tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/leadership-spill-5050/articlesLeadership spill – The Conversation2021-06-22T20:05:01Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1630742021-06-22T20:05:01Z2021-06-22T20:05:01ZNet zero by 2050? Even if Scott Morrison gets the Nationals on board, hold the applause<p>Resurrected Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce is back in the saddle, facing backwards. His determination to prevent the Morrison government from adopting a target of net-zero greenhouse emissions by 2050 will again delay the renovation of Australia’s climate policy.</p>
<p>The Nationals’ leadership spill <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/barnaby-joyce-sets-up-climate-change-policy-clash-after-reclaiming-leadership-20210621-p582ze.html">reportedly followed</a> growing disquiet about Morrison’s slow pivot towards a net-zero by 2050 goal. Many Nationals MPs have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jun/17/nationals-will-oppose-net-zero-emissions-target-resources-minister-signals">indicated</a> they don’t back the target, and Joyce says he will be “guided by the party room” on the issue.</p>
<p>If Morrison eventually gets the 2050 target past Joyce and passed by the joint party room, there will be little cause for celebration. In fact, the achievement will be as exciting as watching a vaudeville magician wrench an old rabbit out of a moth-eaten hat. </p>
<p>Australia’s premiers will yawn in unison. Every state and territory in the country has already adopted this target, or better. Yet at the end of the day, net-zero by 2050 is a risky and inadequate goal, especially for wealthy nations such as Australia. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="two men and a woman" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407597/original/file-20210622-14-164uwba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Barnaby Joyce, centre, says the Nationals’ stance on a zero-emissions target will be guided by the party room.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A target is nothing without a plan to get there</h2>
<p>All G7 states and 11 G20 members are aiming for net-zero emissions by mid-century. These include <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-enshrines-new-target-in-law-to-slash-emissions-by-78-by-2035">the United Kingdom</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/26/japan-will-become-carbon-neutral-by-2050-pm-pledges">Japan</a>, <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/7779596/climate-change-emissions-targets-canada-2030-trudeau/">Canada</a>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/germany-raise-2030-co2-emissions-reduction-target-65-spiegel-2021-05-05/">Germany</a>, <a href="https://sdg.iisd.org/news/france-switzerland-present-roadmaps-to-reach-net-zero-by-2050/">France</a>, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/south-koreas-green-new-deal-shows-the-world-what-a-smart-economic-recovery-looks-like-145032">Republic of Korea</a>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eni-results-idUSKBN2AJ1O1">Italy</a>, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-eu-law-idUSKBN2751GI">European Union</a>, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-10/argentina-is-torn-between-its-shale-dream-and-climate-goals">Argentina</a> and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-says-the-us-will-rejoin-the-paris-climate-agreement-in-77-days-then-australia-will-really-feel-the-heat-149533">United States</a>. China, the world’s largest emitter, <a href="https://theconversation.com/china-just-stunned-the-world-with-its-step-up-on-climate-action-and-the-implications-for-australia-may-be-huge-147268">has committed to</a> net-zero by 2060.</p>
<p>However, as international environment law expert Professor Lavanya Rajamani <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/2015-paris-agreement-climate-change-pollution-7101448/">has argued</a>, net-zero targets should not automatically be applauded. First, they should be checked for their credibility, accountability and fairness. On these measures, a net-zero by 2050 target for Australia is nothing to cheer.</p>
<p>Why? First, because a target is nothing without an effective strategy to get there – something Australia is sorely lacking.</p>
<p>To successfully achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, tough short- and medium-term targets are essential to staying on track. Victoria, for example, has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-02/victorian-government-targets-or-agriculture-transport-interim/100110140">pledged</a> to halve carbon emissions by 2030. The UK is <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-enshrines-new-target-in-law-to-slash-emissions-by-78-by-2035">aiming for</a> a 78% reduction by 2035, reflecting its confidence in existing and emerging technologies.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/failure-is-not-an-option-after-a-lost-decade-on-climate-action-the-2020s-offer-one-last-chance-158913">'Failure is not an option': after a lost decade on climate action, the 2020s offer one last chance</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Morrison government’s 2030 target – a 26-28% reduction below 2005 emissions levels - is not credible. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jan/28/australia-needs-to-cut-emissions-by-at-least-50-by-2030-to-meet-paris-goals-experts-say">Experts say</a> a 2030 target of between 50% and 74% is needed to put Australia in line with keeping warming below 2°C and 1.5°C respectively – the goals of the Paris Agreement. </p>
<p>So what about Australia’s actual emissions-reduction measures? The Morrison government’s <a href="https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/taylor/media-releases/investment-new-energy-technologies">technology-first</a> approach <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-dose-of-reality-morrison-governments-new-1-9-billion-techno-fix-for-climate-change-is-a-small-step-146341">falls short</a> of what’s needed to drive quick and deep emissions cuts. </p>
<p>Reaching net-zero requires substantial government funding and tax relief for investors in renewable technologies. Morrison’s announcement of an additional A$540 million for new technologies is insufficient and partly misdirected.</p>
<p>For instance, the government is investing in carbon capture and storage. As others <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-dose-of-reality-morrison-governments-new-1-9-billion-techno-fix-for-climate-change-is-a-small-step-146341">have argued</a>, the technology is increasingly commercially unviable and encourages further fossil fuel use. </p>
<p>In the meantime, the government is failing to assist the uptake of proven technologies such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/top-economists-call-for-budget-measures-to-speed-the-switch-to-electric-cars-162883">electric vehicles</a>, despite transport being <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/6686d48f-3f9c-448d-a1b7-7e410fe4f376/files/nggi-quarterly-update-mar-2019.pdf">Australia’s third-worst</a> sector for emissions. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Close up of words on car reading 'zero emissions'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407599/original/file-20210622-21-1xpvm21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Morrison government has failed to invest in electric vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2050 goal is risky business</h2>
<p>Even if Australia adopted a goal of net-zero by 2050, and measures to get there comfortably, the target is risky.</p>
<p>In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">report</a> on the potentially catastrophic impacts of exceeding 1.5°C global warming. In the same report it established the idea of “net zero” as a global aim, saying achieving the target by 2050 was needed to stay below that warming threshold.</p>
<p>The IPCC described the emissions-reduction pathways required, but failed to emphasise crucial assumptions underlying them. Most depended on “negative emissions” - drawing down carbon from the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Many of those presumed drawdown measures involve land use measures that <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/global-sustainability/article/coproducing-climate-policy-and-negative-emissions-tradeoffs-for-sustainable-landuse/CE06F8A4BB2745389C53EEBE84EB95E7">potentially threaten biodiversity or food security</a>, for instance by requiring farmland and virgin forests to be used for growing “carbon crops”. Others involve geo-engineeering technologies which are <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-heres-the-lowdown-on-australias-low-emissions-roadmap-146743">yet to be</a> tested or proven safe at scale. </p>
<p>It’s a risky strategy to avoid rapid, substantial and real emissions cuts in favour of gradual mitigation pathways that rely on such future carbon drawdown. It locks us into <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05938-3">technologies which are problematic</a> or don’t yet exist. To limit these risks, Australia must aim for net-zero well before 2050, predominantly via actual emissions cuts.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/even-without-new-fossil-fuel-projects-global-warming-will-still-exceed-1-5-but-renewables-might-make-it-possible-162591">Even without new fossil fuel projects, global warming will still exceed 1.5℃. But renewables might make it possible</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="bleached coral" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407600/original/file-20210622-26-c81839.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The IPCC warned of catastrophic climate impacts, such as coral bleaching.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A matter of fairness</h2>
<p>The matter of equity is another where policymakers have been inattentive to nuance. The undifferentiated call for net-zero by 2050 shifts the burden and costs of effort onto poorer countries. No wonder so many developed countries have been happy to adopt it!</p>
<p>The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement each require developed countries to cut emissions faster than poorer countries – and to assist poorer countries in their efforts. This recognises the fact developed nations are largely responsible for global warming, and have the wealth and technological capacities to act. </p>
<p>Developing nations such as India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, as well as those in Southeast Asia, Latin America, the Pacific and Africa, are mostly below global average wealth. Forcing them to meet the same net-zero timeframe as rich nations is patently unfair. </p>
<p>And for the international community to achieve even the 2050 goal, China – a global emissions giant – must increase its ambition to at least net-zero by 2050 (rather than its current 2060 timeframe).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="smoggy city skyline" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/407617/original/file-20210622-22-4m2w27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">China must accelerate its climate efforts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Morrison’s bind</h2>
<p>It’s clear that rich developed countries must both aim for net-zero emissions well before 2050, and provide climate finance to assist poorer countries to do the same. Anything less will almost certainly guarantee Earth overshoots an already risky target.</p>
<p>Australia, given its wealth and technological means, must certainly aim for net-zero well before 2050. A report in April this year <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/net-zero-emissions-plummet-decade/">suggested</a> reaching net-zero in 2035, to make a “fair and achievable contribution to the global task” and given our vulnerability to extreme weather.</p>
<p>The issue of climate finance was <a href="https://www.g7uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Carbis-Bay-G7-Summit-Communique-PDF-430KB-25-pages-3.pdf">on the agenda</a> at this month’s G7 summit, but critics say the final commitment – meeting an <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/g7-leaders-commit-increasing-climate-finance-contributions-2021-06-12/">overdue spending pledge</a> of US$100 billion a year – is inadequate considering the urgency of the task.</p>
<p>Just months out from a crucial UN climate summit in Glasgow in November, Scott Morrison is caught in a bind. On the global stage, he’s under increasing pressure to commit to a net-zero emissions target or face <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-eu-is-considering-carbon-tariffs-on-australian-exports-is-that-legal-156946">carbon tariffs</a>. At home, he’s forced to assuage a minor coalition partner now led by a man who will <a href="https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/qld-politics/new-coal-power-station-and-an-emissions-fight-qld-promises-that-got-joyce-back-in/news-story/a4a2886742331ac9c7705b2d9f7d3be7">reportedly</a> push for a new coal-fired power station, and for agriculture – and potentially mining – to be exempt from emissions targets.</p>
<p>The looming general election will test whether rural voters are prepared to endure Joyce’s climate antics or will swing to savvy independents. And it remains to be seen whether urban voters will tolerate a prime minister whose transactional politics leaves Australia increasingly exposed at home and abroad.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163074/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Christoff does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>At the end of the day, net-zero by 2050 is a risky and inadequate goal, especially for wealthy nations such as Australia.Peter Christoff, Senior Research Fellow and Associate Professor, Melbourne Climate Futures initiative, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1311432020-02-11T06:35:23Z2020-02-11T06:35:23ZBehave as a team, Morrison tells the troops<p>As he battles to put containment lines around the damage the Nationals’ meltdown is causing his government, Scott Morrison has given his party room a pointed lecture about unity.</p>
<p>He has also obtained a letter from Llew O'Brien in which O'Brien reaffirms he will support the government. O'Brien quit the Nationals this week and then won the deputy speakership thanks to the votes of several rebel Nationals.</p>
<p>O'Brien, who remains a member of the Queensland Liberal National Party, sent the letter after meeting Morrison on Monday night.</p>
<p>Before Tuesday’s Coalition meeting, the word was put out for members to show restraint, after recent public airings of differences over coal in particular. </p>
<p>Addressing the party room, Morrison reminded members they were there as a team, declaring the government had a “contract” with the Australian people.</p>
<p>Those walking into the government party room took on serious responsibilities and must do so as a government. The government had gone to the election highlighting local plans and the capabilities of local members but also very much as being members of a team.</p>
<p>“The people endorsed us to be the government,” he said, emphasising the government wasn’t him or any individual. “We are together the government.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-it-turned-into-a-profitable-day-at-the-office-for-nat-rat-131489">View from The Hill: It turned into a profitable day at the office for Nat rat</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>He said there were many parties in this government: the Liberal party, the National party, the CLP in the Northern Territory, the LNP in Queensland.</p>
<p>But “the contract we have with the Australian people” was to work collectively as their government. The government’s strength was its values, policies and beliefs, which were endorsed at the election.</p>
<p>Acknowledging the difficulties of the last couple of months Morrison told members, when they returned home after the current fortnight sitting, “to focus on the people who put us here”.</p>
<p>Treasurer and deputy Liberal leader Josh Frydenberg invoked John Howard’s adage about being a broad church, when Howard added, “you sometimes have to get the builders in to put in the extra pew on both sides of the aisle to make sure that everybody is accommodated”.</p>
<p>Frydenberg lamented Monday’s “historic moment” in the Australian-Indonesian relationship, with President Joko Widodo visiting Australia and addressing parliament, had been overshadowed in the news bulletins. He also urged MPs to focus on government achievements and policies and future plans “and put internal issues of recent days behind us”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-michael-mccormack-moves-on-from-his-near-death-experience-131305">Politics with Michelle Grattan: Michael McCormack moves on from his near-death experience</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Embattled Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who at the weekend did the Tumbarumba trek which was started by Tim Fischer, said he’d had a call from Fischer’s widow Judy, who’d reflected on how Tim and his team had “stuck firm through difficult periods”. She had said Tim “would want us all to stand firm and together at present”, focused on continuing to deliver the government’s commitments.</p>
<p>O'Brien was present at the meeting but didn’t speak.</p>
<p>Also quiet were the Liberal moderates, who have been recently outspoken on climate change and in opposition to any government support for a new coal-fired power station. </p>
<p>One of the Nationals rebels, former resources minister Matt Canavan, spruiked the advantages of the feasibility study for a Queensland coal-fired power station at Collinsvillle, but his comments were relatively non-combative.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/video-michelle-grattan-on-the-coalition-and-coal-113653">VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the Coalition and coal</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In contrast, earlier Canavan prodded the southern Liberals when on Monday night he hit back with heavy sarcasm against former prime minister Malcolm’s Turnbull’s comment that it was “nuts” to advocate government support to build a coal-fired power station.</p>
<p>Canavan told Sky, “Good luck to Malcolm, he’s welcome to have his views. In fact, I hope that Malcolm keeps expressing those views and that maybe come around the next election he can lead a convoy, let’s say, up to Collinsville, and have a rally up there, and campaign against the coal-fire power station.</p>
<p>"I think that would go down very well, to have Malcolm’s motorcade come up to North Queensland, and tell us all why we shouldn’t be using our own product which we export overseas to create jobs here.”</p>
<p>Asked in question time whether the government would be willing to indemnify a Collinsville coal-fired power station against carbon risk, Morrison said it was committed to the feasibility study but “the matter that the member has raised with me in this question is not currently before the government”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131143/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Addressing Tuesday’s Coalition party room, Morrison called for unity, reminding members they were not there as a team, and declaring the government had a “contract” with the Australian people.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1222602019-08-22T10:52:14Z2019-08-22T10:52:14ZGrattan on Friday: Courting ‘quiet Australians’ from ‘bubble central’, it’s been a remarkable first year for Scott Morrison<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/289031/original/file-20190822-170956-1v5lj90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Can Scott Morrison maintain the image of separation from the Canberra elite, given he's its most powerful member?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/The Conversation</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Even Scott Morrison, with his abundant self-belief, couldn’t have imagined that on Saturday’s anniversary of his seizing the prime ministership, he’d be winging his way to France for a G7 meeting, where Australia has observer status for the first time.</p>
<p>A grim brand of luck – the spectacular collapse of two Liberal prime ministers – and a dash of cunning brought Morrison the top job. His own campaigning skills and a hapless Labor performance enabled him to keep it.</p>
<p>In the next three years, it might all go to hell in a handbasket, given an uncertain economy, a fickle electorate and a thin majority. But after 12 months in the position, Morrison looks the strong leader, clearly in charge, with few constraints.</p>
<p>It’s not just the election win. It’s that there isn’t the remotest sign of a trouble-making aspirant or a vengeful wrecker. New party rules protect a Liberal PM. Infighting has subsided. The party is generally satisfied with its leader, in a way it wasn’t with either Tony Abbott or Malcolm Turnbull.</p>
<p>Three months after the “miracle” victory, we’re seeing how the campaigning prime minister has morphed into the governing one, while remaining the campaigner.</p>
<p>To analyse Morrison’s ideology has always been to plunge into a puzzle box. He’s conservative on moral issues, driven by his Pentecostalism. On secular social issues he’s more moderate – some in the welfare sector found him unexpectedly flexible when he was social services minister. On economics, he can be soggy, lacking the true dry’s distaste for government intervention.</p>
