’ him. He has rather consistent views on things– in that regard he’s the polar opposite of Abbott.
Thomas, what, you honestly think Carr should just run-off to London to ‘help Assange’? And what’s he going to do in London, exactly? Even in Australia, politicians don’t lobby courts!
And, in any case, it’s not Labor party policy, so I don’t think we’ll see him running off to London any time soon because of Assange, even if he personally believes that Assange is not guilty of any crime.
joe2 @ 51,
Well, that’s a relief. Unfortunately, if you are just paying a very cursory attention to politics because the election is not next Saturday, that’s not the impression created. One more little victory for the Murdocracy I suppose.
I’m pretty sure he has extensive business interests in China and regularly travels there.
So it seems Holt was still member for Fawkner while in the army. So if Carr is sworn in as a minister – as is constitutionally possible and IMHO commendable – that wold be a first since Federation?
Debus and Fahey, I think, are the previous two members to have become ministers immediately on entering the federal parliament. Lyons did as well – are there others between?
They seem pretty happy about the Carr appointment in Perak, Malaysia.
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v6/newsgeneral.php?id=649455
And Paul, it is always the Liberal Party intention to paint Julia Gillard as a liar. On the basis of one promise about a carbon price before the election. And despite these words from their leader Tony Abbott when he was Health Minister in a majority Howard government.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/oakes-tony-abbott-enters-promise-land/story-e6freakc-1226167165749
Bob Carr has rubbed shoulders with the great and the good. Here he is setting Henry Kissenger right on some Big Themes in world history. As compensation, Bob clears Henry of any complicity in the 1973 Chile coup.
Well, I’m glad that’s settled.
http://bobcarrblog.wordpress.com/america/
With critical scepticism of the calibre, it appears that the finest traditions of Australian foreign policy are in good hands.
It’s quite touching how keen some people on here are to defend Gillard and insist there was never a problem this week.
She quite clearly came out of a tricky situation with her authority enhanced, as well as the regard of the press gallery. That should be enough.
Katz,
you know what I find amazing about America– and I’m saying this from the deepest recesses of my armchair– it’s how they’ve been able to sanitize not only their own history, but world history. If that isn’t a sign of their hegemonic position in their world, well, I don’t know what is:
The US is essentially, a British colony. All that guff about the Spanish and the French, is basically just that. The simple truth: compare Mexico with the US. In fact, it seems extremely likely, that more convicts were sent to the States from England, than were sent to Australia– and I say this as a reasonably enlightened Australian, as well as someone who recognises just how very many convicts England sent to Australia.
The US also has a first-inhabitants issue, which is at least as bad– I think in many respects, and not wanting to realtivise the issue, worse than in Australia.
The US also had slavery. This lead to the civil rights movement, but as a tradition, this is an incredibly brutal reality to have to live with. Now, I don’t think there’s much point in concentrating on the American wars, that’s a diversion– and I’m not American, but this fascination with wars pales the ridiculousness of our own preoccupation with Gallipoli.
So, how do people in the US sleep at night? They don’t only go to bed on stolen ground, but ground steeped in innocent blood. I think it’s because they are proudly stupid. Up until recently, there natural wealth and their good fortune in being the largest developed country mean they were the most powerful. Anything else is really just myth-making.
Now, I want you to tell me, while we’re being critical of the way things are, how to deal with a character like Henry Kissinger? Especially, if you’re the Premier of NSW? Or a high school history teacher? But maybe we shouldn’t be so self-effacing, because we could as well ask, how do you deal with Kissinger as the president of the US? It’s basically either bootlicking, or he lets you know about the affairs your dad/mother/wife had/are having, or something a lot worse…
Joe2@59, notwithstanding Abbott’s relentless attacking of the PM, she has actually done a pretty good job on herself confirming that she lies to the public.
On this occasion (re Carr) I don’t even know why her candour slipped, as far as I can see, she could have said that Carr was being engaged. What was the need for her to lie?
Geoff was it Gillard or the media who lied to you? I think you need to reflect on that.
Nah, the US grew rich and powerful because of the quality of its decision making, both domestic and foreign.
Trouble is, since WWII, the quality of that decision making has left much to be desired.
But don’t expect Bob Carr to pursue Australia’s national interests bearing that truth in mind.
With regard to evolving Australian-US relations along customary lines, Bob Carr takes on the job with his fundament conveniently pre-reamed.
