Rudd and Abbott: saviour of their parties

August 17, 2016
Written by: The AIM Network
45 Replies

By 2353NM

Two of the three ex-prime ministers who were deposed by their own political party have been in the news in recent weeks. Kevin Rudd requested backing from the Coalition government to bid for the Secretary-General position at the United Nations and Tony Abbott claimed there are factional divisions in the NSW Liberal Party. On face value, both men are using the media to further their own ends. To observers of Australian politics, this really shouldn’t be a surprise.

While Rudd’s campaign was probably always going to be unsuccessful according to others, on the face of it he does offer the UN some demonstrated leadership ability in trying circumstances – such as the GFC when Australia was the only developed economy that continued to expand during the late 2000’s. Certainly he also has some less redeeming character traits as well – some of which were aired in public when the ALP deposed him as prime minister.

Abbott made a number of claims about factions and backroom lobbying in the NSW Liberal Party, despite Prime Minister Turnbull’s claim to the contrary.

In spite of Abbott probably airing the ‘dirty linen’ in public for his own perceived advantage, he is correct. In any organisation there is usually a difference of opinions on a host of issues, with some being convinced that policy and practice should change to reflect current society/meet differing expectations and so on, while others will suggest that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Sometimes the discussion on a combined position is amicable; mostly it isn’t. It also stands to reason that if you can influence parliamentarians – a benefit of being a member of a political party – you could have a better chance of ensuring a particular law of the land reflects some advantage to your business or personal position – so the stakes can be pretty high. Abbott, to his credit, did ban lobbyists from holding organisational positions in the Liberal Party (suggesting there could be a conflict of interest) early in his prime ministership:

One of Mr Abbott’s first acts as prime minister was to rule that party officials could not lobby his government, a move mirrored by then-NSW premier Barry O’Farrell.

Rudd too changed the rules of the ALP after he was brought back to the prime ministership in 2013. Effectively he ensured that there was only a small number of opportunities to change the leadership; the Daily Telegraph claimed at the time that it was an attempt to shore up Rudd’s leadership; probably a pretty good assumption.

In a similar way, Fairfax Media claims Abbott’s statement:

… comes as Mr Abbott’s conservative-right faction struggles with increasing irrelevance in NSW, where the moderate faction has become dominant, led by key figures such as party president Trent Zimmerman and lobbyist Michael Photios.

So the rule changes orchestrated by both men could also be construed as attempts to maintain or increase their personal longevity and power within their respective political parties. On the face of it, there is nothing new to see here. However, lets dig a little deeper, there are almost certainly unintended consequences in play here. Rudd and Abbott really are pretty similar. Both men were ruthless as opposition leaders. Rudd was seen as being in touch with the majority of the population and an example of generational change from the days of John Howard and his long term government. ‘I’m Kevin from Queensland and I’m here to help’ went down in folklore and contrasted sharply with Prime Minister Howard’s last term where his ideological position on workplace rights lost him a lot of support.

Abbott became opposition leader during the initial debate around a mechanism for the pricing of carbon emissions. While later demonstrated to be completely false, visions of $100 lamb roasts and entire cities being shut down due to the impacts of the ‘carbon tax’ that Abbott would rescind on day one certainly grabbed the mind of the public.

On top of that, both men were ‘stop gap’ leaders. Rudd was ‘unaligned’ according to the ALP’s system of factions and took over from Kim Beasley who is often cited as the best prime minister Australia never had. Beasley accepted the position of ambassador to the United States when offered the position by Rudd and survived the transition to an Abbott government seemingly unscathed. As he was ‘unaligned’, Rudd really didn’t have the support of any of the established factions of the ALP, having arrived in federal parliament via the Diplomatic Corps and some time as Queensland ALP premier Wayne Goss’ Chief of Staff. (Goss was the person who led the ALP to victory after a number of decades of predominately National Party rule by Bjelke-Petersen and others). Rudd’s time as prime minister commenced late in 2007; his popularity ratings sank to a position where the ALP decided to remove him from power in June 2010. Some of the reasons for his drop in popularity were supposed to be because of his management style, the actions he took during the Global Financial Crisis, refugee processing and the lack of progress on emissions trading legislation. The ALP reinstated Rudd into the prime ministerial role in 2013 and he lost the subsequent election to Abbott.

Abbott won a party room leadership showdown in 2009 by one vote over his predecessor Malcolm Turnbull. The leadership contest was opened due to differences over climate change policy – Turnbull was prepared to support the Rudd government’s Emissions Trading Scheme; Abbott wasn’t.