<p>In the election, it was said Morrison looked like he was running for “mayor of Australia”. It’s an accurate characterisation in part.</p>
<p>The PM who’ll hobnob at the G7 and soon sup at a White House state dinner has his feet firmly planted in the local community centre, his ear tuned to his “quiet Australians”, the people he asserts are alienated because the “Canberra bubble” too often has ignored them.</p>
<p>We only have to observe what he’s done and how he talks. Setting up “Services Australia”. A pledge to bust “congestion” - in traffic, regulations, the bureaucracy. Badgering the public service to improve delivery. Moving to try to stop the export of plastic waste. An inquiry into the NDIS.</p>
<p>He dog-whistles to his “quiet Australians” - not in a racist way, but through deriding the “Canberra bubble” and publicly putting the bureaucrats in their place.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/against-the-odds-scott-morrison-wants-to-be-returned-as-prime-minister-but-who-the-bloody-hell-is-he-116732">Against the odds, Scott Morrison wants to be returned as prime minister. But who the bloody hell is he?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Morrison likes the practical; he looks from the ground up. It’s all about Mr and Mrs Average from the Sutherland Shire. Indeed, that’s him and Jenny, although their address is Kirribilli House. After he became PM, Morrison moved very quickly to define himself to the public as one of them. When Sky’s David Speers asked about his image as “the daggy dad with the baseball cap”, Morrison said: “Well, that’s how it’s described by others, but you’re describing my life … This is who I am.”</p>
<p>Can he maintain the guise of separation from the Canberra elite, given he’s its most powerful member? Monash University political scientist Paul Strangio says: “It will take political and image-making dexterity by the prime minister to sustain the idea that he is somehow distinct from that ‘bubble’.” </p>
<p>There’s been much claimed about Morrison’s lack of an “agenda” beyond the now-legislated tax cuts, but it’s notable that since the election he’s organised “deep dives” into policy areas.</p>
<p>He gets together the minister, public servants and interested or qualified backbenchers. The sessions run from one to four hours; Morrison stays through them. Topics have included recycling, youth suicide, veterans’ mental health, NDIS, water, aged care.</p>
<p>He also has reviews and inquiries in train or pending, including one on industrial relations, where he has signalled he’ll proceed cautiously. On the fraught area of religious freedom, still in the works, backbenchers have been extensively consulted to smooth the path to decisions.</p>
<p>“Relative to his two predecessors, he has a much better idea of what he wants to do – he’s a better long-term planner than [they were],” says someone familiar with all three of these Liberal PMs.</p>
<p>Former Liberal staffer David Gazard, a close personal friend, describes Morrison as a “pragmatic incrementalist – he will get what he can get in areas he wants to go to”. He’s fortunate that the post-election Senate is set to be easier than the last one.</p>
<p>The questions hang. Is the incrementalist capable of implementing major reforms that the country will need? Will he make a substantial entry in the history book of Australian prime ministers?</p>
<p>Given Morrison’s pragmatism, even his caution, his decision to put Indigenous constitutional recognition on his agenda sits oddly. It is becoming clear that, with his veto of any reference to a “Voice to Parliament” being put in a referendum question, the initiative is likely to fizzle into a disappointing stalemate.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-morrison-can-learn-a-lot-from-the-public-servants-but-will-he-listen-121646">Grattan on Friday: Morrison can learn a lot from the public servants, but will he listen?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Other issues are unavoidable but intractable. While the internal Liberal wars over climate and energy policy have quieted, the rifts remain. This is a self-imposed “wicked problem” for the Liberals - beyond, it seems, any leader to satisfactorily resolve - and the struggle with energy prices will continue.</p>
<p>Morrison is methodical, always political, perennially in action. “He would be the kind of person you’d expect to have a job list on his desk,” says a minister. “I think he’s conscious of the short time frame of the federal cycle. He’s task-oriented - he wants to get stuff done and move on to the next project.”</p>
<p>One source likens his work style to rugby league’s “playing moves in blocks”, proceeding systematically from one thing to another. Another says he picks three or four things to drive, while putting others into “wider orbits”.</p>
<p>Morrison the family man has his nuclear political family. Frontbenchers in his innermost circle are Stuart Robert (minister for government services and the NDIS) and Alex Hawke (minister for international development and the Pacific), both his factional mates from way back, as well as Ben Morton (assistant minister to the prime minister), who travelled on the campaign plane with him.</p>
<p>His chief of staff, John Kunkel, is a close confidant, as is Phil Gaetjens, his incoming departmental head, on whom he’ll lean heavily for advice on turning political objectives into policy outcomes.</p>
<p>Those who work with Morrison stress how focused he is. A close observer describes his responses to problems. “He doesn’t dwell too much on pondering the entrails. He says, ‘How do we fix this?’ His temperament is his biggest asset – he’s unflappable. He’s confident in his ability to handle the situation he confronts.”</p>
<p>This confidence reveals at times his arrogant side. That’s always been there (as when, in events before his downfall as head of Tourism Australia, he wrongly thought Prime Minister John Howard would side with him rather than with the minister, Fran Bailey). The arrogance is more concealed now, but shows when he summarily dismisses awkward questions as of interest only to the “bubble”.</p>
<p>His natural instinct is for command and control, but this operates subtly in managing his ministers. He gives them rein in their own areas, but tells them not to freelance outside their remit. Their “charter letters” emphasise goals and performance.</p>
<p>He exhorts backbenchers to shut up publicly, but can’t make them, and they’ve been speaking out on subjects from China to superannuation and industrial relations. This is messy but quite different from the destructive sniping of the last term.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-being-a-trump-bestie-comes-with-its-own-challenges-for-scott-morrison-120609">Grattan on Friday: Being a Trump 'bestie' comes with its own challenges for Scott Morrison</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In looking at Morrison’s positive first year it’s easy to forget how things can turn. Strangio identifies at least three risks: the party’s right could decide to “seize the moment” and make divisive demands; the electorate could, over time, become frustrated with Morrison’s tendency to incrementalism, interpreting it as inertia; or, conversely, Morrison might eventually surrender to an impulse to which all prime ministers are prone - to leave some big imprint, and thereby plunge himself into political choppy waters. </p>
<p>There’s a bit of muttering in some Nationals quarters about how Morrison has intruded onto their turf. He’s dominated the drought issue, and sees as part of his constituency rural “quiet Australians”. The Nationals did well at the election, but party leader Michael McCormack is treated (respectfully) as a pushover. A Nationals source contrasts Morrison with Howard, who let the junior Coalition partner be seen having a few wins.</p>
<p>Morrison has found himself spending a lot of time on foreign policy; with the low-key Marise Payne backward in coming forward, he is effectively his own foreign minister.</p>
<p>Donald Trump has lionised the PM, quite a mixed blessing (and naturally Australia has signed up to the American request to be part of the freedom-of-navigation mission in the Middle East).</p>
<p>The Pacific Island leaders gave Morrison both barrels over Australia’s climate change policy and coal, when he was wedged between them and domestic politics. Australia’s “Pacific step up” bogged, at least momentarily, in the acrimony of Tuvalu.</p>
<p>Morrison finds himself in office at a time when managing Australia’s relationship with China is becoming increasingly challenging. Indeed, central in his current preoccupations is policy on China, which includes complex responses in resisting that country’s various encroachments on Australian sovereignty. It’s far from being all about trade.</p>
<p>But the most immediate worry is the economy. Will the “global headwinds” turn gale force, requiring more government stimulus and threatening the surplus? With wage growth sluggish and interest rates, already near rock bottom, cut twice since the election, the Reserve Bank prods the government to help with the load.</p>
<p>So far, Morrison and Treasurer Josh Frydenberg are holding back and hoping that the tax package will do enough. The quiet Australians, the people who rode with Morrison’s promises about ensuring good economic management, are watching, quietly.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/122260/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After 12 months as prime minister, Morrison looks the strong leader, clearly in charge, with few constraints. But will he make a substantial entry in the history book of Australian prime ministers?Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1195492019-06-27T09:46:30Z2019-06-27T09:46:30ZTurnbull slams Porter for “nonsense” advice<p>Malcolm Turnbull has accused Attorney-General Christian Porter of providing advice to him that was constitutional “nonsense”, as the divisive events around the former prime minister’s removal are revisited.</p>
<p>Turnbull launched his acerbic Twitter attack following reports that the day before he was deposed last August, he clashed with Porter over trying to involve Governor-General Peter Cosgrove in the leadership crisis. Turnbull was seeking to ensure Peter Dutton did not become prime minister if he won the leadership.</p>
<p>Meantime, Dutton has revealed that before the May election he removed himself from involvement in a family trust – an involvement that last term had raised doubts about his eligibility to sit in parliament. The trust received money from his wife’s child care business, and child care receives government subsidy.</p>
<p>Dutton always maintained he was on safe constitutional ground and his spokeswoman on Thursday reaffirmed that he had had legal opinions saying he was not in breach of section 44. During the leadership crisis the Solicitor-General provided advice, taking the view Dutton was eligible, though he left some doubt.</p>
<p>“Nonetheless, to silence those who are politically motivated and continue to raise this; prior to the minister’s nomination at the May election, he formally renounced any interest in the trust in question,” she said.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-is-peter-dutton-ineligible-to-sit-in-parliament-101840">Explainer: is Peter Dutton ineligible to sit in parliament?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Accounts of the contretemps between Turnbull and Porter were published in Thursday’s Australian and by Nine newspapers.</p>
<p>Turnbull argued Cosgrove should refuse to commission Dutton, if he won the leadership, on the grounds he might be constitutionally ineligible to sit in parliament.</p>
<p>Porter insisted Turnbull’s suggested course would be “wrong in law” - that the eligibility issue was not a matter for the governor-general - and threatened to repudiate Turnbull’s position if he advanced it publicly at an imminent news conference.</p>
<p>The Attorney-General had a letter of resignation with him, in case he needed to provide it.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/solicitor-general-supports-duttons-eligibility-for-parliament-but-with-caveats-102097">Solicitor-General supports Dutton's eligibility for parliament, but with caveats</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The events of last year will be extensively raked over in coming weeks in books by journalists Niki Savva and David Crowe. They featured in a Sky documentary this week.</p>
<p>Turnbull refought his battle with Porter on Thursday, tweeting: “The discretion to swear in a person as PM is vested in the Governor General. The proposition advanced by Mr Porter that it is none of the GG’s business whether the would be PM is constitutionally eligible is nonsense. The GG is not a constitutional cypher.</p>
<p>"During the week of 24 August 2018 there was advice from leading constitutional lawyers Bret Walker that Dutton was ineligible to sit in the Parliament and thus ineligible to be a Minister, let alone Prime Minister. I ensured we sought the advice of the Solicitor General.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1144104135576322048"}"></div></p>
<p>"I took the responsible course of action, obtained the necessary advice, published it and the Party Room was informed when it made its decision to elect Mr Morrison, rather than Mr Dutton, as leader.”</p>
<p>Porter, speaking on radio on Thursday, confirmed the accuracy of the media reports, including the tense nature of the meeting. “Sometimes meetings in government aren’t all potpourri and roses,” he said.</p>
<p>Porter said an attorney-general’s role was to provide advice they considered accurate and legally correct.</p>
<p>“Sometimes that advice is not always what people want to hear. But I’ve always taken very seriously the role and the fact that the role requires to give advice to the best of your legal knowledge and ability you think is accurate and correct.</p>
<p>"And that’s what I’ve always tried to do, that’s what I did during the course of that very difficult week.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119549/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull clashes with Attorney-General Christian Porter.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1090682018-12-26T19:28:42Z2018-12-26T19:28:42ZHannah Gadsby, a royal wedding and a female doctor: in 2018, TV got a shake up<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251429/original/file-20181219-27758-2i45ay.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hannah Gadsby's Nanette received critical acclaim around the world. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">WENN</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>From ground-breaking to game-changing, rule-breaking to near parliament-breaking – 2018 has been a big year for TV makers and audiences. Here are some of the most memorable moments.</p>
<h2>Doctor Who is finally a woman</h2>
<p>What would the 1963 makers of the BBC’s Dr Who have made of television in 2018? They imagined aliens, other worlds and alternate realities, but it took 55 years to imagine a woman in the show’s title role.</p>
<p>Despite some hesitation from a select group of <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/tv-reboots-are-having-a-great-awokening-it-sucks/">die hards</a> , the 13th Doctor, Jodie Whittaker, took the TARDIS to <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/doctor-who-jodie-whittaker-receives-praise-as-first-female-star-1150054">great effect</a> this year. With a fantastic mix of innovation and respect for the show’s legacy, Whittaker and new showrunner Chris Chibnall have allowed Dr Who to explore known worlds from a new perspective. </p>
<p>Standout episodes included Rosa, in which The Doctor and her companions returned to civil rights era USA to meet Rosa Parks, and The Witchfinders, where The Doctor was caught up in the witch hunting season in Lancashire in the era of King James.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_C2Jmg82_1g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Hannah Gadsby shakes up stand up</h2>
<p>Comedy specials have been niche television events for decades, especially championed by US cable outlets like HBO and Comedy Channel. With Netflix now in the mix, the scope for comedy has expanded, and through this global “post-television” network, alternative voices like Hannah Gadsby have found their people. </p>
<p>In Nanette, Gadsby rails against self-deprecating jokes, announces she’s quitting comedy, takes on the canon of Art History and exposes her own traumatic sexual abuse. All done while being funny as.</p>
<p>Praised by the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/24/arts/hannah-gadsby-comedy-nanette.html">New York Times</a>, Rolling Stone, Vanity Fair, The Guardian and <a href="https://junkee.com/nanette-reviews/166225">many others</a>, Gadsby’s impact can be measured by the feathers she’s ruffled, too. Comedians like Jerry Seinfeld have had to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/arts/television/jerry-seinfeld-interview.html">take note</a> of Gadsby’s ability to go beyond “have you ever wondered why” jokes, and her boldness has also earned her a reputation as a strong voice amid whatever comes after #MeToo. A game changer for comedy, for international on-demand television, and for those who hold power generally. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5aE29fiatQ0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>A Honey Badger breaks The Bachelor</h2>
<p>Reality television is, of course, never real, but it’s amazing how many real feelings these shows can evoke. Who knew that a quest for true love, staged in front of a national commercial TV audience, made up of a casting call of pretty young things with little in common might be doomed to fail? </p>
<p>This year’s Australian season of the American franchise The Bachelor added some extra spice with footballer Nick “The Honey Badger” Cummins, who dropped as many ocker sayings as possible while taking his shirt off. After all that, he broke the rules of the game by refusing to choose one of the show’s potential mates – leaving it a case of all sizzle, no steak; and making the show’s producers look like they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery. Cue outrage. Cue surprise. Cue discussions about the spin off series.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GPB4u7QUmN4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Parliament House – the soap opera</h2>
<p>Backstabbing! Affairs! Denials of knowledge about constitutional citizenship requirements! While politicians all over the world have made for extreme television watching this year, Canberra has been particularly spicy in 2018. </p>
<p>There was Barnaby Joyce airing his dirty laundry in the first half of the year for <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-29/australians-disgusted-barnaby-joyce-sold-his-story/9810418">a reported $150,000</a>. Meanwhile the dual citizenship saga, first sparked by Greens senator Scott Ludlam’s resignation in July 2017, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/dual-citizenship-the-constitutional-crisis-that-won-t-go-away-rolls-into-2018">continued</a>. It ate up public funds and airtime.</p>
<p>The show that keeps spinning sequels, “Leadership spill”, continued in August, with Scott Morrison snatching the top job from Malcolm Turnbull. A program that the Australian people are increasingly getting sick of - and it was a shame to see Julie Bishop <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/26/julie-bishop-resigns-as-foreign-minister-after-failed-leadership-bid">leave the show</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sb6cmLDMEQg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>A royal wedding that’s actually interesting</h2>
<p>The marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle was a guilty TV pleasure for many, but also an important historical moment. Television has been a fundamental part of how the British Royal Family is understood (and tolerated) since 1957 when The Queen made her <a href="https://www.royal.uk/christmas-broadcast-1957">first televised Christmas address</a>. The 2018 showstopper was not the bride’s dress or groom’s nod to his still beloved mother, but rather the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdIZpos-ME4&list=PLn2RjxYNpcazW9TJEigBdWrBJHBandSZi&index=6">sermon by Bishop Michael Curry</a> and The Kingdom Choir’s version of Stand By Me.</p>