You’ve got to feel for that other Carr – Kim from the Victorian left (the one that doesn’t include Gillard). While his friends in manufacturing are mounting a rear-guard action lamenting his going, Julia has made him Minister for Human Services. As such he replaces Brendan O’Connor, a Gillard winner, who swaps Human Services for Small Business, Housing and Homelessness. Learning the ropes will mean Kim talking to Brendan about Human Services and supposedly those small businesses that manufacture things. Hope they get along.
query? Is homelessness the opposite of housing and if so is Mr O”Connor open to confusion? Is housing someone a human service?
As to Sen. Bob Carr. How will he enjoy the Opposition benches after 2013 in those lengthy senate terms. His ‘bail out’ in NSW might hold a clue.
Yeah well Katz, I’m not gonna pretend that my opinion’s worth taking seriously. I’m not even a fan of Carr, but I reckon compared to the shadow ministers, he’s ok. And that’s an important thing to keep in mind for all of us when we’re trying to make a decision about which direction the country should develop in.
I really couldn’t give a rats about Kissinger. I read an article about him a year or so ago written by Helmut Schmidt– they went to grad school together, apparently. They were good friends, their wives liked each other, etc. It was bootlicking– from a ninety year old. I just find the whole issue sickening.
I don’t think that Bob Carr can be held accountable for having an opinion on him. It’s deeper than just being able to even shut your mouth on the issue.
Anyway, I wrote some stupid stuff, hope you’re used to it by now!
IMHO I think Bob Carr (whatever his issues) will be of benefit to Cabinet, will be of benefit to the Government’s reception and perception in NSW (and what about Bradbury’s promotion!!!). The ability to talk under water may be an attribute when being interviewed by Mr AJ. — talking of which, in Melbourne red neck radio MTR looks to have gone, in the style of Stan the man Zamernek , another one bites the dust.
Even though he is in FA , Carr presents well on media, will be an andidote to the ramblings of Abbott, Hockey etc. A good asset to include towards next election.
“I have never seen in any indications that Bob Carr had any particular interest in Asia.”
I’m sure his Malaysian born wife would have a different opinion.
I am not sure the point you are trying to make here.
Most of the foreign policy elite will know English and usually at least one other language.
Romance language speakers will have varying levels of fluency in the other romance languages. Eastern Europeans will often know German, some of them may have a bit of Russian and outside Romania and Hungary will probably have some knowledge of the other Slavic languages. Scandinavians will usually have some knowledge of the other Scandinavian languages and frequently some German or French, Italian or Spanish. Ditto with Germans.
Obviously that is not the norm in Anglophone countries – but really that just points out the insularity of our culture.
All I am doing is pointing the absence of obvious qualifications for Foreign Affairs over say Stephen Smith or Simon Crean. I don’t see what Bob Carr would bring to the role that the other two wouldn’t.
Incidentally when the Bob Carr deal looked like falling over Michael Fullilove of the Lowy Institute put his hand up (presumably someone who would have far greater specialist knowledge of foreign affairs). This confirms my suspicion that the Bob Carr move was planned prior to the Rudd challenge.
Suppose that Rudd had sat on his hands and needed to be sacked – some of the Murdoch press might have made rude noises how going back to Stephen Smith was an inferior choice of foreign minister compared with Rudd. Bob Carr could have been presented as a prestigious replacement.
Bob Hawke or Bob Carr?
I don’t really know anything about Bob Carr but if that is true it isn’t on his wikipedia page (not pretending that is the sole authoritative source on such matters)
Aside from some visits to the literary festivals (where he seems to profess a fondness for Gore Vidal – but not, I presume, his belief that 9/11 was an inside job or that Lee Oswald Harvey did not act alone), it has this
“In October 2005 Carr became a part-time consultant for Macquarie Bank, Australia’s largest investment bank, advising the company on policy, climate change, renewables and strategic issues with a focus on the United States, the People’s Republic of China.”
However I assume this was simply a cover for having Bob Carr on the Macquarie payroll as a lobbyist providing access to NSW political circles for infrastructure projects. Reports of Bob Carr, if any, would have been politely filed away. Naturally someone like Bob Carr doesn’t want to be known as a lobbyist.