The Coalition under Abbott and the ALP under Gillard obtained 72 seats each in the 2010 election. According to contemporary media reports, Abbott begged the three independent cross-benchers to allow him to become prime minister – even his opposition to emissions trading was negotiable according to Tony Windsor, one of the independent MP’s involved in the discussions:

“But … Tony Abbott on a number of occasions said that he would do absolutely anything to gain government – anything,” Mr Windsor told Sky News.

“One could draw a conclusion from that that if we pulled a tight rein and said ‘Well, you’ve got government if you put a carbon price on’ he would agree with it – that was the inference from his statements.”

Mr Windsor said he had made a “character judgment” about Mr Abbott after the discussions.

“He actually begged for the job … (he said) ‘I will do anything to get this job’,” Mr Windsor said.

It seems both Rudd and Abbott are the personalities who will do anything to reach a goal or shore up a position. Now let’s look at why this is relevant in August 2016. When Rudd achieved victory over Howard and Abbott achieved victory over Rudd, they were in the pantheon of glory within their respective political parties. As the opinion polls went south (and the other side was suddenly looking like a winner), there was a reassessment of their capabilities; the respective party rooms came to the conclusion that their leadership was untenable in the long term.

Potentially a believer in the axiom to keep your friends close and your enemies closer, Rudd was kept in the Cabinet by his successor Julia Gillard. History suggests that Gillard didn’t keep Rudd close enough, leading to a challenge in 2013 where Rudd was re-installed as prime minister. One of the things Rudd did to the ALP rules subsequent to his re-installation was to institute a requirement that the parliamentary leader of the ALP be elected by polls of not only those in parliament, but the broader ALP membership. Rudd claimed he decided to: ‘

“… democratise the party for the future.

”Each of our members now gets to have a say, a real say in the future leadership of our party. Decisions can no longer simply be made by a factional few,” he told reporters in Balmain.

While the statement is true enough – all ALP members now have a vote on the leadership of the Federal Parliamentary Party – subsequent to the 2013 election Anthony Albanese won the ‘ALP members’ vote and Bill Shorten won the ‘parliament’ vote which was held due to an election defeat. Obviously, while all ALP members are equal, Caucus has more say.

As we all know, Abbott was rolled by his party room in 2015 (it couldn’t be because it seemed to work so well when the ALP did it, could it?) and for a while Malcolm Turnbull and the Coalition’s approval figures, according to the opinion polls, were stratospheric. Accordingly, Shorten and the ALP’s polling figures went down by a similar level.

The benefit Shorten inherited from Rudd was that it would have taken his resignation, an election loss or a 75% vote of no confidence by the ALP Caucus to topple Shorten. If there were any ALP ‘bedwetters’ (to coin a phrase) in late 2015, they probably realised the hurdles required to change the opposition leader were almost insurmountable and decided (publicly anyway) to grin and bear it. It’s now also history that Shorten went on to lead the ALP to the 2016 election, suffering a narrow loss which was a better than expected result.

Abbott’s recent disclosure regarding factions in the Liberal Party probably didn’t surprise anyone. Turnbull’s claim last October that the Liberal Party in NSW was one big happy family was treated with the ridicule it probably deserved by those that should have some idea of the reality (the video above was published widely when it occurred). In the words of The Guardian:

“Tony Abbott has warned that lobbyists holding positions as power brokers in the Liberal party creates the potential for corruption.”

and

“Some of these factional warlords have a commercial interest in dealing with politicians whose preselections they can influence,” Abbott said.

He said this created a “potentially corrupt position”. “The best way to see off the factionalists is to open up the party — the more members we’ve got, the harder it is for the factional warlords to control.

“There are people not on the state executive who caucus regularly on the phone and face-to-face with people who are on the executive to try and get pre-cooked outcomes.”

Abbott said he wanted to empower the membership by letting them choose Liberal candidates for parliament. The call for more democratic preselection is likely to re-open a debate between moderates and conservatives over how candidates are chosen.

Abbott’s opinion seems to be that if the process of preselection within the Liberal Party is opened up, and dare we say made more ‘democratic’, the party will preselect those whose opinions are shared by the majority of the Liberal Party members in the electorate. He may believe that more ‘conservative’ people would be elected but there is no guarantee that outcome would occur, just as Rudd’s changes to the ALP rules didn’t save his leadership.

Rudd was probably trying to cement himself as the parliamentary leader of the ALP in 2013. Abbott is probably trying to ensure that more ‘conservative’ Liberal Party members are given a chance to enter parliament ensuring that he has a greater number of like-minded people around him, improving the chances of a second ‘Abbott era’.