<p>Here the former oppressed and oppressors met and were brought together by what was an undeniably very sweet event. While there was some <a href="https://www.who.com.au/royal-family-facial-expressions-at-royal-wedding">apparent uncomfortableness</a> from certain members of the Royal Family, it was captivating viewing for those watching at home in tiaras and pyjamas.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7t7TfPwk5y4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Honourable mentions include the resignation of SBS newsreader and style icon <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-26/lee-lin-chin-career-memorable-moments/10041026">Lee Lin Chin</a>; American actor Roseanne fired from her own sitcom in a show of <a href="https://theconversation.com/commercial-tvs-rare-leadership-on-roseanne-is-a-breath-of-fresh-air-97447">zero racism tolerance</a>; ABC sketch show <a href="https://tendaily.com.au/entertainment/tv/a180903wpv/high-profile-aussies-come-out-in-support-of-axed-abc-comedy-tonightly-20180903">Tonightly</a> coming, growing, then getting cut; (men’s) cricket being “ruined” by a ball tampering scandal and subsequent <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-29/steve-smith-apologises-for-ball-tampering-scandal/9603670">weepy press conferences</a>; and NBC/Netflix’s The Good Place continuing to show that network sitcoms can be clever, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/jan/30/the-good-place-how-a-sitcom-made-philosophy-seem-cool">philosophical</a>, and still wonderfully funny.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Liz Giuffre does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>From ground-breaking to game-changing, rule-breaking to near parliament-breaking, 2018 was a hell of a year for TV.Liz Giuffre, Senior Lecturer in Communication, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1067062018-11-09T03:06:58Z2018-11-09T03:06:58ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on Turnbull’s QandA appearance, Morrison’s bus tour, and antics in NSW<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/f5eYQn1iEZ4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks to University of Canberra Vice-Chancellor Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics. They discuss Malcolm Turnbull’s special interview on ABC’s QandA, Scott Morrison’s bus tour campaign in Queensland, former federal Labor opposition leader Mark Latham running as a One Nation candidate in the NSW upper house, and Luke Foley resigning as NSW opposition leader over alleged inappropriate behaviour.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/106706/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks to Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1024152018-09-10T20:15:08Z2018-09-10T20:15:08ZReforming our political system is not a quick fix. Here’s a step-by-step guide to how to do it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/235536/original/file-20180910-123134-1gyn518.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Regaining public trust in government starts with steps like capping political donations and establishing a federal anti-corruption body.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With public trust in government already in serious decline over the <a href="http://www.australianelectionstudy.org/charts.html">last ten years</a>, the downfall of yet another <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbulls-problem-was-that-he-was-a-politician-for-another-era-102034">prime minister</a> between elections underlines both the importance and urgency of making serious changes to our political system.</p>
<p>The key to renewing Australia’s democratic system is to view it as our next major reform challenge, just as economic renewal was <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/confs/2000/pdf/kelly-address.pdf">prioritised</a> in the 1980s and ’90s. </p>
<p>So far, however, the changes proposed by political commentators, academics and think tanks are largely single reforms, such as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-28/canberras-first-citizens-jury-to-tackle-ctp-insurance/8843130">citizens’ juries</a> to seek more public input into policy, or <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/why-australia-needs-to-move-to-fixed-fouryear-terms-for-the-federal-parliament-20170220-gugruu.html">fixed four-year terms</a> for federal parliament to allow more time to tackle big problems and implement complex policy.</p>
<p>These fall short of matching the scope of the challenge: democratic renewal requires multi-level and multi-step change addressing interconnected issues. In short, we need a comprehensive roadmap for political reform.</p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="zqYaz" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/zqYaz/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<h2>Charting a roadmap for renewal</h2>
<p>We first need to recognise that two distinct crises are contributing to declining public trust in government.</p>
<p>The first is a “crisis of representation”. This results from a fragmented, highly diverse electorate that <a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/why-politics-is-testing-our-faith">increasingly fails to connect with major parties</a>. The major parties are left with shrinking, less diverse memberships. </p>
<p>The second is a “crisis of functionality”. Our democratic system is increasingly unable to deliver good public policy in a consistent or coherent way, and to convince the public to support it. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-think-our-politicians-are-corrupt-but-where-is-the-evidence-101822">Australians think our politicians are corrupt, but where is the evidence?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This “crisis of functionality” is partly due to the <a href="https://www.themandarin.com.au/95695-what-happened-to-the-skills-aps-review-hears-all-about-the-view-from-the-bottom/">decline of the public service</a> and its ability to deliver independent, quality policy advice to ministers. Also to blame is an increasingly myopic approach to policymaking by parties <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/how-to-fix-the-flaw-at-the-heart-of-australian-politics-20180822-p4zyyl.html">obsessed with short-term polling and point-scoring</a>.</p>
<p>But it is also linked to the “crisis of representation”. As an <a href="http://www.policy-network.net/news/3993/Political-volatility-and-government">increasingly disconnected public turns its back on</a> politicians, it also loses trust in their ability to deliver sound policy programs and decisions.</p>
<h2>A two-stage approach</h2>
<p>The dual nature of these problems underlines a critical issue. The roadmap not only needs to link up separate reforms, it also needs to be rolled out in stages to persuade a highly distrustful public that democratic renewal is in the interests of everyone – not just those in power. </p>
<p>The first stage is what I would call “creative governance”. The aim here is to start restoring public trust in government by making immediate and tangible improvements to the political system.</p>
<p>These reforms would have clear precedents or strong levels of public support. For example, national uniform caps on campaign spending, like those recently introduced <a href="https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/parliament-in-election-year/limits-on-election-related-spending-begin/">in New Zealand</a>, would reduce money in politics. This in turn would put the onus on politicians to explain their policies with more fact-based detail instead of expensive, slogan-based advertising campaigns.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-trails-way-behind-other-nations-in-regulating-political-donations-59597">Australia trails way behind other nations in regulating political donations</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Other possible reforms include <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-truth-about-political-donations-there-is-so-much-we-dont-know-91003">real-time disclosure of all political donations</a>, which is <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-24/political-donations-in-queensland-revealed-in-real-time/9145608">already in effect in Queensland</a>, and the establishment of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/apr/09/legal-experts-suggest-design-for-federal-anti-corruption-commission">federal anti-corruption commission</a>, also already in existence at the state level.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.smh.com.au/public-service/most-australians-support-a-federal-anticorruption-commission-research-20171211-h02ger.html">Recent surveys</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jun/27/most-voters-support-real-time-political-donations-reporting-guardian-essential-poll">show</a> that a majority of Australians support both moves and believe these would improve transparency in the political system.</p>
<h2>Setting the scene for deeper reform</h2>
<p>The more difficult second stage of political reform is what I call “systemic renewal”. The goal here is to realign our democracy with the fundamentally changed dynamics and expectations of how it should work in the 21st century.</p>
<p>For instance, a major overhaul of our <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/our-nations-rulebook-is-showing-its-age-we-desperately-need-a-review-of-the-constitution-20161229-gtjf7l.html">federal-state constitution</a> is needed to update a framework originally written in the 1890s. It’s replete with outdated rules, processes and responsibilities. </p>
<p>However, this has largely failed to capture the public’s imagination because of the arcane way experts talk about the <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/horizontal-fiscal-equalisation/draft">problem and potential solutions</a>. Reframing it as part of a broader democratic renewal to usher in a more nimble and representative political system is much more likely to gain public traction.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ideas-for-australia-voters-have-a-good-choice-of-politicians-but-need-to-overcome-their-mistrust-of-them-57795">Ideas for Australia: Voters have a good choice of politicians, but need to overcome their mistrust of them</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Major reforms are also needed to make federal parliament more effective and less dysfunctional. These might include eliminating <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1314/DisorderlyConduct">Question Time</a> and mandating a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Senators_Interests/reports/022012/c01">strict code of ethics</a> for MPs aimed at addressing toxic behaviours like the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/am/julie-bishop-takes-aim-at-liberal-party-bullies/10207026">bullying crisis</a> rocking the Coalition government.</p>
<p>Reforms like these would raise the level of decorum in parliament and set a new standard for parliamentary <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/act/parliaments-toxic-and-aggressive-culture-a-threat-to-good-government-20180302-h0wxlz.html">behaviour</a>. This would increase public confidence that politicians both reflect and are accountable to modern values. </p>
<p>Lastly, a “<a href="http://www.rebootdemocracy.org/citizens-assembly/">Citizens’ Assembly</a>” could be formed of randomly selected citizens to act as a non-partisan check and balance on parliament. Such an assembly could be modelled after the citizens’ juries that have been trialled successfully around the world, including <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/why-ireland-s-citizens-assembly-is-a-model-for-europe-1.2876808">Ireland</a>, <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario-asks-citizen-juries-for-advice-on-budget/article992207/">Canada</a> and <a href="https://www.themandarin.com.au/71948-going-nuclear-inside-sas-nuclear-citizens-jury/">South Australia</a>. The assembly would be given the responsibility to chart out long-term, national policy blueprints in areas like health, tax and education. </p>
<p>With this kind of direct voice on a national level, the public would be much more involved in policymaking and thus more vested in the success of their government.</p>
<h2>Thinking like reformers</h2>
<p>What’s clear is we must do the hard strategic thinking of reformers if we are serious about fixing our political system.</p>
<p>Like every credible plan to reform a major institution showing multiple dysfunctions, we need more than one reform idea. We also need to test these ideas against the root causes of the institution’s malaise. And we need to organise them into a strategic and practical sequence.</p>
<p>The alternative is to believe Australian democracy will magically right itself. Which is no alternative at all.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102415/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Triffitt is a Fellow with the Centre for Policy Development</span></em></p>With public trust in government at an all-time low, it’s time we prioritised political reform and put in place a comprehensive roadmap for effective, long-term change.Mark Triffitt, Lecturer, Public Policy and Political Communications, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1026642018-09-04T10:45:18Z2018-09-04T10:45:18ZPolitics podcast: Judith Troeth on the Liberal party’s woman problem and asylum seekers<p>Former Victorian Liberal senator Judith Troeth is no stranger to speaking out forthrightly on issues, even when that goes against her party’s position.</p>
<p>In this podcast, Troeth says the party should adopt quotas to rectify the “abysmally low numbers” of Liberal women in parliament. “We should have quotas, but not forever … to get the numbers up”. </p>
<p>One of the group of moderates when she was in parliament (1993- 2011), Troeth is concerned about the party’s drift to the right. “Sometimes i feel as though i am standing on the extreme left … when everyone who knows me knows I’m certainly not”. She partly attributes the present situation to newer MPs being reluctant to rock the boat. Troeth’s advice to them? “Be brave and let your conscience be your mouth piece.”</p>
<p>On asylum seekers - an issue over which she confronted then prime minister John Howard - Troeth believes “quite strongly” that on humanitarian grounds people who have been processed and found to be refugees on Manus and Nauru should be allowed to come to Australia and stay.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102664/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Troeth says the party should adopt quotas to rectify the "abysmally low numbers" of Liberal women in parliament.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1020412018-09-03T05:14:22Z2018-09-03T05:14:22ZLies, ‘fake news’ and cover-ups: how has it come to this in Western democracies?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234594/original/file-20180903-41705-1wc4eo3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Malcolm Turnbull has blamed the conservative faction in the Liberal Party for the 'insurgency' that led to his resignation as prime minister.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Liberal leadership spill and Malcolm Turnbull’s downfall is but the latest instalment in a game of musical chairs that has <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-time-starts-now-how-leadership-instability-and-revenge-became-woven-into-our-political-fabric-101806">dominated Australian politics for the best part of a decade</a>.</p>
<p>For many, it has been enough to portray Tony Abbott as the <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/tony-abbott-has-a-swipe-at-the-former-prime-ministers-decision-to-quit-parliament/news-story/9b3db05727f1dc8daed985bbc21f5a29">villain of the story</a>. Others have pointed to Peter Dutton and his allies as <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/peter-van-onselen/peter-dutton-and-supporters-need-to-own-the-mess-theyve-created-for-liberal-part/news-story/52c51baec5585916c1ac31435848ce30">willing, though not-so-clever, accomplices</a>. There’s also been a highlighting of the herd instinct: once self-serving mutiny gathers steam, others will want to follow. </p>
<p>But this barely scratches the surface. And the trend is not confined to Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/dutton-v-turnbull-is-the-latest-manifestation-of-the-splintering-of-the-centre-right-in-australian-politics-101888">Dutton v Turnbull is the latest manifestation of the splintering of the centre-right in Australian politics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We need only think of Donald Trump’s America, Britain’s Brexit saga or the rise of <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/europe-populists-right-wing-success-marine-le-pen-viktor-orban-italy-slovenia-a8382766.html">far-right populist movements</a> in Europe. Politics in the West seem uneasily suspended between farce and tragedy, as deception, accusations of “fake news” and infighting have become commonplace.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1034782741714399232"}"></div></p>
<p>In Australia, the revolving prime ministerial door has had much to do with deep tensions surrounding <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/world/australia/australia-climate-change-malcolm-turnbull.html">climate change and energy policy</a> more generally.</p>
<p>In Britain, a longstanding ambivalence towards European integration has deeply divided mainstream parties and plunged the country into <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/brexit-referendum/brexit-chaos-what-happens-next-british-pm-theresa-may-n890151">“Brexit chaos”</a>, a protracted crisis greatly exacerbated by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/13/brexit-theresa-may-eu">government incompetence</a> and political expediency.</p>
<p>In Italy, the steady erosion of support for the establishment parties has paved the way for a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/01/italy-crisis-coalition-deal-agreed-after-rome-roils-global-markets.html">governing coalition</a> that includes a far-right party <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/italy-immigrants-populist-government-180603130547425.html">committed to cracking down</a> on “illegal”, specifically Muslim, immigration.</p>
<p>Yet, beyond these differences are certain common, cross-cultural threads which help explain the present Western malaise. </p>
<p>Simply put, we now have a glaring and widening gap between the enormity of the challenges facing Western societies and the capacity of their political institutions to address them.</p>
<h2>Neoliberalism at work</h2>
<p>The political class in Australia, as in Europe and North America, is operating within an institutional framework that is compromised by two powerful forces: the dominance of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-exactly-is-neoliberalism-84755">neoliberal order</a> and relentless <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/dec/05/globalisation-time-look-at-past-plot-the-future-joseph-stiglitz">globalisation</a>.</p>
<p>The interplay of these two forces goes a long way towards explaining the failure of political elites. They offer neither a compelling national narrative nor a coherent program for the future. Instead, the public is treated to a series of sideshows and constant rivalries over the spoils of office. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/partially-right-rejecting-neoliberalism-shouldnt-mean-giving-up-on-social-liberalism-98386">Partially right: rejecting neoliberalism shouldn't mean giving up on social liberalism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>How does the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/aug/18/neoliberalism-the-idea-that-changed-the-world">neoliberal creed</a> underpin the state of current political discourse and practice? The shorthand answer is by setting economic growth as the <a href="https://www.themonthly.com.au/blog/richard-denniss/2018/15/2018/1529022371/dead-right">overriding national objective </a>. Such growth, <a href="https://theconversation.com/neoliberalisms-failure-means-we-need-a-new-narrative-to-guide-global-economy-69096">we are told</a>, requires the public sector to be squeezed and the private sector to be given free reign.</p>
<p>And when economic performance falls short of the mark, pressing social and environmental needs are unmet, or a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/sep/16/economics.wallstreet">global financial crisis</a> exposes large-scale financial crimes and shoddy lending practices, these are simply dismissed as inconvenient truths. </p>
<p>Compounding the impact of this highly restrictive economic agenda is globalisation or, to be more accurate, the phenomenal growth of <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-a-vulnerable-world-teetering-on-the-edge-of-a-new-dark-age-32143">cross-border flows</a> of goods and services, capital, money, carbon emissions, technical know-how, arms, information, images and people. The sheer scale, speed and intensity of these flows make them impervious to national control.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-the-economy-stupid-its-whether-the-economy-is-fair-63371">It's not just the economy, stupid; it's whether the economy is fair</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But governments and political parties want to maintain the pretence they can stem the tide. To admit they cannot is to run the risk of appearing incompetent or irrelevant. Importantly, they risk losing the financial or political support of powerful interests that benefit from globalisation, such as the <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/fossil-fuel-industries-climate-lobbying_us_5b4f8fdee4b0de86f4894831">coal lobby</a>.</p>
<p>And so, deception and self-deception become the only viable option. So it is that several US presidents, including Trump, and large segments of the US Congress have flagrantly contradicted climate science or downplayed its implications.</p>
<p>Much the same can be said of Australia. When confronted with climate sceptics in the Liberal ranks, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/20/australian-pm-dumps-key-climate-policy-to-stave-off-leadership-revolt">Turnbull government</a> chose to prioritise lowering electricity prices while minimising its commitment to carbon emission reductions. </p>
<h2>The erosion of truth and trust</h2>