Bob Carr has said some sensible things about the insanity of hostile rhetoric and positioning towards China. But since this rhetoric and posturing is so clearly stupid and the foreign policy elite and the Murdoch press etc are so clearly not stupid there must be some deeper rationality behind it. I would claim to know what it is, but as a wild guess I would say that China is primed for the next justification for the high levels of military investment and military research once Islamic terrorism (which has done excellent work in this regard) begins to tail off. As such Bob Carr will be happy to fall in line.
Carr, I think Tony Jones mentioned it one time he was on Q&A.
I expect Bob Carr to succeed in his new position and with little effort see off Julie Bishop a shadows shadow.
Chris @ 4 pray tell me where Kate Lundy obtained her IT background because here in the ACT she was in the building construction industry prior to being selected to stand in the Senate.
Good luck to her in her new job she has come on in leaps and bounds since first elected.
On the other hand Stephen Conroy did go to the ANU, has an economics degree which included a computer segment. He is doing a great job and I hope to see the NBN connected to my home in the not too distant future.
Also I understand that Stephen has been assisted by Kate working together in the IT field during the course of the last few years.
If Robert McClelland pulls the plug It would be great to see Kristina Keneally take his spot, she is gutsy ran with a poison chalice and saw it through to the election.
I agree, Bilko, I hated seeing her defend the despised Part 3a approvals process in NSW, and that coloured my opinion of her, but I can’t deny she was extremely able in atrocious circumstances. Predictably, the LNP has left Part 3a in place and will undoubtedly be even more enthusiastic about inappropriate and ecologically disastrous developments. I think she would be excellent.
As predicted, Gillard has been extremely harsh with Chris Bowen and kept him on in Immigration : )
Bilko @ 72 Kate was was opposition spokesperson in the senate for IT and communications for quite a while. She regually bested Richard Alston(?) and has a very good grasp of the both technical and policy aspects of the portfolio. A great promotion on merit.
Mindy @64
Good suggestion to reflect Mindy, so I did.
I came up with this;
The press claimed the PM was engaging Carr. Gillard denied that, and I was able to see her denial on a video clip.
Soon after that, it emerged that the PM had in fact spoken with Carr, and contextually, she had done so prior to denying the contact.
Now if all that is true and correct, then I’m happy with the duck thing – if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck… you know the rest.
So was the press was lying? Let me concede here that the Press has been guilty of embellishing a story, or even making stuff up. Even worse in the UK, and maybe in Oz too.
So was that the case in the Carr/Gillard matter. There was fairly good agreement amongst the reports (of contact) I thought, likewise the denial. Lack of evidence is not proof and I don’t read all Press accounts, so you might correct me if I am wrong.
But I have seen no cry of “foul!” from the PM or Carr, no re-write of the story, and little contra in this pretty well informed forum. No cry of conspiracy, and no blame sheeted home to the Libs.
Mindy I still feel beyond reasonable doubt that this nation was lied to (again) by the PM, an office that should be meticulously honest.
If you have information that I am wrong please share it – I don’t mind being shown I am wrong.
Katz@65 I hold more of a conspiratorial view to account for the growth and concentration of America’s rich, and the phenomenal level of world power held by the US.
At a point in time, about when the rail roads were being developed, there was important growth in some complimentary industries. These included steel, media, finance and later, oil and automobile. A cosy relationship with government facilitated the corporate success, and that relationship continues today. You can see political donations driving the Republican nominations in America – these generate access to an in-power government and the expectation is that favours will be granted. Charges that America is “bought democracy” are probably correct, but the question is, could that happen in Oz, or has it already happened?
I’m straying off topic again, so I’ll stop there Katz, I just had a different perspective of the US.
Geoff Henderson #76,
wasn’t the original question to the PM on Tuesday “have you offered the Foreign Minister position to Bob Carr”?
If so, isn’t it possible that on Tuesday she had not made a formal offer, but had rather simply been sounding him out regarding his willingness to serve if asked?
Then, by Thursday, she’d made her final decision and issued a formal offer, which he accepted?
If this was the sequence of events, then where is the actual lie? After all, what if on Tuesday neither Gillard nor Carr was yet quite certain about whether he was going to be the final choice? Should the government really have told journos the full list of absolutely everybody who had been considered and/or sounded out, and should each one of those people have told the journos about how they’d been approached? Really?
Gillard and Carr both perhaps played a gotcha game with tempting the the media to embellish their statements, and may well have enjoyed leading them down the garden path a little bit more than they should, especially when all those columns came out about how Carr “would have been” a brilliant choice but Gillard “blew it again”, the authors of which now have egg all over their faces.
