Tag Archive for 'Liberal leadership instability'

News Limited’s partisan nonsense actually a disaster for the Liberals

Various News Limited scribes on the weekend opined (all speaking in the voice of Tony Abbott’s ventriloquist dummy – it couldn’t be more obvious) that Malcolm Turnbull had set himself the task of tearing Rudd down in order to win. And failed. [By the way, bad move according to the News punditariat - nothing at all to do with publishing fake Utegate emails on front pages - who are now touting the said Tony Abbott, who presumably is as pure as the driven snow and would never resort to personal attacks or absurd and false confected scandalising in the most unlikely event he became Opposition Leader...] In case you missed the various stories, Turnbull has “declared” the Liberals can win the next election. That’s a matter of total irrelevance to the actual dynamic of Australian politics, since the “influence” of the News Limited opinionistas now only extends to Liberal MPs (and, sadly, the ABC’s more recondite political correspondents).

There’s a bit of a problem with this meme.

In a (now) rare piece of relatively sensible and reality based political commentary, Lenore Taylor, formerly of the Australian Financial Review, wrote in The Australian on the weekend that the “personal destruction of Rudd” thing failed dismally for the serried ranks of Howardistas in government and – were she writing completely honestly she might have added – in News Limited in 2007.

She also neglected to observe that Dennis Shanahan was the most enthusiastic participant in this collective delusion. While Glenn Milne, one might conjecture, did the mud slinging antecedent to the putative glorious Howard re-election that never was.

Continue reading ‘News Limited’s partisan nonsense actually a disaster for the Liberals’

Nelson brings on leadership spill for tomorrow

It’s on. Brendan Nelson’s thrown down the gauntlet. The Liberal Party will determine its leadership tomorrow morning after Nelson called on a spill. Perhaps his capital E emo man performance in Parliament today was his audition – or maybe he’d eaten some of those baked beans. At any rate, he’s got one night of that “clear air” that is/was the new cliche/talking point de jour.

You have to wonder if there’s not some level at which this is a bit of subconscious revenge on Peter Costello, whose book launch tomorrow will now surely be “overshadowed”, as the meejah like to say.

Let’s see if the Turnbull boosters’ claims that they already have the numbers are right. Or will Malcolm Turnbull even put his hand up? What happens if he loses? Surely he couldn’t stay on the front bench. Nelson must be dreaming if he thinks this will end the thing. If he marginalises Turnbull to curry favour with the hard right, he’s still got a divided party. If he keeps Turnbull on the front bench, he looks weak. But at least it might kill off the Costellology.

Update: Michael Brissenden reported on the 7 30 Report that Nelson had been more angry than ever seen before (is that possible?) at a party room meeting and had promised to “clean out” his office and the front bench if he wins. He could lose endless commentator Tony Abbott for a start, and the promise regarding the office presumably refers to his habit of going off the reservation and making policy unilaterally – for instance with the $30 a week pension increase. Presumably the implication that Nelson will be clearing out his desk is unintended, but maybe interesting in a Freudian slippy sorta way.

More strange is a reported promise to “toughen up” the line on climate change while simultaneously walking away from the carping opposition to same sex rights in the Senate. This sounds like a typical Nelson left/right straddle to me, but apparently he’s going to show a “different” side to his leadership. More props? No more truck trekking? Who knows?

Turnbull is standing by the way.

More: Possum has posted Nelson’s press release.

Update: Bruce Billson, the Shadow Minister for Communications (who knew?), duly communicated on Lateline tonight. It wasn’t 100% clear, but he seemed to be suggesting that Malcolm Turnbull might remain on the front bench if Nelson wins. Yeah, right, that’d be smart. But it does show that Nelson’s inclusive or something. Oh, and “strong action on climate change without wrecking the economy” may or may not be a different stance from their most recent unintelligible confusion. But communications expert Billson appeared pleased that it was a nifty soundbite. Who thinks that somehow all this isn’t going to be over tomorrow morning?

Decided [by Kim]: It’s Turnbull by 45-41. New open thread here.

Update [by Kim]: I’ve put up a post with some analysis of what Turnbull needs to do here.

Continue reading ‘Nelson brings on leadership spill for tomorrow’

Costello memoirs: Bored now?

I’ve got a question about the Costello memoirs. Is anyone going to rush down to the bookshop today and hand over $55 of their hard earned for a copy? I mean – courtesy of the neverending promo show – we now know $weetie doesn’t like Janette, Malcolm, Barnaby or Little Johnny, thinks Tony Abbott is two faced, and that he wanted the leadership handed to him on a platter. And that the election loss was all Howard’s fault, or all Jackie Kelly’s fault, which comes to the same thing really, doesn’t it? And of course all this is such a surprise! Is $55 worth the punt that we might find out that The Great Pretender also wants revenge on Bruce Billson or Wilson Tuckey or Peter Lindsay or someone?