<p>In the face of such evasion and disinformation, large segments of the population, especially those who are experiencing hard times or feel alienated, provide fertile ground for <a href="https://medium.com/@lseideas/understanding-the-global-rise-of-populism-27305a1c5355">populist slogans</a> and the personalities willing to mouth them.</p>
<p>Each country has its distinctive history and political culture. But everywhere we see the same refusal to face up to harsh realities. Some will <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html">deny the science of climate change</a>. Others will want to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/14/australian-senator-calls-for-final-solution-to-immigration-problem">roll back</a> the unprecedented movements of people seeking refuge from war, discrimination or abject poverty.</p>
<p>Others still will pretend the state can regulate the accelerating <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/why-do-we-care-so-much-about-privacy">use of information technology</a>, even though the technology is already being used to <a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-mass-surveillance-regime-is-directly-opposing-human-rights-93323">threaten people’s privacy</a> and reduce <a href="https://www.afr.com/technology/facebook-hit-with-first-fine-over-cambridge-analytica-data-scandal-20180711-h12jxg">control over personal data</a>. Both the state and corporate sector are subjecting citizens to unprecedented levels of surveillance.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-turnbull-government-is-all-but-finished-and-the-liberals-will-now-need-to-work-out-who-they-are-101894">The Turnbull government is all but finished, and the Liberals will now need to work out who they are</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Lies, “fake news” and cover-ups are not, of course, the preserve of politicians. They have become commonplace in so many of our institutions.</p>
<p>The extraordinary <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/25/banking-inquiry-accuses-nab-and-cba-of-possible-criminal-offences">revelations from the Banking Royal Commission</a> make clear that Australia’s largest banks and other financial enterprises have massively defrauded customers, given short shrift to both the law and regulators and consistently disregarded the truth.</p>
<p>And now, as a result of another <a href="https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/religious-institutions">Royal Commission</a>, we have a belated appreciation of the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-14/royal-commission-child-sex-abuse-case-studies/9250972">rampant sexual abuse of children</a> in the Catholic Church, which has been <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-03/archbishop-philip-wilson-sentenced-concealing-child-abuse/9883610">consistently covered up</a> by religious officials.</p>
<p>These various public and private arenas, where truth is regularly concealed, denied or obscured, have had a profoundly corrosive effect on the fabric of society, and inevitably on the public sphere. They have severely diminished the social trust on which the viability of democratic processes vitally depends.</p>
<p>There is no simple remedy to the current political disarray. The powerful forces driving financial flows and production and communication technologies are reshaping culture, the global economy and policy-making processes in deeply troubling ways.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/06/11/2017/truth-political-luxury">Truth and trust</a> are now in short supply. Yet, they are indispensable to democratic processes and institutions. </p>
<p>A sustained national and international conversation on ways to redeem truth and trust has become one of the defining imperatives of our time.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Joseph Camilleri will speak more on this topic in three interactive public lectures entitled <a href="https://stmichaels.org.au/event/brave-new-world-seminars-with-professor-joseph-camilleri-oam/">Brave New World</a> at St Michael’s on Collins in Melbourne on Sept. 11, 18 and 25.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102041/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joseph Camilleri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Truth and trust are in short supply in Western democracies. It’s imperative our political leaders end the constant bickering and sideshows and restore public confidence in good governance.Joseph Camilleri, Emeritus Professor of International Relations, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1021912018-08-31T02:22:41Z2018-08-31T02:22:41ZAustralian politics and the psychology of revenge<p>It’s hard to read the recent felling of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull as anything other than an act of revenge by Tony Abbott and his closest supporters. </p>
<p>This is indeed the judgement of former foreign minister and opposition leader Alexander Downer and former Liberal Party treasurer Michael Yabsley, as revealed in ABC’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-27/liberal-party-elders-lash-tony-abbott-for-acts-of-revenge-on-tu/10166590">Four Corners</a>. </p>
<p>This judgement fits with everything we know about the humiliation and embitterment Abbott and his conservative allies felt after <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/tony-abbott-leadership-challenge-transcript-of-malcolm-turnbulls-blistering-speech-20150914-gjmace.html">Turnbull toppled Abbott</a> in a leadership spill in 2015.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-the-liberals-have-any-hope-of-rebuilding-they-might-take-lessons-from-robert-menzies-102102">If the Liberals have any hope of rebuilding, they might take lessons from Robert Menzies</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It also accords with what modern psychology and social science would lead us to expect in circumstances where a person or group experiences what they perceive to be unjust treatment at the hands of an adversary. The feelings of grievance and damage to the ego can often only be ameliorated by revenge against those who inflicted the harm. </p>
<p>Such feelings, and the aggression they cause, apply no less to politicians such as Abbott and his conservative colleagues than they do to anyone else. </p>
<p>How then, can revenge become a force that controls us? </p>
<h2>The emotional basis of revenge</h2>
<p>The predisposition to harm those who are perceived to have harmed us – the essence of <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-international-studies/article/got-him-revenge-emotions-and-the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden/024447DD04220548C83B45995C29433D">revenge</a> – is a fundamental human desire.</p>
<p>Cultural and legal deterrents against “taking the law into your own hands” might mitigate the destructive potential of vengeful behaviour, but it can never fully remove it.</p>
<p>That’s why we observe revenge in all societies and walks of life, including politics. It’s what Francis Bacon, writing nearly 400 years ago, warned of as a kind of “<a href="http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/revenge/revenge.html">wild justice</a>” that can destroy both the avenger and their victim. </p>
<p>While revenge often involves planning and cool calculation (the proverbial “dish best served cold”), psychologists and social scientists have long recognised it’s always premised on <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/305/5688/1246">particular emotions</a>. </p>
<p>Shame and humiliation, typically caused by the perceived erosion of respect and esteem in the eyes of others, are particularly important instigators of vengeful thoughts and actions. When others undermine our feelings of self worth, this often triggers resentment and rage and the desire to strike back against one’s tormentors. </p>
<p>Doing so constitutes a form of <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.782">emotionally gratifying communication</a>. The avenger “teaches” the object of revenge a lesson. They make the victim of revenge feel what they once felt, communicating a psychologically satisfying message of righteous redress to the victim, third parties and, most importantly, themselves. </p>
<p>The substance of this message varies, but typically includes assertions about the resolve of the avenger to uphold rights that have been violated, to preserve respect that has been threatened, and to shore up social and personal honour that has been besmirched. The avenger demonstrates to themselves and the world they are somebody not to be crossed. </p>
<p>Psychologically, this helps the avenger restore an ego deflated by their previous humiliations. Revenge, to put it bluntly, helps the humiliated person feel better about themselves. It helps them cope. They take satisfaction in the knowledge the source of previous harms is now being punished, and that they deserve their punishment. This is why revenge has often been described as “sweet”. </p>
<p>Modern neuroscience and psychology affirms that <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.782">revenge is indeed sweet</a>. Inflicting harm on those who have previously harmed us arouses feelings of pleasure in those parts of the brain regulating emotion. Even thinking about or planning revenge - the so called “revenge fantasy” - releases feel-good chemicals in our brains. </p>
<p>This is why we can become so preoccupied and even obsessed with vengeful thoughts. The more we think about revenge, the more we reinforce neural pathways that trigger those thoughts and release those chemicals. We can become addicted to the feeling of revenge, which can lend a certain vindictive cast to a person’s character. </p>
<p>Such a character trait typically manifests itself when the person feels themselves, or persons and groups with whom they identify, to be the victim of an injustice. Revenge fulfils what justice demands. Revenge erases unjust humiliations. It turns the world right side up again. Vengeful acts are thus always redemptive acts – or at least, that is the hope. More often than not, they end up being hugely destructive acts.</p>
<p>The destructiveness of revenge - a common literary theme from the ancient Greeks, through Shakespeare to contemporary writers - can be understood in two senses. </p>
<p>On the one hand, the victim and perpetrator of revenge can both be damaged. The reasons are obvious in the case of the victim. For the perpetrator, the destructiveness arises from being consumed by vengeance. This can overtake all rational judgement about what is in the avenger’s interests, and what is a proportional response to a perceived harm. Sometimes, no price seems too high to pay to realise revenge. </p>
<p>On the other hand, revenge can be hugely destructive because it unleashes cycles of further revenge and counter revenge. Anthropologists <a href="https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1985.87.3.02a00590">confirm instances</a> of tribal warfare in the New Guinea Highlands, and blood feuds in Mediterranean peasant societies, where cycles of revenge have lasted for generations, long after the source of the original conflict has been forgotten. </p>
<p>Today’s political parties are not immune to such human failings. In fact, where towering personal ambitions meet huge but often fragile egos, vengeful behaviour is inevitable. </p>
<p>While all of this <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/23/a-form-of-madness-turnbull-castigates-opponents-as-he-buys-time-for-morrison">“madness”</a>, as Turnbull called it, was not just the product of vengeance - deep ideological fractures within the Liberal Party and Australia more generally were just as important - it was nonetheless a key ingredient. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-high-costs-of-our-destructive-coup-culture-102416">Grattan on Friday: The high costs of our destructive coup culture</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Conservatives harnessed vengeful motives to their broader efforts to re-capture the Liberal Party. In so doing, they became slaves to their emotions, animosities and personal ambitions. They will now pay the electoral price. </p>
<p>When they do, we can expect further vengeful recriminations. Such is the logic of “wild justice.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102191/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lloyd Cox does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The psychology of revenge and how shame and humiliation can cause chaos in Australian politics.Lloyd Cox, Lecturer, Department of Modern History, Politics and International Relations, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1024162018-08-30T12:25:47Z2018-08-30T12:25:47ZGrattan on Friday: The high costs of our destructive coup culture<p>Australia’s “coup culture” has become so entrenched that it now holds serious dangers for our democracy. Not that the politicians seem to give a damn. For all the talk of “listening” and being “on your side” the voters have once again been treated as little more than a gullible audience for a low-grade reality show.</p>
<p>A decade or two ago, many commentators advocated four-year federal terms, to encourage better policymaking. Now we can’t even count on a prime minister lasting through the three-year parliamentary term after the election they win.</p>
<p>In less than a decade, we’ve had four prime ministerial coups: from Rudd to Gillard (2010); from Gillard to Rudd (2013); from Abbott to Turnbull (2015); and, last week, from Turnbull to Morrison.</p>
<p>A couple of these seemed politically savvy. I admit to thinking them so. In 2013, Kevin Rudd was reinstated to “save the furniture”, and he did. In 2015, Tony Abbott’s government appeared headed for certain oblivion. Malcolm Turnbull was installed as a better prospect; in the event, he won in 2016 by the skin of his teeth.</p>
<p>The Gillard coup, driven by a panic attack and colleagues’ frustration with Rudd’s style, was ill-conceived. The botched assault by Peter Dutton, that elevated Scott Morrison, was fuelled by a cocktail of revenge against Turnbull and a policy push to the right. We’ll see how it ends, but likely it won’t be well.</p>
<p>While a particular coup may have its justifications, when you look at a clutch of them, they’re bad for the country and for the political system.</p>
<p>Some will point to history for precedent – Paul Keating overthrew Bob Hawke in 1991. But we didn’t in those days have a “coup culture”.</p>
<p>We may chuckle on hearing Australia referred to abroad as the “coup capital” of the world. But it’s not a joke. Although this country will continue to be seen as a safe place to invest, a rolling prime ministership must eventually test the faith of outsiders.</p>
<p>The coup culture works against the sort of decision-making that requires serious policy bravery. Time frames shorten – ironically, just when governments fancifully cast programs as stretching over ten years.</p>
<p>Thinking for the future is difficult enough with continuous polling and the shrill media cycle. But if a prime minister can’t rely on their troops guaranteeing their leadership through tough patches, or standing up against guerrilla insurgencies, public policy is reduced to the lowest common denominator or falls victim to the worst of internal power struggles.</p>
<p>Ditching opposition leaders is different from tossing out prime ministers. It has its own problems, but doesn’t undermine the system the way assassinating a PM does. Voters feel (and are entitled to feel) they elect the prime minister; it’s not technically true but it is effectively so, as campaigns are so leader-focused.</p>
<p>Fundamental in this revolving door is the cost to trust. As in other democracies, Australians’ trust in their system and its players has been eroding over decades.</p>
<p>Research from the University of Canberra’s Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis found fewer than 41% of Australians are currently satisfied with the way our democracy works. This compared with 78% in 1996.</p>
<p>Generation X is least satisfied (31%); the baby boomers most satisfied (50%). Women are generally less satisfied with democracy and more distrustful of politicians and political institutions.</p>
<p>According to this data – which preceded the leadership crisis – only 21% trust politicians and 28% trust journalists.</p>
<p>The yet-to-be-released research concludes: “Politicians, government ministers and political parties are deeply distrusted and media of all kinds and how they report Canberra politics are viewed as a key part of the problem.” </p>
<p>The research also found strong public support for reforms to ensure greater political accountability of MPs and to stimulate more public participation.</p>
<p>The coup culture further alienates an already disillusioned public, unable to comprehend the appalling behaviour they often witness from their politicians.</p>
<p>Recently I spoke to members of a community leadership program who’d come to Canberra for a couple of days of briefings from politicians and others. They’d been to Question Time a few hours before I met them.</p>
<p>To journalists, it was a pretty standard QT. For these people, what they witnessed was shocking. They had trouble getting their heads around how the goings on – the shouting, the insults – could be so dreadful. They’d looked over at the schoolchildren in another part of the public gallery and wondered what those youngsters were thinking.</p>
<p>They asked: why do our politicians act like this and what can be done? All 72 decided to write to their MPs to say this wasn’t the type of conduct they wanted to see from them.</p>
<p>My hunch is that this group of ordinary, well-educated, interested citizens would probably be even more put off by subsequent events.</p>
<p>One thing I suspect would have particularly disturbed them is the way the players in last week’s coup expect the public to just move right on. Everyone was back to work, they said.</p>
<p>Gillard in 2010 tried to explain and justify her deposing of Rudd by saying “I believed that a good government was losing its way”. It didn’t wash.</p>
<p>We know for ourselves the reasons for the latest coup – hatred of Turnbull and a desire to force a sharp turn to the right. But have the main coup-makers and their allies (as distinct from their noisy backers in the media), and the windfall beneficiaries, felt the need to properly account for their actions?</p>
<p>This hit-and-run attitude is contemptuous of the public.</p>
<p>The coup culture, especially in this instance, is also accompanied by an “anything goes” view of tactics. Again, it is a matter of degree – the extent to which the hardball, which we always see at such times, crosses a line.</p>
<p>For some of the Liberal women, it undoubtedly did last week.</p>
<p>Julia Banks, announcing on Wednesday that she’ll resign her Melbourne seat of Chisholm at the election, has cited bullying. Western Australian senator Linda Reynolds went to the lengths of telling the Senate: “I just hope that … the behaviours we have seen and the bullying and intimidation, which I do not recognise as Liberal in any way, shape or form, are brought to account.”</p>
<p>But Victorian Liberal president Michael Kroger saw it as par for the course, saying, in response to Banks: “This is politics. People do speak strongly to each other. You just need to look at Question Time. If you think Question Time is not full of bullying and intimidation then you’ve got another thing coming.”</p>
<p>Well, anyone who bullied or was fine with such conduct should do this: go to your local high school and explain to the kids why bullying shouldn’t be in their tool kit but is needed in yours.</p>
<p>Some Liberals flirt with the idea of rules to curb the coup culture, a path Labor has gone down.</p>
<p>It depends on the model: as with so much in politics, what looks good at first sight may hold dangers. Giving a party’s rank and file a say in electing the leader, as the ALP does, might eventually advantage those harder to sell to voters, because party memberships are small and unrepresentative.</p>
<p>A higher-than-50% threshold for a spill, which Labor also has embraced and Reynolds suggests, holds some merit. But when Anthony Albanese was stalking Bill Shorten before the Super Saturday byelections, Albanese’s supporters insisted the rule could be circumvented.</p>
<p>What’s really critical is the culture – in a party and in the political system generally. Once that’s been corroded, it’s a devil of a job to scrape the rust off.</p>
<p>There are no easy ways to rid ourselves of the coup culture, or to force tin-eared politicians to lift their game. But it wouldn’t hurt for more people to follow the example of those in the community leadership program and remind their MPs of their KPIs.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102416/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While a particular coup may have its justifications, when you look at a clutch of them, they’re bad for the country and for the political system.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1021842018-08-27T08:18:35Z2018-08-27T08:18:35ZSpills and City Deals: what Turnbull’s urban policy has achieved, and where we go from here<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233655/original/file-20180827-149484-g1tvnm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Governments need effective policies to lure people into regional towns. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s recently announced ministry includes a new Minister for Cities, Urban Infrastructure and Population. Alan Tudge’s first Tweet in his new role announced he is “looking forward to my new congestion busting role”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1033632068868091904"}"></div></p>