Is that really an exercise of significant dishonesty rather than just a bit of larrikin mischief, given that the reshuffle was announced when Gillard said it would be, which was Friday? Just because the media wanted to know earlier than that, did they really have a right to know?
Here’s the ABC banner tonight on Google News:
Carr tells Labor to stop ‘gabbling’ to the media”
Could it be that Carr has really been brought in to bolster discipline? Or something more than FM?
tigtog@78 – “wasn’t the original question to the PM on Tuesday “have you offered the Foreign Minister position to Bob Carr”? If so, isn’t it possible that on Tuesday she had not made a formal offer, but had rather simply been sounding him out regarding his willingness to serve if asked?”
Yes that is possible, but I guess that depends upon what was actually said to Carr, and what his response was. Can you believe that the conversation went along the lines that would Carr be interested in the FM position if it were offered? And Carr has indicated that such a call would be hard to refuse. So even if the exchange did not contain the explicit offer, it was sufficiently presented to Carr that if he so desired, a formal offer could/would be made. That might be how it went, and if it did, JG was still not forthcoming about the possibility of a Carr appointment. It would have perhaps acceptable to simply say we are exploring a number of options, Carr is one of those. Instead she denied it when plainly her answer was deliberately incomplete.
Here’s a dictionary definition of LIE
1.
a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
2.
something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.
3.
an inaccurate or false statement.
4.
the charge or accusation of lying: He flung the lie back at his accusers.
verb (used without object)
5.
to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.
6.
to express what is false; convey a false impression.
As far as a gotcha game possibility, I would be surprised. Not really the time or place for that sort of mischief. The fragility of the Labor grip on government and recent events would render that humour most unlikely.
Nice choice of “ABC banner tonight on Google News:” Geoff.
Did you actually go beyond the superficial? Watch the video and read the story that comes with the banner. It’s actually a classic example of why many of us have real problems with Aunty, these days.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-03/carr-tells-labor-to-stop-27gabbing27-to-the-media/3866696
hint: Carr never actually used the word ‘gabbing’ that is used for the header. Even in the story he is actually quoted as such, with quotation marks this time, but never actually uses the word.
Pathetic beat up and unprofessional, imo.
No joe2, my take was nothing but the sensational banner, and the sudden thought that Julia was actually recruiting a new champion to support her.
Why is Gillard held to such a high standard when others, notably Howard lied through their teeth? Anyone remember Children Overboard? Howard won the election on the back of that whopper and yet he is still remembered as Honest John. The PM’s office was sullied long before the media decided to hold Gillard to a standard no one else attained.
Looks like your programmed thoughts are still leading you up a dry gully, Geoff. You may need to go beyond reflection.
You know, I always blab every detail of a sensitive job negotiation to the media, and I’m stunned, just stunned that Gillard doesn’t.
Mindy, absolutely!!! It’s incredible how she is both disrespected for her position by the likes of Alan Jones and then painted as a figurehead that is required to have higher moral standards than is practically possible. I mean, if what she’s done is lied, I’d like to know how most people think of themselves?! FFS she’s making complicated decisions daily, it’s anything but simple and when she changes her mind it’s lying?!! When she’s in the middle of making a decision and she let’s people know how things stand at the moment they ask, ans subsequently there’s a change and it’s lying? I mean, hello?
Lying used to be when you knowingly tell an untruth to gain personal advantage. Or in the case of Howard and the Tampa, when you give the impression that you know what the truth is for personal gain00 when you don’t. Gillard has done neither.
And Weapons of Mass Destruction. Really, JG’s qualified comment on a carbon tax (“under a government I lead”- she had no way of knowing she’d be negotiating in a hung parliamen) pales into insignificance beside these deliberate lies which caused the death of millions of people – not just discomfort to around 50 major corporations.
If you concentrate on Gillard’s statements in question time, its possible that she has been consistently denying that she had been rolled on her choice of Carr. The “don’t believe everything you read” and “I’ve been discussing the next FM with a range of people” statements on Wednesday and Thursday are consistent with her having intended to appoint Carr all week, and that reports that such a plan were undone were incorrect.