Boycott the thing, I say!

Continue reading ‘Costello memoirs: Bored now?’

Peter Costello’s legacy

The Fin Review ran today with a cover story on Peter Costello’s legacy – not on the Liberal leadership but as Treasurer. It appears to be an article of faith – based on a questionable analogy about the supposed damage a move away from Paul Keating’s legacy did to Labor in opposition (and one, incidentally, pushed by PJK himself to journos and commentators) – that they have to hug John Howard close to their chest. So Peter Costello is routinely dubbed by Liberals as “Australia’s best Treasurer”.

The IMF didn’t think so. The Fin has obtained leaked Treasury documents prepared for discussions with IMF officials last year. The upshot of the story can be summed up by its tagline – “Peter Costello’s fiscal policy was potentually more damaging than any other period since the Whitlam years”. IMF wonks were deeply concerned about a stimulatory budget and fiscal policy at a time of economic over-heating, and the article by Paul Cleary concludes:

… from 2003 onwards, Costello executed a sustained expansion of fiscal policy during a sustained upswing in the economy. Looking further back, his predecessors had only engaged in such a policy during recessions. The result of this outbreak of bad policy in the last years of the Howard government is likely to be a long period of inflation and weak economic growth, and it may take some considerable time, and pain, to get the balance back in the right order.

Continue reading ‘Peter Costello’s legacy’

So it was all about promoting his book…

Hardly surprising, I must say, to read that Peter Costello has dumped on Howard in his book and has also ruled out standing for the Liberal leadership. What a petulant and self-indulgent performance.

What if they held a History War and nobody came?

Now that the Howard gubbermint is ancient history – except in the memoirs of the ghost of Peter Costello who wants you to know that Howard LIED six times and failed to hand him the leadership on a platter (ps. don’t waste your 55 bucks on his stoopid book – it’s been scooped, and that’s about it, except Pete WAS TEH BEST TREASURER EVAH! and could have singlehandedly sorted the international credit crisis) – there’s very little force, I’d have thought, in a claim that “the history wars have been revived”. A claim made by the usual suspects – particularly Dr Kevin Donnelly – that teh Communists have their hands on the history curriculum under a Labor Government. Read all about it here – in Crikey – by Jeff Sparrow – who skewers this nonsense without even raising a sweat, I suspect. As you were. No narrative here. Look away. There’s commies under your bed though.

Continue reading ‘What if they held a History War and nobody came?’

Newspoll: Labor 56-44

Via The Poll Bludger, the same old same old from Newspoll. I think what Rod Cameron had to say on Lateline had a lot of merit – voters will give Kevin Rudd at least another year before making a final judgement. In the meantime, the Liberals probably are wasting their and all of our time with their constant shenanigans. Their best bet would be to lie low and stop making themselves the story. They’re unlikely to, of course. Too much a bunch of prima donnas, plotters and media tarts. And now we’ve got this to look forward to:

But you can be sure that from the end of the next week until at least the end of the following week, it will be all-Costello-all-the-time in the Australian media.

Lord save us.

This question from Essential Research (which incidentally has Labor sitting on a 59/41 2PP split) is a hypothetical, but it’s still an interesting result:

Kevin Rudd is preferred to Peter Costello head-to-head 53 per cent to 27 per cent.

Elsewhere: Possum shows why the Costello dithering is doing a lot of damage to the Libs.

Bursting the Costello balloon

In the wake of the punditariat’s latest game of deconstructing each parliamentary interjection by The Great Pretender and wistfully wishing his incoherent comedy lines on the public, it’s worth taking a step back and asking whether – even if you think Peter Costello’s schtick is remotely worthwhile – it matters.

Andrew Bartlett points out:

I remain to be convinced that being the best performer at ‘throwing the switch to vaudeville’ does much on its own to attract public support.

Kevin Rudd didn’t defeat John Howard because he had a lot of witty putdowns in parliament. Nor did John Howard win against Paul Keating in 1996 for this reason. Indeed, one could argue that this fixation with Keating’s apparently unchallenged ability to dominate the arena during Question Time was a key reason why so many commentators argued he still had a chance of winning in 1996, well after the electorate had already decided they’d had enough.

Exactly.

Continue reading ‘Bursting the Costello balloon’

Nelson’s interest rate gambit

As Dennis Atkins observes, Brendan Nelson yesterday took what appeared to be a calculated gamble in breaking the convention that senior pollies don’t comment on the Reserve Bank’s interest rate decisions. Nelson called for a cut of 50 points in the cash rate.