<p>Federal governments have rarely shown any explicit policy concern with cities or urban problems. And conservative governments had never done so until September 2015, when the then newly installed prime minister, Malcom Turnbull, <a href="https://www.afr.com/business/infrastructure/malcolm-turnbulls-cabinet-jamie-briggs-named-minister-for-cities-20150920-gjqvsq">announced the appointment</a> of a Minister for Cities and the Built Environment. </p>
<p>Jamie Briggs was persuaded to adopt a version of the <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/policy/ahuri-briefs/what-is-a-uk-city-deal">UK’s City deals</a> as the major policy initiative of his ministry. City Deals are <a href="https://theconversation.com/city-deals-nine-reasons-this-imported-model-of-urban-development-demands-due-diligence-57040">essentially about creating partnerships</a> between all three levels of government (federal, state and local) to drive the sustainable growth of our cities.</p>
<p>This model encourages city councils or groupings of councils to work together more effectively in identifying local economic development opportunities. They then strike a deal with the central government to secure the funding necessary to realise these opportunities.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/city-deals-nine-reasons-this-imported-model-of-urban-development-demands-due-diligence-57040">City Deals: nine reasons this imported model of urban development demands due diligence</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In his <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/malcolm-turnbull-farewell-press-conference?utm_term=.li0oaD8pk#.fbyOWkqeY">farewell speech</a> last week, Turnbull referred to City Deals as a “real innovation” in the way the three levels of government now engage in planning and managing our cities. Looking back over these three years, there are three important questions about City Deals to be answered. </p>
<ol>
<li>Have they transformed the way we go about planning our cities and managing their growth?</li>
<li>Do they serve as the foundation for a coherent national urban policy?</li>
<li>Have they made our cities – large and small – better places for most of us to live and work in?</li>
</ol>
<h2>1. Deals are nothing new</h2>
<p>City Deals celebrated public-to-private partnerships, but these are nothing new in urban policy; nor are attempts to create better working relations between different levels of government. </p>
<p>The challenge has always been for these partnerships to remain in place and to retain the enthusiasm of the partners over the course of a long-term relationship. In contemporary Australia, we have a poor reputation for maintaining the long-term political relationships that enable policy stability. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=489&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=489&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233659/original/file-20180827-149475-z8obrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=489&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There’s little appetite in Australia to amalgamate local council areas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the UK, City Deals were also part of a concerted drive to encourage greater amalgamation and cooperation among the patchworks of municipal governments in the larger, metropolitan areas. There have long been calls for a <a href="http://www.mdpi.com/2413-8851/1/4/34">metropolitan-scale government</a> in Australia to enable the plethora of local councils that run our major cities to work more effectively together. </p>
<p>But many locals are still <a href="https://www.governmentnews.com.au/council-mergers-blamed-for-13-by-election-backlash-in-nsw-coalition-heartland/">tremendously hostile</a> to council amalgamations in major cities. And there is no appetite for the creation of new metropolitan authorities and their “<a href="http://www.centreforcities.org/publication/everything-need-know-metro-mayors/#whatis">metro mayors</a>”, which were a hallmark of the UK City deals program.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/deal-or-no-deal-are-uk-style-city-deals-a-good-bet-for-australia-58978">Deal or no deal: are UK-style City Deals a good bet for Australia?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>2. Deals tend to be opaque</h2>
<p>So, are City Deals likely to be the foundation for a coherent national urban policy, or even a national settlement strategy? We can only hope so, but the experience of City Deals in the UK suggests otherwise. </p>
<p>Three waves of UK City deals have resulted in some local <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pa.1661">improvements to public infrastructure</a> such as improved broadband connectivity in a part of Nottingham and a new geothermal district heating system in Stoke on Trent. In some cases, the policy also strengthened relations between central and local government. </p>
<p>But the initiative as a whole has been <a href="https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Devolving-responsibilities-to-cities-in-England-Wave-One-City-Deals.pdf">criticised from various quarters</a> for an <a href="http://www.regionalaustralia.org.au/home/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/POBrien-%E2%80%98City-Deals-%E2%80%98deal-making%E2%80%99-and-UK-local-and-regional-development-policy.pdf">overarching lack of transparency</a>, which may explain why some areas appear to have struck better deals than others.</p>
<p>This goes to the heart of the deal-making approach to urban policy, or indeed to any central or federal government policy initiative based on deals. They tend to be opaque and to hide behind commercial-in-confidence clauses that deny the public (whose tax dollars are at stake) much insight into who is getting what from the deal. </p>
<p>Without principles of consistency and transparency there is often a suspicion that decisions about major infrastructure projects are influenced as much by <a href="https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/18817/1/cesifo1_wp1453.pdf">pork barrel politics</a> as they are by assessments that are both rigorous and transparent. </p>
<h2>3. It’s about broader national policy</h2>
<p>It is too early to say whether any of the aspirations, and even some of the early works undertaken under the first round of City Deals, are having the positive impact hoped for. The A$250 million <a href="http://www.udiaqld.com.au/getmedia/2fef5d16-2ddf-46c4-b63f-c8dc36773bf3/Townsville_City_Deal_progress_report_v8_March_ACC.pdf.aspx">North Queensland Stadium</a> is underway and is expected to generate around 2,000 jobs during its construction. In Launceston, the University of Tasmania’s <a href="https://www.examiner.com.au/story/5522454/launceston-city-deal-makes-progress-one-year-on/">new campus</a> is in the detailed planning and design stage.</p>
<p>There is no doubt such projects are having some impact – large scale infrastructure projects invariably provide a boost to the local construction industry – but we don’t and can’t yet know of their long-term impact. </p>
<p>This has always been a challenge when trying to measure the costs and benefits of long-term urban policy. The evaluative challenge is not only to assess whether the Townsville City Deal (under which the North Queensland Stadium is being built) has delivered more or less of what it promised. Nor can we say whether Launceston has become a better place.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/making-small-cities-bigger-will-help-better-distribute-australias-25-million-people-101180">Making small cities bigger will help better distribute Australia's 25 million people</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>What we need to know is whether we have begun to develop a more comprehensive and coherent national system of towns and cities. Because, if we have not, it is likely we will continue to ignore the important connections that exist between our major cities and their regional hinterlands. </p>
<p>We’re also likely to to deal ineffectually with the problems of rapid population growth in Sydney and Melbourne at the same as trying to lure people and investors to regional towns and cities with ad hoc inducements and inadequate incentives.</p>
<p>Prime Minister Morrison studied economics and geography at university and spent some time leading the Property Council of Australia. So, he has the credentials to continue the relatively new tradition of giving urban policy debates a national perspective. Let’s hope Minister Tudge can rise above the congestion problems of Sydney and Melbourne and bring a fresh approach that truly integrates population, infrastructure and city planning into a coherent national urban policy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102184/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Burton is a member of Regional Development Australia, Gold Coast and sits on the National Education Committee and the Queensland Committee of the Planning Institute of Australia.
The Cities Research Institute receives support from the City of Gold Coast.</span></em></p>Turnbull put in place the City Deals program in 2015 - aiming to create better partnerships between all levels of government. Some projects are underway, but we need more than just partnerships.Paul Burton, Professor of Urban Management and Planning & Director, Cities Research Institute, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1018902018-08-22T20:06:29Z2018-08-22T20:06:29ZShifting to Peter Dutton, or anyone else, will not cure what ails the Liberal Party<p>At time of writing, Malcolm Turnbull is still prime minister. But he is seriously, and most likely, terminally, wounded. It is unclear how long he will be able to remain as Liberal leader and PM.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s turn as leader was always likely to be an exceedingly difficult one. From the <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-malcolm-turnbull-be-a-liberal-leader-for-the-21st-century-47486">start</a>, he faced the problem of whether he would be able to bring the conservatives into the Liberal party room with him. That problem was compounded by the narrowness of his election win in 2016, which further undermined <a href="https://theconversation.com/even-if-he-keeps-the-top-job-malcolm-turnbulls-troubles-have-only-just-begun-61425">his authority as leader</a>. </p>
<p>That 2016 election outcome partly reflected the errors in Turnbull’s political judgement that have dogged his career. He called the election too early and had an exceedingly long campaign marked by various <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-30/pm-says-tax-reform-left-him-exposed-to-gst-hike-attacks/7554002">“own goals”</a>.</p>
<p>Such mistakes reminded some Liberals of previous debacles. These included Turnbull’s disastrous handling as opposition leader in 2009 of the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/intrigue-over-fake-email-scandal-continues/2675008">Godwin Grech affair</a>, when he made false accusations of Labor government financial impropriety based on easily faked documents (forwarded emails with their content changed). </p>
<p>Concerns over Turnbull’s lack of political nous continue in the party today, including over the timing of the recent leadership spill. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-turnbull-government-is-all-but-finished-and-the-liberals-will-now-need-to-work-out-who-they-are-101894">The Turnbull government is all but finished, and the Liberals will now need to work out who they are</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>On the other hand, Turnbull has attempted to fix aspects of his leadership performance. When he <a href="https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Liberal_Party_of_Australia_leadership_spill%2C_2009.html">lost</a> the Liberal party leadership in 2009, it was partly because he’d been seen as not making enough concessions to the party room before trying to sign them up to an agreement on climate change policy, which he had negotiated with the Rudd Labor government. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/233046/original/file-20180822-149496-qtmx7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Turnbull has been criticised for a series of missteps as prime minister.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Now Turnbull has made so many concessions to the conservatives in his party, including signing up to Tony Abbott’s direct action climate change policy that he had previously <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/turnbull-discusses-broadband-and-climate-policy/2719046">lambasted</a>; agreeing to canvas the public’s opinion on same-sex marriage despite previously <a href="https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/transcript-doorstop-on-the-nbn-and-mobile-blackspots-program-marriage-equal">criticising</a> the idea; substantially <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/xx-20180105-h0dss1.html">putting off</a> the republic issue; <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-17/sudanese-gangs-real-concern-in-melbourne-malcolm-turnbull-says/10002556">dog-whistling</a> on race; and now <a href="https://theconversation.com/malcolm-turnbull-shelves-emissions-reduction-target-as-leadership-speculation-mounts-101811">dropping</a> the emissions reduction targets in the National Energy Guarantee, that voters are left wondering whether he has any convictions left. </p>
<p>As Labor is delightedly pointing out, what happened to the man who once <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBK3d6rAP8">emphasised</a> the need for political leaders to act decisively on climate change? </p>
<h2>A failure to connect with voters</h2>
<p>In fact, what happened reflects a deeper malaise in the Liberal Party, namely the failure of a <a href="https://www.mup.com.au/books/the-turnbull-gamble-paperback-softback">diehard group</a> of conservatives, post John Howard, to accept that <a href="https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/policy-exchange-london-disraeli-prize-speech-in-defence-of-a-free-society">small “l” moderate traditions</a> have also always been part of the Liberal party’s heritage. </p>
<p>Dutton supporters are presumably hoping that a <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/aliceworkman/27-things-you-need-to-know-about-peter-dutton-the-man-who?utm_term=.lc2O9zKB1#.kcGnr0gKv">deeply conservative</a> alternative leader will at least save the furniture by holding on to key seats in Queensland. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/can-malcolm-turnbull-be-a-liberal-leader-for-the-21st-century-47486">Can Malcolm Turnbull be a Liberal leader for the 21st century?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, even that is questionable given the recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/longman-result-shows-queensland-vote-is-volatile-and-one-nation-remains-potent-100746">byelection outcomes</a> and major questions about how well Dutton <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/peter-dutton-for-prime-minister/">would do</a> in a general election in the rest of the country. (It isn’t clear that any other Liberal politician is currently in a position to challenge Turnbull, even given questions over Dutton’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-is-peter-dutton-ineligible-to-sit-in-parliament-101840">eligibility</a> for parliament, although a compromise candidate may well emerge.)</p>
<p>If he is eventually elected as party leader, Dutton may be able to mobilise the conservative base on issues such as race, crime and security more effectively than Turnbull (albeit at the risk of alienating many other voters). But how effectively would he be able to address the broader issues concerning the electorate?</p>
<p>Currently, the focus on bringing down <a href="https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/press-conference-with-the-hon.-scott-morrison-mp-treasurer-and-the-hon.-jos">power costs</a> seems to be the Coalition’s main strategy for tackling cost-of-living issues. It is straight out of Abbott’s playbook. Dutton has now proposed <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6084731/Peter-Dutton-proposes-removing-GST-power-bills-save-households-142-year-bid-PM.html">removing the GST</a> on power to bring down bills even further.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/tony-abbott-and-the-revenge-of-the-delcons-94531">Tony Abbott and the revenge of the ‘delcons’</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Whoever ends up the Liberal prime minister will need to address deeper issues of <a href="https://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Inequality-in-Australia-2018.pdf">inequality</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2018/jun/17/good-luck-with-telling-voters-they-are-better-off-than-a-few-years-ago">weak wage growth </a> in the Australian economy. Those issues, not just the banking royal commission, are why cost-of-living concerns are so important and why the proposed big business tax cuts have proved so toxic. </p>
<p>Conversely, it is arguably Labor’s focus on <a href="http://www.billshorten.com.au/address_to_the_national_press_club_tuesday_30_january_2018">tackling inequality</a> that is helping it to do so well in the polls, despite the electorate’s <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/turnbull-widens-lead-as-preferred-pm-in-latest-newspoll">reservations </a> about leader Bill Shorten. </p>
<p>Admittedly, unlike Turnbull, Dutton does have the advantage of not being a wealthy former banker and he doesn’t own a harbourside mansion. He may be a less easy target for Labor on those equality issues. However, he is vulnerable from his time as health minister, when he advocated <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-03/timeline-dumped-medicare-co-payment-key-events/6275260">Medicare co-payments</a>, and his <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/peter-dutton-a-brief-history-of-the-man-who-wants-to-be-prime-minister">controversial comments</a> as home affairs minister have also alienated many voters. </p>
<p>Furthermore, it will arguably take more than a change of leader to convince Australian voters that the Liberal party is prepared to tackle voters’ everyday economic concerns. It may take a move away from the trickle-down, free-market, neoliberalism that has dominated Liberal economic policy since the 1980s, but was not actually part of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-is-right-to-link-the-liberals-with-the-centre-but-is-the-centre-where-it-used-to-be-80799">Menzies’ tradition</a>. Turnbull might have originally been a moderate on social issues, but he remains predominantly a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-28/berg-the-dries-have-it:-the-past-and-future-of-economic-reform/7056060">“dry”</a> on economic policy, with a continuing belief in <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/malcolm-turnbull-joins-insiders/9394476">trickle-down</a> economics. </p>
<p>In other words, the Liberals need to acknowledge that one of the reasons why they only narrowly won the 2016 election and have been doing so badly in the polls may have been because of the difficulty in selling their <a href="https://theconversation.com/even-if-he-keeps-the-top-job-malcolm-turnbulls-troubles-have-only-just-begun-61425">economic policy</a> to a post-financial crisis electorate in anxious economic times. This will still be the case, even if someone else replaces Turnbull as prime minister in the not-too-distant future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101890/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carol Johnson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Whoever ends up the Liberal prime minister will need to articulate a more coherent economic policy to help everyday Australians.Carol Johnson, Professor of Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/474732015-09-15T03:02:32Z2015-09-15T03:02:32ZTurnbull inherits an economy battered by global headwinds<p>Malcolm Turnbull was all smiles after his overnight ascension to the prime ministership, but the fact is he has inherited some grim economic realities. </p>
<p>He <a href="http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/transcript-doorstop-interview-canberra1">said</a> yesterday that he decided to challenge Abbott for the leadership because, among other reasons:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is not the fault of individual ministers, ultimately the Prime Minister has not been capable of providing the economic leadership our nation needs; he has not been capable of providing the economic confidence that business needs… Remember this: The only way, the only way, we can ensure that we remain a high wage, generous social welfare net, first-world society is if we have outstanding economic leadership, if we have strong business confidence. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, what can Turnbull do to deliver the kind of outstanding economic leadership he says Australia needs?</p>
<p>His first step will be to acknowledge the economic problems Australia is currently facing. </p>
<h2>Biggest fall in terms of trade in 50 years</h2>
<p>Since peaking in September 2011, the terms of trade have fallen by more than 30%. This is the biggest fall in the terms of trade in the last 50 years.