The problem seems to stem from the statement that the report in the Oz on Tuesday was “completely untrue”. However, with so many factual assertions in the Tuesday paper, a literalist approach would say that if any were true, then Gillard’s statement that it was “completely untrue” was, itself, untrue. However, if one reads Gillard’s statement as an emphatic rejection of the gist of the article, then again, it is perfectly consistent with her intending to appoint Carr all week and intending to override any revolt by Smith / Crean, but that she hadn’t made the final offer until Thursday.
I think we should hold the “journalists” at The Australian to at least as high a standard of honesty as the PM.
Plainly, you are an enemy of the right of “free speech”. If one can’t lie for the cause, speak recklessly because actual relevant data is too much like hardwork to get and so forth, recycle advertising bumpf and gossip as news, then your speech is regulated. Journos everywhere would be out of work.That sounds suspiciously like a “nanny state” to me.
Jowel-wobbling outrage doesn’t cut it.
The best way to counter this populist knownothingism is to be more amusing than the Parrots of this world.
And isn’t the Parrot a huge, lumbering, naked target of mirth?
It’s not difficult to be more amusing than the Parrot.
Perhaps the reason Gillard is being held to such a high standard is that we were all led to believe the lying would stop once Howard was gone and Labor was in. Oh, I forgot. It was Kevin who promised that.
85 Nick Caldwall
Classic, Nick.
Unfortunately the intelligent explanation will not get a run in the MSM or in Abbott/Credlin-speak. The intention is to paint and reinforce the image that Gillard is a liar. Evidence is not going to change that meme.
Since Abbott/Credlin work to Tea Party attacks aligned to focus group research, this type of attack is probably working. Bernard Keane reckons she’s toxic and will be gone by December.
The saving grace is that most of the public expect politicians to lie, and that this type of attack did not damage Howard a lot at the time of his PMship.
I’m happy to state that at this point I’ve changed my view and reckon that JG can and will take Abbott down at the next election. Appointing Bob Carr is very clever. JG needs clear air, which she’s now got, and to throttle the media pack until it learns to behave.
akn, I agree the Bob Carr appointment is a coup for JG.
Certainly Carr has plenty of baggage with the spin over substance having some true elements. But, this current minority government is getting significant changes through. I might add, that the imput from the greens and independants has augmented and helped shape the policies for the better of all. Alas the vested interests, especialy big business and News Ltd have helped hide the messages getting out. This I believe is where Carr can help to make serious in roads into the message, narrative and explanation of the good work being done. Carr, is able to get the message out, with humour and eloquence. Further as a former jounalist he understands the sound bite within a speech (just like a certain mister Abbot), this could indeed cause significant damage to the opposition’s momentum.
Carr should be re-parachuted into Reps at the next election, so he can lead a Labor Opposition back to victory in 2016.
I expect there will never be any “deliberately barren” jibes aimed at BC …
Since the Kruddslide I’ve perceived some improvement in Gillard’s self presentation. Since this is her most dangerous shortcoming any improvement is important.
It is questionable whether she can improve far enough, fast enough. She has a way to go and not much time to make up ground.
On another issue, Clive Palmer has just alleged that the “faceless men” who tell Wayne Swan what to say and do “all live in Melbourne”.
Who is Palmer referring to?
And now the almost inevitable H|tler Downfall paroady of the Gillard/Carr manoeuvre …
H|tler hears Julia Gillard trolled the Press Gallery
Usually, repeated jokes don’t work, but this is risible.
The Melbourne Club?
Them behave ?, I think not.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/pm-julia-gillards-bid-to-dump-whip/story-e6freuy9-1226288223252
And every dubious Newslimited creative attack piece, is dutifully covered by their ABC ..
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-04/fitzgibbon-threatened-to-resign-over-reshuffle/3867324
Pablo at 66
Assuming this is a genuine question … you can’t end homelessness without housing. We have a shortage of housing in this country, particularly affordable housing. I doubt he will get confused because there will be people like me to fill him in. The portfolio was previously with McClelland and he seemed to get it. Those of us interested in this stuff have argued very strongly for the portfolios to be held by the same person, preferable a Cabinet Minister which we achieve with O’Connor. Who my guess is will be OK. That said I thought Arbib did a good job on homelessness and McClelland was just starting to get into it.
Human Services is a portfolio that looks after Centrelink, Child Support Agency and Medicare – all service delivery agencies and two of them on a rather large scale.