I suspect this was some sort of pre-emptive strike to try to forestall any credit claiming by Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan if (as expected) the cash rate is cut by 25 points later today. The politics haven’t played out to script, with Nelson’s comments that he wouldn’t make such a call in government playing into Rudd’s hands.

But it was interesting to hear Nelson’s justification on Lateline last night. Nelson argued that he was reflecting what “many Australians” thought. For those who’ve been paying any attention to what he’s had to say since he became leader, that’s typical. He appears to regard himself as some sort of transmission belt. Hence all the emo-ting. It’s an intriguing view of political leadership because it completely eviscerates the notion of leadership itself. Perhaps it’s one reason why his own leadership is in so much trouble.

Continue reading ‘Nelson’s interest rate gambit’

Imagine

Somehow I’m not feeling the Costello excitement:

After Gillard taunted him in the parliament last week about his publisher’s motto, “books with spine”, he responded: “If she bought a copy, I might sign it for her. She could take it back to that flat where she lives with the spartan furniture, put it up on the bookshelf with her current library, the collected works of Marx and Engels. She could file it alphabetically, by author, ‘Cos’. It will come after ‘Com’, for The Communist Manifesto, and before ‘D’, for Das Kapital. Or she could it put by her bedside where she’s reading a book on how to create unemployment in an economy which is undergoing a mining boom.” Imagine those lines delivered in parliament.

Meanwhile, Brendan’s still truckin’

Federal Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson says all decision-makers should spend 12 hours in a truck to understand the issues long-distance drivers face.

Newspoll Tuesday: Labor 56-44

Ok, in the parallel universe that is press reporting of polls, we get this from the West Australian:

Extensive Olympics coverage over the past two weeks may have pushed politics out of the minds of many Australians and be responsible for the minimal changes in the latest Newspoll of voter sentiment and no improvement for the coalition.

Right. Yep. Because the natural order of things is that the Coalition vote should always be rising and its failure to do so is an aberration to be explained away by… stuff that happened in the same fortnight. Whatevs.

Meanwhile, Dennis Shanahan puts it all down to the waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting for Costello to release his book. Which, by the way, the ABC is giving free publicity to by televising a National Press Club speech by the former Treasurer on the day of its release. What’s with that?

But note the common assumption that the Liberals should be gaining were it not for their leadership woes. Really? How do they know? Because they do. It’s not argued. But it’s there as the background assumption on which all the rest rests.

Elsewhere: For actual commentary on the poll, go visit Possum and the Poll Bludger’s crew in comments. The Poll Bludger also links to the rather interesting Essential Research poll (Labor 58-Coalition 42) which shows that there’s a 7% negative differential between state and federal ALP voting intentions among its sample.

Turnbull in the corner

Judging by this news item in the Fairfax media, tonight’s Four Corners warts and all profile of Malcolm Turnbull sounds like a bucket load of fun.

In a profile on the shadow treasurer to air on the ABC’s Four Corners tonight, Mr Turnbull is identified as the insider who passed on secret notes indicating Mr Packer would publicly stick to the law but would privately exercise editorial control over Fairfax.

Timely because it comes slap bang in the middle of the run up to Peter The Ditherers biography launch and important questions about Liberal Party leadership issues and tensions arising from that event.

Fun prime time viewing for the whole family. Bring the popcorn and consider this an open thread if you’re watching tonight.

Can Peter Costello win when Brendan Nelson can’t?

Poor old $weetie must have been feeling attention deprived. The “will he, won’t he?” stories had run out of any possible oxygen, so he opened a Senator’s office, and attacked the Labor party on economic management. The drooling in the News Limited punditariat started on cue, with Costellologist in Chief Dennis Shanahan immediately pointing out that while the Great Pretender had said he woudn’t challenge Brendan Nelson, he hadn’t ruled out being drafted into the leadership. Of course he didn’t. He’s always wanted everything given to him on a platter.

All the schtick about some leadership draft ignores the fact that Nelson – although he’s been reminded ad infinitum that a dignified handover would lead to some fabbo outcome for him like becoming the next Lord Downer – will probably fight, if indeed as the same pundits previously speculated, he has to at all, because he’s been briefed by Costello on his intentions. But I suppose an attention span longer than a day and paying some attention to what you’ve previously written is beyond their ken.

The other theme here from the cheer squad (they give you “balance and fact”, remember!) is that Costello supposedly came out with some masterly (remember the front page about last year’s “Master Class Budget”?) economic critique of economic management Rudd style. Err, he didn’t actually. Continue reading ‘Can Peter Costello win when Brendan Nelson can’t?’