The terms of trade refers to the ratio of the average price of exports to the average price of imports. It an indicator of a nation’s purchasing power. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94737/original/image-20150915-4695-11ccift.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A century of terms of trade fluctuations.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">DFAT, ABS, Intergenerational Report 2015 (forecasts from 2015-16)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>About 20% of Australia’s output is exported, in exchange for imports. If the price of exports falls relative to the price of imports, that is, if the terms of trade fall, Australia’s purchasing power is weakened. </p>
<p>Since 2011, Australia’s GDP, or production, has grown by about 1% per person per year. Over the same period, Australia’s net national income has fallen by about 1% per person per year.</p>
<p>More subtly, the terms of trade can also have an effect on employment. Imagine that the terms of trade are falling, making imports more expensive. If wages are indexed to consumer prices, which include imports, this will lead to an increase in money wages. </p>
<p>However, producers, some of whom are exporters, are not receiving the same price increases for their output. From their point of view, rising wages lead to an uncompensated increase in the cost of labour. Thus the producers employ fewer workers, leading to an increase in unemployment.</p>
<p>The link between the terms of trade can be broken if the labour market is sufficiently flexible to absorb a fall in money wages relative to prices. The fall in the terms of trade that we are currently experiencing has been accompanied by wage growth that has been very weak and in some cases negative. Consequently, there has not been a large increase in unemployment by historical standards. Given the circumstances, this is a positive outcome for the economy.</p>
<h2>Income recession</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94738/original/image-20150915-31151-juzxmz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Quarterly per capita growth in GDP and real incomes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ABS</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>National per capita real income has been falling for the last three and a half years. This is the most prolonged fall in national incomes in a generation. </p>
<p>Usually, national income moves closely with national output, or GDP. Large movements in the terms of trade have introduced a gap between income and output in recent years. During the terms of trade boom from the mid-2000’s to 2011, incomes grew faster than output because national purchasing power was strong. Now, as the terms of trade are falling, incomes are lagging behind output.</p>
<p>During the recessions of the 1980’s and early 1990’s, falling incomes were associated with falling output and high unemployment. The pathways out of these recessions were clear, if difficult. Bring down unemployment, increase output, and thus revive incomes.</p>
<p>This income recession is different, and somewhat inevitable. The falling terms of trade is largely beyond our control. While unemployment is at a 10-year high of 6.3%, it is nothing like the double-digit unemployment rates experienced in the 1980’s and early 1990’s. </p>
<p>While Turnbull may be called on to “fix unemployment”, and he should certainly hope that unemployment doesn’t increase further, there is only limited scope for reducing unemployment. A reduction from 6.3% to, say 5%, won’t have quite the same effect as if the starting point had been 10%.</p>
<h2>The transition from the mining boom</h2>
<p>Turnbull will need to accept that the mining boom is on the wane and plan for a transition to a new economy. </p>
<p>The current fall in the terms of trade is attributed to large falls in the prices of major mining export commodities. Resources exports account for more than half of the value of Australia’s exports. The price of iron ore has fallen from a peak of over $US 180 per ton in 2011 to just $US50 per ton. The price of coal peaked in 2008, but since 2011 it has fallen from around $US140 a ton to just above $US60. Data from the Department of Industry shows that commodity exports have been increasing in volume terms but falling in dollar value.</p>
<p>Rather than asking why prices are falling, in this case it may be more pertinent to ask why they were so high in the first place. The current trajectory of the terms of trade is perhaps better described as a return to normal. </p>
<p>In the early 2000’s, construction activity in China gave impetus to a huge increase in world demand for steel. As a producer of both iron ore and coal, Australia enjoyed significant price increases over the mid-2000’s.</p>
<p>Over mid to late 2000’s, massive investment in mining fuelled high wages and a high Australian dollar. However, as that investment has gradually transformed into higher capital stocks, mining output has increased and prices are now falling back to their original level. It is this “transition” phase that we are now observing.</p>
<p>The 2015 Intergenerational Report uses the assumption that Australia’s long-run terms of trade will settle at the level observed in 2005-06 by 2019-20. However, this assumption appears quite optimistic as it implies that the terms of trade will remain above its long run average in the long term.</p>
<h2>Accepting the new normal</h2>
<p>To some extent, a Turnbull government needs to accept that Australia is currently being battered by economic headwinds largely outside any government’s control.
It needs to resist temptation to promise it will return the budget to surplus and instead plan for the future. </p>
<p>That would involve a budget plan that incorporates suitable forecasts for key economic variables including the terms of trade and productivity. </p>
<p>Overly optimistic forecasts – such as those in the last budget, which involved a doubling of productivity growth and a long-term elevation in the terms of trade – perform a disservice to good government.</p>
<p>A plan to return the budget to balance needs to be based on a realistic reading of our current circumstances.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47473/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Janine Dixon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What can Turnbull do to deliver the kind of outstanding economic leadership he says Australia needs? His first step will be to acknowledge the economic problems Australia is currently facing.Janine Dixon, Senior research fellow, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155982013-06-27T20:31:32Z2013-06-27T20:31:32ZOnce bitten, twice shy: Labor again betrays the Australian people<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26322/original/6fqgfwkw-1372313341.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is the decision to re-install Kevin Rudd as leader of the ALP and of the country an affront to Australian democracy?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The decision by the Labor caucus to minimise the electoral damage in September and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-26/rudd-prevails-over-gillard-in-leadership-ballot/4783422">return Kevin Rudd</a> to the party leadership was short-sighted and ultimately self-destructive. </p>
<p>More importantly, it operated to confirm the damaging sense, growing over recent decades among the Australian public, that politicians act cynically in their own interests. And with his decision to not move a motion of no confidence in the new administration, opposition leader Tony Abbott made his own contribution to the growing problem of voter alienation.</p>
<p>“They’re just in it for themselves” is the sentiment which best captures how the average voter currently thinks about their democratically-elected political representatives. Why did 57 caucus members vote to reinstate Rudd as prime minister on Wednesday? Because they were worried about their own seats – and therefore their jobs – come the election.</p>
<p>Labor powerbroker Bill Shorten <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/shorten-forced-to-swing-the-axe-20130626-2oxln.html">provided the public rationale</a> for the caucus decision half an hour before the vote. He reminded Labor parliamentarians that the main game was the September election, and the primary objective was keeping Abbott out of Kirribilli House. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/men-flay-gillard-in-poll-15228">polls</a> had long said that Labor would not achieve that primary objective while led by Julia Gillard. The only alternative was Rudd. It was a no-brainer.</p>
<p>There is no evidence that Shorten was not being genuine in that speech. His passionate defence of his party’s policies against those of the opposition may even be admirable. But in equating the interests of his party with the interests of the nation, he – and the Labor caucus – made the gravest of political mistakes for the second time.</p>
<p>The mistake was to ignore the question which for decades now has been nibbling at the integrity of Western parliamentary democracies. How can the relationship between state and citizen be repaired?</p>
<p>For the past 30 years, the relationship between state and citizen has been in what seems a permanent decline. Governments, with the assistance of journalists in the mass media and increasingly meek and ineffectual parliaments, have imposed wave after wave of significant, way-of-life-changing reform on voters, who rarely get a say on its implementation. </p>
<p>Sometimes that reform is genuinely in the public interest, though the public may not know it yet. A more expansive immigration program and a scheme to reduce carbon dioxide pollution are instances in Australia. </p>
<p>However, there are some occasions that reform is demonstrably not in the public interest, including the removal of workers’ protections, the replacement of income and profit-based taxes by consumption taxes, and the pursuit of budget surpluses over public infrastructure. </p>
<p>But only rarely are voters offered a genuine choice between alternatives. More often than not, the major parties agree at the level of fundamental philosophy, so that the choice available to voters is akin to a customer who prefers yellow paint being confronted by a shelf displaying different shades of brown.</p>
<p>The result is an increasingly cynical electorate which becomes ever more despondent about the prospect of turning up to the local primary school every three years to vote. Last year <a href="http://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/lowy-institute-poll-2012-public-opinion-and-foreign-policy">the Lowy Institute found</a> that only 39 per cent of young Australians were prepared to say they backed democracy unequivocally. What to do about this cynicism is the key question at the heart of democratic governance in Australia today.</p>
<p>This is not an argument for base populism: not for running opinion poll-driven administrations which pander as much to majority prejudice as they do to genuine public interest needs. Rather, it is an argument for governments - and those politicians who inhabit them - to take much more seriously their responsibilities as democratic representatives of the people. </p>
<p>That is why the panicked decision of the Labor caucus must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Yes, Westminster conventions allow it. Yes, Labor was facing a probable annihilation under Gillard. But no, political parties should not be allowed to put their own private interests before the broader public good in a way that further encourages dangerous voter cynicism.</p>
<p>One does not need to be a supporter of Abbott or the Coalition to support a no confidence motion. It is enough to be a supporter of democratic renewal. The voting public were entitled to have the new administration tested by the cross-benchers in their representative institution. </p>
<p>However, despite three years of running perhaps the most negative and cynical opposition in modern Australian political history, Abbott baulked at the final chance to move a motion of no confidence in the new Rudd administration. In this way, he merely participated in what increasingly appears to be, to borrow <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3149592.htm">his own phrase</a>, a “conspiracy of the parliament against the people”.</p>
<p>In any case, this latest switch will not help Labor. One of the expressions of contemporary voter cynicism is that we prefer the idea of the leader who isn’t: when Rudd was prime minister, Gillard was preferred; when Malcolm Turnbull was opposition leader, Joe Hockey was popular. </p>
<p>Now we prefer Rudd and Abbott to Gillard, and Turnbull to Abbott. Anger at the self-serving nature of Wednesday’s decision will soon overwhelm any honeymoon popularity Rudd attracts.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15598/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Russell Marks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The decision by the Labor caucus to minimise the electoral damage in September and return Kevin Rudd to the party leadership was short-sighted and ultimately self-destructive. More importantly, it operated…Russell Marks, Honorary Research Associate, School of Social Sciences, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155882013-06-27T20:30:40Z2013-06-27T20:30:40ZThe political tragedy of Julia Gillard<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26336/original/dgnfshbj-1372326694.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">While she may look elsewhere, ultimately Julia Gillard has no-one to blame for her political demise but herself.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the middle of the 2012 winter, an influential supporter of Julia Gillard laid out for me the intricacies of the Labor caucus’ power structures, the labour movement’s web of personal antagonisms and the federal government’s dire predicament. At the end of his treatise, with a wide-eyed look of resignation and a despairing tone, he summed up:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The whole show is f—ed and no-one can work out how to unf— it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A few weeks later, a highly experienced Labor figure with deep knowledge of public attitudes to the Gillard government and how to harness voter support shared his assessment. He’d concluded that Labor was headed for defeat and had lost the capacity to independently influence the 2013 election outcome because the bulk of voters had lost any desire to listen to the government. </p>
<p>An avowed agnostic on the Kevin Rudd-Julia Gillard question, he averred that the only way Labor could re-enter serious consideration would be if the Liberal-National Coalition made a series of major public blunders.</p>
<p>Both encounters came after the introduction of the carbon tax, which Gillard had consistently told her MPs would be the moment when the dark electoral clouds would part for the government, and only a few months after Gillard had thrashed Rudd in a caucus ballot and declared that the leadership question had been settled for all time.</p>
<p>And yet, Gillard managed to hang on as Labor leader for almost another year, right up until Wednesday of this week. With Gillard having surrendered the leadership to Rudd in decisive but not overwhelming fashion, it seems that 26 Labor MPs who in February last year backed Gillard found, to borrow the aforementioned Gillard supporter’s eloquent term, a way to “unf—” the government. They did so by switching back to the man Gillard thought she’d vanquished.</p>
<p>In doing so, they have at least created the possibility that the ALP can moderate, or perhaps even avoid, the electoral nightmare that was likely to consume the nation’s oldest political party. Or maybe not. Rudd’s return affords an opportunity for Labor, but that is all.</p>
<p>The caucus’ decision also implies, heavily and unavoidably, that it made a mistake by elevating Gillard to the leadership on June 24, 2010.</p>
<p>The truth is that the Australian Labor Party nationally has in the past three years experienced its most rancorous divisions since the split of the 1950s. Unlike the period of the split, which occurred in opposition and guaranteed many more years of it, the party has endured these divisions while holding office, and the enmities have, for the most part, grown from ego rather than ideology.</p>
<p>If the events of the past few days are to have any meaning, they need to be seen in the context of what has happened to the Government since early 2010. First things first: Julia Gillard’s downfall as prime minister is one of the greatest personal tragedies in Australian politics.</p>
<p>It is a tragedy because Gillard’s ambition ultimately exceeded her political talent, and to the very end she would not see it. Her <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-26/julia-gillard-speaks-about-defeat/4783950">speech</a> delivered after her caucus defeat on Wednesday night attributed her removal as leader to only two causes: a loss of fortitude among past supporters who buckled under external pressure and sexism directed at her as the nation’s first female prime minister.</p>
<p>There was no acknowledgement that she had lost the confidence of most of her colleagues because of her own performance.</p>
<p>The pattern of failing to fully own her errors was set early during the 2010 election campaign when she said that she would no longer conform to her handlers’ directives and from that point voters would see <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/the-pulse/gillard-vows-to-unleash-the-real-me-as-polls-flatline-20100802-111q2.html">“the real Julia”</a>. Notably, it was the advisers who had made the big mistakes. Her mistake had been to follow their advice.</p>
<p>Gillard had been a brilliant deputy to Rudd, an earthy foil to his high-flown nerdishness. But as leader, she rarely looked comfortable and did not seem at ease with the natural authority that comes with the nation’s highest political office.</p>
<p>Nor did she have the benefit of a deputy who could perform as well as she had. Indeed, in Wayne Swan she had one of the least effective communicators modern politics has seen. It has become a mantra for Labor and its supporters to bemoan the fact it does not get the credit it deserves for its handling of the economy.</p>
<p>The media gets the blame which, to a degree, it should. But Swan was charged with selling Labor’s economic policy from December 2004 until last Wednesday. Should he not shoulder most of the responsibility?</p>
<p>Gillard’s defenders in the party room and in the electorate produce a list of reasons for her removal: Rudd’s refusal to accept his loss of the leadership and leaks aimed at harming her; sexism; a ferocious, sometimes unhinged approach from some people in the opposition; harsh treatment by the media.</p>
<p>There is something to all of them. She definitely was the target of vicious, sexist attacks. The media was quick to turn on her and some elements were relentless in their dismissive attitude. The opposition treated her time as prime minister as one unbroken crisis.</p>
<p>And Rudd did undermine Gillard. The leaks against her during her first weeks as leader either came from Rudd or people sympathetic to him and they hurt her. One revealed that she had <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/07/28/leaks-tarnish-gillards-shine/">opposed</a> a rise in welfare payments chiefly on the basis of Labor’s political interests.</p>
<p>Another far more damaging leak, put directly to Gillard during an appearance at the National Press Club, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/rudd-denies-leaking-details-of-leadership-challenge-deal-20100716-10e75.html">suggested</a> that during a long meeting with Rudd on June 23, 2010, she had undertaken to give him several months to repair his faltering leadership. During a break in the meeting, she was told by her supporters that she already had the caucus numbers stitched up, whereupon she returned to Rudd and withdrew her undertaking: she was challenging him.</p>
<p>To this day, this leak is regarded by many on the Labor side as appalling treachery, which it was. But one thing needs to be said: it has not been challenged successfully on the grounds of veracity. The real damage was not in the act of leaking but in its substance, which presented Gillard as someone who would put her ambition ahead of her word.</p>
<p>From that moment, her troubles never left her. Her trustworthiness was in question but voters were still willing to give her the benefit of the doubt – until she committed after the 2010 election to a carbon tax.</p>
<p>Gillard favoured an emissions trading scheme until early 2010, when in the face of an onslaught by Tony Abbott and some bad polls she urged Rudd very strongly to put the policy on ice until there was a cross-party consensus. Rudd, revealing his own severe propensity for misjudgement, accepted that advice. Then Gillard replaced him as leader and once again favoured an ETS. </p>
<p>During the 2010 election campaign, Gillard promised to refer the issue to a hazily-designed <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-election/pm-pledges-peoples-assembly-on-climate-20100722-10myh.html">“people’s assembly”</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApCwoj35d3M">vowed</a> there would be no carbon tax. After the election, under pressure from the Greens, she dropped the idea of the assembly and adopted a temporary carbon tax as Labor policy. But, incredibly, rather than emphasising its temporary nature and perhaps calling it a levy, which has a different meaning for many voters, she declared that she was happy to call it a tax.</p>
<p>That sealed the trustworthiness question and it’s why there was no recovery in Labor’s polling numbers after July 1 last year. Too many voters resented the way she had pursued the policy much more than the policy itself.</p>