MartinB@34 “So is Carr the first minister appointed from outside parliament since federation? ”
Michael Larvarch in 1993 as Attorney-General? On the one hand, he was in Parliament as the Member for Fisher until the 1993 election, but he was not an MP at the time his appointment was announced, as Peter Slipper had been elected in Fisher and the election in Larvach’s new seat of Dickson was delayed by the death of a candidate.
d
Nice suggestion, but it seems that Lavarch was not actually sworn in as a minister until the 27th April, after his election.
My take on the media role in the cabinet reshuffle is in my notes on this pome.
Turkey Feathers Ruffled?
Julia Gillard’s cabinet reshuffle,
Was the wildest of media shows.
Like pigs, their snouts sniffing for truffles,
Journos found all sorts of things to expose.
Or like jackals who lurk in the jungle,
And our own outback dog, the dingo,
If they sighted a mis-step or bungle
The news hounds were on to her. “Bingo!”
Headline hunting, they pushed and they scuffled,
Yet she remained calm and composed.
Now they are turkeys, feathers all ruffled.
Their payback will be poisonous prose.
Tony Abbott is flexing his muscles;
Big and bulging near bursting his clothes.
In the House bitchy Bishop bustles
To move one more of their damned SSOs.
Amid all this clamorous kerfuffle,
The name Gillard so much on the nose,
Bob Carr partners her soft shoe shuffle
As she smiles, looking sweet as a rose.
I thought I’d take this opportunity to thank Lavartus Prodeo for getting me started on composing these ‘pomes’ with your In The Loop thread. I’ve just had the joy of being invited by the National Library to join other sites like this one here, and people like Mr. Denmore, Grog, Andrew Elder et al on their PANDORA index.
Since January, 2010, I’ve been using polliepomes as an addition to my modest fitness routines which authorities tell me help in preventing synaptic deterioration in my very elderly brain. I guess it doesn’t matter if they’re right, I get a lot of fun out of it.
patriciawa – your doggerel rates! : )
Japerz figured prominently in patriciawa’s thread.
I miss Japerz.
Martin@104 Well, Carr’s not getting sworn in until he takes his seat either. What was the premise of your question again? ;^P
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3445520.htm
d
Japerz occasionally pops up on Dr Cat’s blog, Katz. If you really feel a need to reconnect …
Japerz is not banned from commenting here, either, just FYI. He took exception to his comments being pre-vetted via permamod (due to a habit of unpredictably posting gratuitous stoushbait every now and then) and decided to mostly flounce.
Yes, I remember Japerz’ parting flounce.
As I recall it, his flounce was protracted and entertaining.
I miss protracted and entertaining flounces.
Well done on the National Library gig and your very wise brain , patriciawa.
Thanks, joe2, I am often here to read and of course to comment on a couple of other more simpatico sites, so I often see and agree with your own input. It is reassuring, isn’t it, to know that we are not alone in thinking we have a good government, a sound economy and that remarkable things are being achieved in the face of huge hostility from the media and population at large.
We know the motivation of the media giants, of course, but it’s hard to believe that so many people have allowed themselves to be led into such a massive misapprehension of their circumstances. How long can it go on? Surely Australians have enough fairness and commonsense to see how they are being manipulated?
And journalists too, they can’t all be incapable of seeing and reporting the truth? How many of them listening to Messrs Oakeshott and Windsor at their National Press club gig were impressed by the honesty of these two men and their experience of what was being achieved in their regions in cooperation with the government and by their obvious appreciation of the Prime Minister’s ability and commitment to her promises? Why haven’t we seen wider reporting of this?
Pt/I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiybdjFvkOM
Pt/2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En9YB8KK1Ts
@107, 109-111. Sheesh. Why don’t you just grab a megaphone and shout ‘VOLDEMORT’!!?
Didn’t you catch Kevin Rudd’s 1.00am Washington press conference the other week?
Though I concede that Mark Arbib was not flouncy in the least.
And it’s been many a year since we had a good Latham or Costello-strength flounce.
Perhaps Crean could bridge the flounce gap? He looks like he’s been sucking on enough lemons to give good flounce…
Interesting that the appointment of Bob Carr’s inspires arguments about whether or not he’s an assess entirely in terms of his being associated both with the NSW government and the NSW Right. It’s as if the ALP is its very own pre-Copernican cosmos.
Two things:
1. I can’t ever remember a government needing to import someone into cabinet.
2. Mr Carr’s attitude is entirely orthodox: China, US? Pucker up! Aren’t there people far enough left of the Dead Centre present to object?
Adrien @115 I note the word need in your post, that the government needed to get someone.
As I see it, there was a need for a foreign minister, and it is probably correct to say that there were sufficient willing candidates in cabinet already to fill the position. But the PM, asserting her authority, chose a different path. Since she had (arguably) sufficient choices in her cabinet, why would the PM then choose to import Bob Carr?
My view is that Carr, a senior Labor figure with a considerable history in government, arrives with attributes that Gillard needs, and not especially related to foreign affairs. She saw Carr as a respectable (certainly in Labor circles) figure that as a supporter of JG, would bring her credibility and a line of defence against further leadership threats.
That seems plausible to me, although the kerfuffle surrounding the appointment took something away from the clever side of the move.
How will Carr be as a FM? Who knows. He should be well equipped to deal with political complexity…
@108: While supporting courtesy, I am nonetheless disappointed at the failure to use an obscure constitutional provision. It certainly joins a small list – including Lavarch – of potential uses of the provision.
In any case I am still interested in whether Gorton is the only person since 1901 to have relied on S64.
@115: I don’t think Carr is the worst of the ALP right, but on issues of law-and-order, foreign policy and general culture-wars I guess he’s pretty close. I certainly don’t commend the substance of the appointment.
I am, however, rather supportive of the process. I think it’s a great constitutional development. I don’t see it as being a matter of cabinet needing imports but rather of the reality that any cabinet in history is going to have the potential to be improved by adding people from outside parliament.
Obviously I wouldn’t want to see Senate casual vacancies abused, but insofar as they exist I think they are a great way of having a US-style direct appointment to cabinet but entirely within a Westminster parliamentary model.
Bob Carr will enable the ALP to win the 2013 election.
Despite being a useless Premier and an unelected Foreign Minister, which makes me want to projectile vomit, I am overjoyed that Carr has been drafted into Cabinet.
Because he provides in spades what the Federal ALP does not currently have: communication skills.
Yes, he is vacuous and pompous, but he sounds convincing and can sell a policy, a combination which exactly zero other persons in Cabinet possess.
Plus, Keatingesque, Carr can make his opponents look uneducated and foolish. Yes, Abbott is uneducated and foolish, but no-one in the ALP, except Roxon many moons ago, has achieved the feat of revealing that basic truth to the electorate. OK, Kerry O’Brien did so as well, but that doesn’t count.
BTW Notice that Abbott does not do interviews ? Despite being ever-present on the TV, he only communicates in set pieces. The Libs are keeping him tidily under wraps and are avoiding the horrific transparency of placing Abbott in an uncontrolled circumstance, i.e. an adult conversation, in which his basic boneheadery must inevitably surface.
Carr will strip away the layers. Mercilessly. He’s there to do the communicating and crucifying that Gillard cannot.
Long live Bob The Vacuous! And long live his patron, Julia The Wise.
Bloody smart move.
There were people who were already in parliament who could have been FO. However, logical candidates such as Smith really needed to finish some of the things they had started in their existing roles instead of being part of a wave of disruption.
I am all for the appointment of a limited number of outsiders to cabinet, particularly as minister for roles where specific expertise is desirable. It would be desirable that they were non-voting additions who didn’t have to replace elected members.
The case is particularly strong for state governments where the depth of talent is often less than outstanding.
Part of the problem with the US system is that the members of congress and the senate tend to function as a rabble of independents.
Giles, you are still being spammed. Maybe it’s the indifferencegivesyouafright in the url.
Maybe Giles could move to the centre point between ‘anthrxx’ and ‘green gables’? The spaminator could be sensitive to extremes.
Paul Keating reckons he’d be a better PM now than he was then. More mature.
Any chance of a HoR vacancy coming up?
Ambigulous it was Keating who said of Andrew Peacocks second tilt at leadership that “A soufflé can’t rise twice”. Of course, it was different when he took out Bob Hawke on his second attempt.
This is a pretty interesting read..about Carr, Turnbull and Abbott from the Bulletin Days @global mail: where you scroll to the side.
http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/the-bulletin-boys/116/
Sounds like it should have been Snedden. Wasn’t Peacock more noted for older women?
- A popular internet encyclopaedia
Might be true Martin, PK probably borrowed it