<p>The argument in defence of Julia Gillard is that her government managed to get hundreds of pieces of legislation through a parliament in which Labor did not have majorities in its right in either house. This included the signature reforms of new education funding arrangements and the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Again, the argument has merit.</p>
<p>But the story must also include the failed idea of a <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/no-refugee-centre-for-us-east-timor-20110328-1cdlo.html">processing centre in East Timor</a>, the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/slipperhood-architect-gets-his-christmas-wish-20111124-1nx7t.html">enlisting of Peter Slipper</a> as Speaker of the House, the crazy idea of <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/gillard-sets-september-14-election-date/story-e6frfkp9-1226565039127">setting a September election date</a> in January and the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-does-the-softshoe-reshuffle-20130202-2dra8.html">departure of two Cabinet members</a> two days after the announcement, the costly architecture of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-mining-and-governing-policy-made-on-the-fly-is-likely-to-flop-12261">minerals resource rent tax</a>, and the threat in late 2011 to force a parliamentary vote on the <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/mps-opposition-scuttles-gillards-malaysia-swap-deal-20111013-1llvb.html">Malaysia solution</a> as a wedge tactic against the Coalition which was withdrawn when she realised she would lose.</p>
<p>Worst of all, it must also include the oft-repeated pledge by Gillard and Swan to <a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/treasurer-wayne-swan-to-pledge-to-deliver-15-billion-budget-surplus-this-year/story-e6freooo-1226349256978">return the budget to surplus</a> this year. The signs were there in mid-2012 they could not deliver but they kept promising it until the end of the year. Incredible.</p>
<p>Neither Rudd nor the media nor pollsters nor the nation’s sexists forced these errors. They were entirely the work of a politician who, like all leaders, was fuelled by immense personal ambition but who could not learn from her mistakes. Sadly, the journey Gillard took to the summit deprived her of some of the skills and the sense of legitimacy she needed to fully inhabit the role she had sought so desperately.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15588/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Shaun Carney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the middle of the 2012 winter, an influential supporter of Julia Gillard laid out for me the intricacies of the Labor caucus’ power structures, the labour movement’s web of personal antagonisms and…Shaun Carney, Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/156002013-06-27T20:30:24Z2013-06-27T20:30:24ZGrattan on Friday: Kevin Rudd and the narrative of the house<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26331/original/xmz6nnb9-1372319536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Kevin Rudd wants to mess with Tony Abbott's head.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In March 2010 PM Kevin Rudd faced off against opposition leader Tony Abbott at the National Press Club in a debate about health policy.</p>
<p>Three months later Rudd would be deposed by his own party. One criticism by colleagues was that he’d become obsessed with health, tramping around the nation’s hospitals with his eye off other areas.</p>
<p>But on that March day he trounced Abbott who, as a former health minister, should have been competitive. The incident underscores the strength of Rudd as campaigner.</p>
<p>Rudd yesterday was challenging Abbott to debate him on all sorts of issues. “We are going to be debating debt and deficit at the National Press Club”, he said.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_tMtsTKsOvE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>We’re back to the future in more than just the fact of Rudd’s resurrection.</p>
<p>You can feel the busyness in the air, as he’s being briefed to the eyeballs.</p>
<p>Politically, he’s messing with his opponent’s mind, as well as directing the voters’ gaze away from the government’s problems to the sunny uplands of vision and optimism.</p>
<p>Never mind that half a dozen ministers jumped off the frontbench (without even having to be pushed) when he defeated Julia Gillard, or that Craig Emerson, Peter Garrett and Stephen Smith - who remains Defence Minister - have announced this week they will quit parliament.</p>
<p>Such departures are hardly votes of confidence in his powers as electoral saviour. Smith, who holds a marginal seat in West Australia, said he could not take another three years after serving two decades. But earlier this term, when Gillard’s leadership was in trouble and Rudd was considered unacceptable, Smith’s name was canvassed as a possible compromise candidate. Presumably at that stage he intended to stay on.</p>
<p>Any other leader would be discombobulated by the shambles. But not Rudd. He is being very consultative because he is aware of all that old criticism of his style, but at heart he’s a one-man band.</p>
<p>He can also live in a parallel universe. Who else would have exhorted MPs, in his first remarks in the House as restored PM, to “let us try, just try, to be a little kinder and gentler with each other in the further deliberations of this parliament”?</p>
<p>Nevertheless, he sailed through yesterday’s question time – the last of the hung parliament – with little trouble.</p>
<p>No, he wouldn’t provide an election date but strongly indicated he’d vary Gillard’s September 14. He said had to talk with colleagues, and consider the local government referendum (which has its own timetable requirements), the early-September G20 meeting in St Petersburg, and the clash with Yom Kippur.</p>
<p>Whatever the considerations, he probably wants a date chosen by him not her. Anyway, why wouldn’t he give the Liberals, who’ve been making their arrangements around the date Gillard so conveniently announced, a more uncertain environment? The speculation is that an August date is possible - but that would mean ditching the referendum.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1392&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1392&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26335/original/wjmv5j29-1372320075.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1392&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>He brushed off attacks on his integrity, over breaking his pledge not to challenge Gillard, by simply turning the tables, pointing to Abbott’s statements about Malcolm Turnbull when the latter was opposition leader. “I think it’s not a time for pots calling kettles black”.</p>
<p>The Liberals have a mountain of negative character references about Rudd from Labor colleagues who have previously unloaded on him. The grabs are devastating.</p>
<p>But the question is: has the public factored that in? After all, Rudd has been sky high in the opinion polls well after many of these things were said.</p>
<p>If those lines have lost their bite, the opposition will have to be careful about dwelling on them excessively.</p>
<p>Rudd yesterday declared there has been too much negativity – that Australians are looking for “a positive vision”. Gillard was always painting Abbott as Mr Negativity; the pitch had some success but she was a poor messenger. Rudd should be able to drive the point home more forcefully (with the qualification that Abbott knows he has a problem and has been working on the positives).</p>
<p>Mark Latham as Labor leader used to trot out the “ladder of opportunity” as his storyline. Rudd’s narrative, which got a major workout yesterday, is that of the house.</p>
<p>The Labor party, he said, wants to build the house up. “It takes time, brick by brick, laying the foundations, setting the walls, installing the roof. This is how we see the task of nation building.”</p>
<p>Even defence and emergency management are part of the house story. “These are all about how we maintain the securty of the house. We are building the walls to make sure they are robust against those threats which may come against us”.</p>
<p>The roof is for the protection of all – including the disabled, the sick, the pensioners.</p>
<p>But Abbott’s politics “is about not building the house up. His comfort zone is tearing the house down”.</p>
<p>Get used to the house, a simple political metaphor in a country big on home ownership.</p>
<p>Rudd’s strategy is about making people feel good about themselves and their nation, having them think on what is going well, even while some things need improving, and seeking to neutralise Abbott’s exploitation of their discontents.</p>
<p>He’ll also promote the idea of “new” more constructive politics, which elevates the discourse into something more civil and constructive, seeking to cast Abbott as practicing aggressive “old” politics. This picks up on community disillusionment with the way politics has been operating especially in the period of the hung parliament.</p>
<p>The public opinion polls and the parties’ own tracking will be important for both sides in formulating their tactics as the election nears. This week’s huge change in Labor has opened something of a vacuum. We don’t know whether people will be cynical about Rudd’s duplicity and less enamoured when they see him day to day, or whether they will be (and stay) as enthusiastic as ever about the man they didn’t want thrown out.</p>
<p>In other words, has Rudd Mark 2 returned to power coated with teflon? If he has, the Coalition will have to adapt its tactics quickly.</p>
<p>Rudd is talking buzz words and ideas – energy, engaging with young people and “cooking with gas”, politicians working together rather than shouting at each other all the time.</p>
<p>He’s creating a sense of momentum. The new ministry is expected today; the swearing in will be Monday. He’ll talk to Victorian premier Denis Napthine about the Gonski funding ASAP. Can he clinch a deal where Gillard failed? Apparently Rudd is now quite keen on Gonski despite some earlier speculation that he wasn’t.</p>
<p>He plans to fulfil Gillard’s commitment to visit Indonesia for leadership talks next week. She was accused of making the trip a political exercise, even though it is part of a regular dialogue. If he goes Rudd will be able to put a more “statesman” frame around it; he may also emerge appearing to have “done something” on boats (whether or not it amounts to anything substantial).</p>
<p>The boats issue is one of the most difficult policy challenges he has. In search of a solution, he meanwhile lectures Abbott about the need for the opposition leader to get briefed.</p>
<p>Another challenge is dealing with the business community. He has sent the signal that he wants to improve what has become a very bad relationship. Even if there were a superficial improvement, however, it is hard to see big or small business doing anything but being polite, while waiting in the expectation of a change of government.</p>
<p>What success the Rudd government has in selling its economic credentials to the wider community will partly depend on how well new Treasurer Chris Bowen performs. Wayne Swan has been widely seen as an ineffective salesman of Australia’s economic successes. Bowen versus Joe Hockey, who has been presenting more sharply in recent months, will be an interesting match up.</p>
<p>Around Labor, one of the big questions is whether Rudd will be be different second time round. A little, no doubt – anyone who’s been to political hell and back will have learned a bit.</p>
<p>Has he changed fundamentally? Probably not. But then, for Labor’s purposes just now, he probably does not need to have remade himself. If, between now and the election, Labor had a reprise of Kevin 07 that would suit it just fine.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=614&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=614&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=614&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=771&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=771&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/26332/original/3p3gjbr8-1372319560.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=771&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15600/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In March 2010 PM Kevin Rudd faced off against opposition leader Tony Abbott at the National Press Club in a debate about health policy. Three months later Rudd would be deposed by his own party. One criticism…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155722013-06-27T04:44:17Z2013-06-27T04:44:17ZRudd’s return marks the victory of opportunist politics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26286/original/3zjsz6vm-1372302625.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ultimately, it was Julia Gillard's failure to find a 'narrative' to weave her policies together that cost her the Labor leadership to a more opportunistic Kevin Rudd.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The morning Julia Gillard was deposed as Australia’s prime minister many of the British newspapers carried a picture of her <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2348746/Julia-Gillard-LOSES-leadership-contest-challenging-old-rival-Kevin-Rudd.html">knitting a present</a> for the future heir to the British (and presumably) Australian throne. </p>
<p>There was something very sad in this image. How had Gillard, once attacked for living in a house with an <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/Spike/Gillard-bares-all/2005/01/23/1106415457103.html">empty fruit bowl</a>, come to this?</p>
<p>Watching a coup via distant internet is bizarre. The ABC news site carried a series of mindless tweets, presumably because the blogosphere can tolerate anything but silence. My Facebook messages breathed indignation, with most of my friends convinced Gillard was the victim of misogynist bullying.</p>
<p>I would be more convinced of this had Gillard herself not come to power by a similar, if less anticipated, coup. It is hard to accept the thesis that her fall was due to the machinations of nasty male machine politicians when she was made prime minister by similar means. She has also endorsed one of the less impressive party apparatchiks for the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3785427.htm">seat of Batman</a> despite Labor’s commitment to finding more safe seats for women.</p>
<p>It is certainly true, as Anne Summers has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-needs-more-women-at-the-top-20130612-2o48q.html">elegantly demonstrated</a>, that Gillard was constantly assailed by a viciousness that was clearly infused by deep-seated - indeed, pathological - sexism. It is also true that the concerted campaign of the Murdoch press and some of our shock jocks to deny her legitimacy has few parallels in recent history: although Whitlam faced a similar campaign of vituperation.</p>
<p>But when you remember that Gillard was elected leader because a majority of the Labor caucus believed she had a better chance of winning in 2010 than Rudd did, it is difficult to blame those caucus members who applied a similar logic three years later in deposing her. Remember, too, that she and Rudd combined their support to overthrow Kim Beazley as Labor leader. It was also her performance as deputy prime minister that convinced her colleagues she was a better bet than Rudd.</p>
<p>The real cause for regret is that just as she found it difficult to give a convincing explanation of how her policies would differ from Rudd’s, his return is equally without any commitment to a significant shift in vision for Australia. Should he bring forward the election date to August he can only run on the record of the current government, while simultaneously explaining why its leader needed to be replaced. This is the same dilemma Gillard faced last time.</p>
<p>The polls that caucus read three years ago let them down, leading to a hung parliament (which Gillard managed with remarkable political skill). My hunch is that caucus has similarly misread current polls. Many people will have a vague sense of satisfaction that what was portrayed as a stab in the back has now been avenged, but will still vote to change the government.</p>
<p>In the end Rudd may save a few seats in Queensland and NSW, but he cannot save the government. The most interesting question about Rudd is whether he will stay on as Leader of the Opposition, and indeed whether his remaining colleagues would want him. One wonders what deals may have been done to win over Bill Shorten, whose role as <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/bill-shorten-the-man-who-knifed-two-prime-ministers/story-fnho52ip-1226670420184">Labor kingmaker</a> has now been further cemented.</p>
<p>One larger political question revolves around whether Rudd can lift the Labor vote sufficiently to deny Abbott control of the Senate. Whether a post-election ALP will have the emotional and intellectual resources to re-imagine themselves as a convincing party of government is also up for debate.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Gillard and Rudd shared an unwillingness to maintain a convincing progressive position when put under pressure. Rudd gave way on climate change after <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/greatest-moral-challenge-turns-out-to-be-rudds-dearest-folly-20100428-tscw.html">declaring</a> it the “greatest moral challenge of our time”, and Gillard has steadily shifted her <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/gillard-survives-caucus-backlash-over-asylum-seeker-crisis/story-e6frfkp9-1226669428926">stance on asylum seekers</a> without at any time showing genuine empathy for people willing to risk their lives to seek refuge.</p>
<p>Rudd’s <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national-news/kevin-rudd-declares-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage/story-fncynjr2-1226647193111">belated support</a> for same-sex marriage reeks of the same opportunism as Gillard’s opposition to it does. In contemporary Australia no Labor leader can survive by sounding as if they belong to the Greens, who have been consistent on all of these issues. But one wonders what a leader with the reckless courage of a Gough Whitlam would identify with the ALP’s politics in 2013.</p>
<p>The final undoing of Gillard was not, I believe, due to misogyny, but rather to her inability to articulate a clear vision of where she wanted to lead Australia. Her tragedy was that many of the pieces were there in the actual policies she pursued, but she never found a narrative that weaved them together.</p>
<p>Gillard has much of which to be proud, but she never communicated the personal warmth and commitment that one sees in her face-to-face. Yes, this is a greater challenge for a woman, particularly perhaps for a woman on the political left who faces the implacable belief of conservatives that they have the right to govern. </p>
<p>Rudd now inherits the great dilemma of all current “left” leaders. Despite the global financial crisis it is the parties of the right who seem to have most profited from the downturn brought on by the excesses of capitalism. When he penned long articles for The Monthly, Rudd seemed prepared to grapple with this question, even perhaps to move away from the faith in market solutions which is the legacy of the Hawke/Keating years. That he reached out to business in his initial speech suggests he is not inclined to pursue the logic of his own analysis.</p>
<p>Gillard did not fall because she was a woman, but undoubtedly she encountered increased hostility because of her gender. One is reminded of the comment about actress Ginger Rogers, namely that she did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in high heels.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15572/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dennis Altman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The morning Julia Gillard was deposed as Australia’s prime minister many of the British newspapers carried a picture of her knitting a present for the future heir to the British (and presumably) Australian…Dennis Altman, Professorial Fellow in Human Security, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/153702013-06-20T20:40:21Z2013-06-20T20:40:21ZAn end to the Rudd-Gillard battle?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/25916/original/9yr9jdrg-1371705698.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">If Kevin Rudd replaces Julia Gillard as Labor leader next week, constitutional conventions dictate that he may not necessarily become prime minister again.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Julian Smith</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If <a href="http://www.news.com.au/opinion/columnists/rudds-date-with-destiny-looms/story-e6frg75f-1226666523342">some reports</a> are to be believed, Kevin Rudd will replace Julia Gillard as leader of the ALP and become prime minister again by the end of next week. This raises questions about the political and constitutional implications if such a change was to occur.</p>
<p>On the political front, Rudd’s return would be a Machiavellian triumph. Despite being dumped in 2010, Rudd has never left the forefront of Australian politics. He consistently maintained a high public profile, much to the chagrin of his political opponents within Labor: first as the country’s foreign minister, then as a backbencher after a failed leadership challenge in 2012.</p>
<p>Constantly fuelling Rudd’s prominence in the political debate was the fact that Gillard never established an election-winning lead over the opposition according to opinion polls. Opinion polls showing Rudd to be <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/going-back-to-rudd-gives-labor-a-shot-20130616-2oci7.html">more popular than Gillard</a> have been a regular feature, precipitating speculation about whether Rudd would one day return to the top job.</p>
<p>An interesting feature of the Rudd-Gillard battle is that it appears to be built on popularity rather than policy. Indeed, those who support Rudd do so because they believe he is more popular with the electorate - suggesting that there is little difference in the leaders’ policy programmes.</p>
<h2>Complexities since 2010</h2>
<p>Had Labor won a majority in its own right at the last election, a change of leader would not be so complicated. It would be a fairly straightforward process of Gillard leaving the position to Rudd, as Rudd did when Gillard challenged in 2010.</p>
<p>As it stands, Rudd can win the leadership battle of the party but - <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/labor-risks-majority-crisis-20130618-2ogwh.html">thanks to Australia’s political system</a> - may not necessarily lead the party to the election as prime minister.</p>
<p>The convention in Australian politics is that the prime minister is the leader of the party (or collection of parties and individual MPs) that holds a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. Furthermore, she or he must be able to pass supply and withstand motions of no confidence.</p>
<p>The problem for Labor now is that it relies on the support of the cross-benchers to remain in government. And there is no guarantee that the cross-benchers will support Labor if Rudd becomes prime minister.</p>
<h2>Constitutional considerations</h2>
<p>As a result, the governor-general would require Rudd to demonstrate that he had the support of the lower house. Of course, with parliament rising at the end of next week, this could be difficult. But, if Rudd was to win the leadership at the end of next week, the governor-general could recall parliament by using powers outlined in <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/xx5.html">section 5</a> of the Constitution.</p>
<p>The Rudd-led Labor would then be at the mercy of the cross-benchers. If they support Labor in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-motions-of-no-confidence-and-the-constitution-5258">no confidence motion</a>, Rudd would gain confirmation of his prime ministership. But if they vote with the opposition, Tony Abbott could be installed as caretaker prime minister until the election was held.</p>
<p>The timing of the election is also fluid, despite Gillard having named September 14 as the date earlier this year. If, in fact, Rudd was to take over, the earliest date a joint House of Representatives and Senate election could be called is <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2012/12/2013-federal-election-calender.html">August 3</a>. It would be probable that he would go for the earlier date to capitalise on the expected popularity he would enjoy immediately after taking office.</p>
<h2>A new Rudd way?</h2>
<p>Rudd would also try to distance himself from the Gillard years by breaking links with unpopular policies. For example, he could propose changes to Gillard’s centrepiece policies such as the carbon pricing scheme and school funding reform in an attempt to garner greater support from the electorate.</p>
<p>The relationship between Labor and the Greens, already frosty since Bob Brown’s retirement, would continue to deteriorate under a newly-installed Rudd. He would seek to rebuild Labor’s image as a party that could govern in its own right.</p>
<p>Despite the potential benefits some Labor MPs identify by toppling Gillard, there is a great deal of political danger in reinstalling Rudd. Aside from the constitutional questions, a number of high profile ministers have vowed to <a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/wayne-swan-peter-garrett-would-rather-lose-jobs-than-work-for-kevin-rudd/story-fnihsrf2-1226664690340">never work for Rudd</a> again. </p>
<p>While Rudd could scramble to fill ministerial positions with other MPs, voters may not have enough time to be convinced about the quality or credibility of his new team.</p>
<p>Three years and several leadership challenges later, Labor appears to be unable to move on from the Rudd-Gillard battle. But by potentially fixing a perceived weakness and replacing Gillard, Labor may open up more problems for itself at this late stage of the electoral cycle by reintroducing Rudd as leader.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15370/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If some reports are to be believed, Kevin Rudd will replace Julia Gillard as leader of the ALP and become prime minister again by the end of next week. This raises questions about the political and constitutional…Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/151832013-06-13T20:40:44Z2013-06-13T20:40:44ZGrattan on Friday: caucus members are sitting on a powder keg<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/25511/original/y78bh2ss-1371130698.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Kevin Rudd's campaigning today will be a reminder to the caucus of his popularity among people.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dave Hunt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Kevin Rudd will hit western Sydney today to do some high profile campaigning. For Labor, he would say. For the leadership, others would note.</p>
<p>Rudd will be mobbed. He’ll visit schools in the electorates of Reid and McMahon. The seats are held by a couple of loyalists, John Murphy and former minister Chris Bowen. Bowen went to the backbench after the March non-challenge but would be treasurer if if Rudd returned.</p>
<p>The former PM will talk to the kids about leadership and the like. He’ll canvass the Gonski school funding plan during his campaigning. It’s Julia Gillard’s issue of the week, and she has MPs outside schools today. Not that they’ll get coverage. The cameras only have eyes for one Labor backbencher at the moment.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yt4hdwjFpxo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Early in the year, Gillard spent the best part of a week in western Sydney, without getting out much among the people, or raking in votes. The area remains a potential disaster for Labor. Reid is on a 2.7% margin; McMahon, 7.8%. On present indications Reid is gone and McMahon problematic.</p>
<p>The media pictures coming out of Rudd’s visit will emphasise that he gets on to the ground; the not-so-subtle message will be that he could save a swag of these seats if only his caucus colleagues would swallow their pride, doubts and allegiances and restore him to his old job.</p>
<p>As Rudd’s moon face has beamed from various hustings, this has been another bad week for Gillard. Last year’s misogyny speech might have been a hit but Tuesday’s pitch to women didn’t do so well. She raised a scare about what Tony Abbott might do on abortion, only to have some on her own backbench say, in effect, they wished she hadn’t.</p>
<p>Then there was the strange affair of the men in blue ties. She was warning that under Abbott there’d be fewer women at the top (as there would under a Rudd government?) But it came out a bit crazily and was easy to send up.</p>
<p>It’s hard to know precisely how the cards fell in the confused claims, denials, apologies and confession over the offensive sexist menu referring to Gillard’s figure – let’s give a win there to Labor.</p>
<p>But one problem with I-am-woman pitch in general is that it could further alienate male voters (if that’s possible).</p>
<p>With the June 30 deadline looming, Gillard intensified her pressure on the states to get behind Gonski. The number of governments “landed” is two – NSW and the ACT – out of eight (with South Australia expected today).</p>
<p>Gillard flew to Perth and offered Liberal premier Colin Barnett an improved deal. It’s hard to see the logic of this. WA was always the state least likely to sign. She could get away with it not doing so, if Victoria and Queensland could be snared.</p>
<p>The federal government had said consistently that it wouldn’t vary its basic offer. To do so for WA complicates the situation with other states - and WA isn’t taking the bait.</p>
<p>In Perth Gillard had to endure bizarre and outrageous questioning from radio presenter Howard Sattler, who confronted her with the “rumour” that partner Tim Mathieson was gay. “But you hear it – "he must be gay, he’s a hairdresser”. … It’s not me saying it … You can confirm that he’s not?“ And so on.</p>
<p>Consider the likelihood of John Howard when PM being put under such questioning. The shock jocks simply think they can say anything about, or to, Gillard with impunity, in this case under the guise of probing "rumour” and “innuendo”.</p>
<p>With the last parliamentary sitting fortnight about to start, there are conflicting reports about the state of the leadership play. Yes, Bill Shorten is critical – but what’s in his head? When he said this week he believed the PM would lead into the election, everyone focused on why he chose the word “believe”. He keeps insisting he’s sticking with her.</p>
<p>Parliament returns on Monday against the backdrop of a Nielsen poll that morning. Caucus members are atop a powder keg. They see no fuse: Gillard won’t budge; Rudd won’t challenge. But will there be some spectacular spontaneous combustion?</p>
<p>Labor MPs aren’t the only ones on edge.</p>
<p>Watching Rudd prosecute the case against the Liberals over the sexist menu (including his call for candidate Mal Brough to give his fundraiser’s proceeds to the RSPCA) Abbott could wonder whether Rudd might, paradoxically, have more cut through on the women’s issues than has the woman.</p>
<p>The Liberals have an armoury of material against Rudd, on camera and out of the mouths of Labor figures, from the extraordinary onslaught on him in the 2012 challenge. They would also expect there’d be bitterness and even chaos after a switch.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Rudd would bring to the battle with Abbott not only his own popularity but a refreshing of the team. The replacement of the much criticised Wayne Swan with Bowen could sharpen the economic lines. Anthony Albanese, a Rudd supporter who kept his head (in both senses) in March would be deputy PM (a position Swan now holds).</p>
<p>Martin Ferguson could not be brought back, because he’s announced his retirement from parliament. But if Rudd had nous he’d twist (very hard) the arm of the well-respected John Faulkner to make a return to the frontbench, to add some credible lustre to the line up.</p>
<p>Not that a revamped frontbench would have much time to do a lot. Rudd would not necessarily dash instantly to the polls - he’d need to put his own stamp on the agenda. But the election is almost here anyway.</p>
<p>For Rudd and Abbott it would be a return bout of sorts. Abbott didn’t fight an election against Rudd but when Gillard displaced him it was also a scalp for Abbott, who had contributed to his downfall.</p>
<p>On both sides of politics they believe Rudd V Abbott would see Abbott prevail. But it would be much more interesting than Abbott V Gillard.</p>
<p>Then again, we’re getting way ahead of ourselves. We’ve yet to see a result in the Rudd V Gillard epic.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15183/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Kevin Rudd will hit western Sydney today to do some high profile campaigning. For Labor, he would say. For the leadership, others would note. Rudd will be mobbed. He’ll visit schools in the electorates…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/129822013-03-21T07:53:59Z2013-03-21T07:53:59ZExplainer: how does a leadership spill work?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21559/original/nqdh37mz-1363845226.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=2%2C2%2C997%2C664&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">No blood was spilt today in parliament, but we still had a leadership spill.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Spill image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After a <a href="https://theconversation.com/live-blog-michelle-grattan-12976">harrowing day in parliament</a>, the Labor party saw a leadership spill and Prime Minister Gillard was returned as leader.</p>
<p>The only thing was… no one contested the top spot and Julia Gillard’s name the only one on the ballot. Kevin Rudd declared at the 11th hour that <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-depth/i-wont-challenge-for-pm-rudd/story-fnhqeu0x-1226602686327">he would not stand as a candidate</a>.</p>
<p>A “spill” for most people would be something to clear up, but what was happening this afternoon behind closed doors was something quite different. </p>
<p>So how does the process of a leadership challenge work? Monash’s Zareh Ghazarian takes a look at the process behind the leadership crisis. </p>
<p><strong>What is a leadership spill and how does it work?</strong></p>
<p>A leadership spill is brought about in cases where there is disquiet and discontent about current leadership. This is something that prime minister Gillard has been dealing with for quite some time. </p>
<p>There’s been constant speculation about her leadership and of course, there’s been Rudd in the background reminding voters that he was Prime Minister, before Gillard rolled him last time. </p>
<p>So that’s what brought it on today. </p>
<p>But as for the technicalities of the spill, the prime minister convenes a meeting. The meeting is attended by all Labor members of parliament, that includes senators. All positions are then declared vacant and then they will call for nominations for leader and deputy leader of the party. </p>
<p>If they were in opposition, it would just be the opposition leader. But of course, the extra significance here is the person that becomes the leader of the governing party becomes Prime Minister.</p>
<p><strong>So how do they cast their vote? Is it a secret ballot?</strong></p>
<p>If there is more than one candidate, it is a secret ballot. There will be people appointed to be tellers, they will count the votes, it will all be done in secret and no one will know who they voted for. </p>
<p>In some famous cases of past spills, some people have said that they will vote for one person and have written that name on the ballot paper. But as they are about the throw their ballot paper in the ballot box, they cross it out and put someone else’s name on it.</p>
<p>So it’s done by secret ballot and then it’s counted, and who ever has the 50% plus one majority becomes the leader. In the 102 member Labor caucus that means at least 52 votes .</p>
<p><strong>When the vote is cast, is the leader bound to stick the result?</strong></p>
<p>If a candidate doesn’t win the majority, they will no longer be the leader and no longer prime minister. The person who does win a majority will be and they would need to be sworn in by the governor general.</p>
<p>But it’s an easy thing for parties to get around, it’s not a change in terms of numbers in the parliament, it’s just a change of personnel. So it’s not such a major problem for them.</p>
<p><strong>Does a hung parliament affect a spill?</strong></p>
<p>Well, the parliament tests that support and this will mean the incoming prime minister will need to get the assurance of all the crossbenchers that they will continue to support the party in forming government.</p>
<p>And they only have to promise the incoming leader and their party two things. First that they will vote with them on the budget and they will vote with them on motions of no confidence.</p>
<p>So as long as the incoming prime minister can guarantee their budgets will pass and they can survive no confidence motions, they can govern. And technically they don’t even have to pass any other pieces of legislation ever as long as they can get those two things done.</p>
<p><strong>So what would you see if you were a fly on the wall in caucus today?</strong></p>
<p>Well, it’s fairly unceremonious. As observers, we think there’s some great magic going on but there really isn’t.</p>
<p>Generally it’s just a very prosaic paper ballot. Each candidate is asked to make a short speech about why they should be elected. </p>
<p>And then MPs are asked to write down the name of the candidate that they want to win and put it in a box. </p>
<p>It’s very, very back to basic democracy and it certainly doesn’t have the pomp and ceremony of other sorts of electoral contests. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12982/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After a harrowing day in parliament, the Labor party saw a leadership spill and Prime Minister Gillard was returned as leader. The only thing was… no one contested the top spot and Julia Gillard’s name…Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/129702013-03-21T02:53:53Z2013-03-21T02:53:53ZCrean fires the gun on leadership: ‘I don’t want any more games’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21534/original/xyt4kh3b-1363833993.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Simon Crean has called for a spill of all leadership positions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Julia Gillard has called a ballot for the leadership at 4:30pm. Gillard announced the ballot at the start of question time. “In the meantime, give it your best shot,” she told the house.</em></p>
<p>Veteran Labor minister and former leader Simon Crean has called for Julia Gillard to declare the Labor leadership open and backed Kevin Rudd for Prime Minister.</p>
<p>Crean said if Gillard won’t call a spill, caucus members should petition for one.</p>
<p>It is reported the momentum was with Kevin Rudd. A petition immediately started to circulate around caucus. </p>
<p>He told a news conference all positions should be spilled and he would run for deputy leader.</p>
<p>Crean said Rudd – who has promised not to challenge Gillard - “has no option but to run”.</p>
<p>“I don’t want any more games.”</p>
<p>The dramatic intervention of Crean, who is Minister for Regional Australia, climaxed a week of fevered speculation and lobbying over the leadership.</p>
<p>Crean said he had spoken with the Prime Minister yesterday and today. The party was in stalemate and something needed to be done to resolve the situation.</p>
<p>He said he had told her that he’d “think about his position” if she refused to call a spill. She indicated she would not do so.</p>
<p>“I am urging Mr Rudd to put his name forward in the interests of breaking the deadlock,” he said, but “there is no ticket between me and Kevin”.</p>
<p>Declaring Labor had to become “an inclusive party”, he said its problems would not be stopped by a “revolving door of leadership”.</p>
<p>Crean said the question should not be cast as “a loss of confidence in the Prime Minister,” but the stalemate had to be broken and the “white noise” had to stop.</p>
<p>He said he would resign from the ministry if the party re-elected Gillard; he also said that he was not seeking the key job of treasurer if there was a Rudd prime ministership.</p>
<p>Crean’s dramatic action came with only hours of the current parliamentary sitting to go and as the government’s desperate effort to get a compromise on its controversial media bills collapsed, handing more ammunition to the Rudd forces.</p>
<p>As Labor pulled the bills to avoid defeat on the floor of the House, Rudd’s supporters intensified their frantic efforts to muster the numbers for the lunge at Gillard’s leadership, before parliament breaks for seven weeks.</p>
<p>Before Crean’s dramatic statement, some sources in the Rudd camp worried that they were several votes short, with the arm twisting continuing.</p>
<p>Crean’s 1pm news conference was his second for the day. Earlier he sent dual messages to a party that has seemed resolutely determined to descend further into self-destruction.</p>
<p>At that doorstop, he said the Rudd forces should back off. But he also made it clear that Gillard needed to step up to the plate and perform better.</p>
<p>Crean used to be a rusted on Gillard supporter.</p>
<p>In a clear criticism of Gillard’s performance at his first doorstop, Crean said Labor’s problem was not just about changing leaders or sticking with a leader, but was more fundamental. It needed to get back to what the party not just stood for but how it advanced the interests of the nation.</p>
<p>“We have got to understand that the strength of the Labor party in the past has been when it has been bold with its initiatives… and it has taken the nation forward,” he said.</p>
<p>In a backhander to both Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan, he said the Labor party had always operated most effectively when “it has been inclusive, when it has sought consensus. Not when it sought division. Not when it has gone after class warfare.”</p>
<p>Was he disappointed in Gillard’s leadership? “No,” he said but immediately added “I am of the view that there are certain decisions we could’ve handled better”.</p>
<p>As Labor figures kept adding fuel to their burning party Queensland backbencher Graham Perrett turned on chief government whip Joel Fitzgibbon, who is one of Rudd’s chief numbers men. </p>
<p>Fitzgibbon, always outspoken, has been particularly frank this week in acknowledging the leadership talks sweeping the party. He has also piled the pressure on colleagues by saying the idea of a leadership change between the budget and the September 14 election was “a silly concept”. In other words his message has been, get it done now.</p>
<p>Perrett said: “There can be no gap between the whip and the prime minister”.</p>
<p>“If [Fitzgibbon] can’t be 100% loyal to the prime minister, he can’t draw a wage as a whip, obviously. He needs to get on with the job of looking after the prime minister’s back. That’s what he’s paid for and if he’s not doing that after five o’clock today, well then obviously he needs to look at his situation,” he said.</p>
<p>“If he can’t be loyal to the boss, well he should resign.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12970/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Julia Gillard has called a ballot for the leadership at 4:30pm. Gillard announced the ballot at the start of question time. “In the meantime, give it your best shot,” she told the house. Veteran Labor…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.