Both interventions, however, have the effect of opening up both major political parties in areas where they have been accused of pandering to sectional interests. While Abbott obviously thinks he can influence ‘conservative’ Liberals to a greater extent than the more numerous ‘moderate’ faction, it is not a fait accompli that the ‘moderate’ majority would send more ‘conservatives’ to Canberra.

Rudd’s ‘reforms’ to the ALP leadership have made it more democratic (all members have some say) and made it easier for a new leader to develop and implement a strategy designed to improve the position of the ALP at the next election. As the leader is not judged on instant results (because the bar for changing leaders is set at a high level of discontent), a new leader and the party organisation have a reasonable expectation that the strategy will, if somewhere in the ballpark, be implemented in full. Shorten and the ALP’s opinion poll popularity certainly played a part in the demise of Abbott, who went from hero to zero in about two years. The election results also demonstrate the success of the ALP sticking to one leader and strategy for a considerable period of time.

Wouldn’t it be a delicious irony if Rudd and Abbott’s seemingly self-serving interventions into the operation of their respective political parties make the two major parties more democratic and ensure rank and file party members have a genuine say in their respective party’s destiny?

This article was originally published on The Political Sword

For Facebook users, The Political Sword has a Facebook page:
Putting politicians and commentators to the verbal sword

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Post Views: 209

45 comments

Login here

Register here

Matters NotAugust 17, 2016 at 9:53 pm

Accurate and insightful! On the money and all that. An excellent summary.

Matters NotAugust 17, 2016 at 10:38 pm

While Rudd can certainly be ‘compared’ with Abbott, perhaps a better comparison might be with Peta Credlin.

While Rudd was ‘driving the government bus’, Credlin was obviously a very interested observer who was also ‘driving the opposition bus’ at the same time. That they were both supremely arrogant in their dealings with ‘underlings’ should not be disregarded. Perhaps Credlin learnt too many things from Rudd?

But maybe the wrong ones? At least as far as political success was concerned.

Bighead1883August 17, 2016 at 10:50 pm

Matters Not August 17, 2016 at 10:38 pm

I`ve seen total crap passed as commentary but yours is pure diarrhea

So compare Abbott to this>

Kevin Rudd`s main achievements (2007 – 2010)
 Ratified the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change on his first day in office.
 Apologised on behalf of the parliament and the government to indigenous people
removed from their families under previous policies.
 Managed the Australian economy through the Global Financial Crisis, injecting
$77 billion into the Nation Building for Recovery Plan, guaranteeing bank deposits
in Australian banks and other financial institutions, and playing a leading role in
G20 responses to the international economic crisis.
 Withdrew Australian troops from Iraq while remaining committed to the NATO
intervention in Afghanistan.
 Replaced the previous government’s Work Choices policy with a new national
workplace relations system overseen by Fair Work Australia, a new national
workplace relations tribunal.

Character
 ‘Rudd describes himself as a ‘very determined bastard’.’
– Glenn Milne, Sunday Mail, 3/12/07
 ‘Sydney 2GB’s Philip Clark, Rudd’s university contemporary, says he has an
ambition for power that transcends any politician Clark has ever met.’
– Paul Kelly, Weekend Australian Magazine, 27/10/07
 ‘In politics Rudd was a surprise – beneath his smooth exterior was a pulsating
energy, drive and ambition.’
– Paul Kelly, Weekend Australian Magazine, 27/10/07
 ‘Despite his manner, impeccable diction and unfashionable looks, Rudd makes
himself available to people of all backgrounds to speak on any number of topics –
perhaps a fall back to time spent working in overseas embassies, the political and
public service career that followed, or simply the challenge of being a good local
member.’
– Tony Koch & Annabelle McDonald, Weekend Australian, 2/12/06
 ‘His faith is absolutely central to everything he does… it’s not a piece of political
manoeuvring that he comes here. It’s absolutely because he believes in God and
that Christ is important to his life.’
– Tony Koch & Annabelle McDonald, Weekend Australian, 2/12/06
Did you know?
 First Prime Minister to be born after the Second World War.
 Rudd has cited German pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer as a personal inspiration.
Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran minister who was executed by the Nazis in 1945 for
his involvement in a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler.
 The only Prime Minister to speak fluent Chinese (Mandarin). He also speaks some
Swedish.
 Rudd is a descendent of transported convict Mary Wade, who had over three
hundred relatives when she died and is considered as one of Australia’s
‘matriarchs’.
 At the age of 15, wrote to Prime Minister Gough Whitlam asking for advice on
how to become involved in a diplomatic career. Whitlam suggested Rudd learn a
foreign language, which he did.
 Was present at Tiananmen Square in Beijing in 1989, shortly before the incident
which saw protesters killed. (Source: Canberra Times, 6 October 2007)

jantoniusAugust 18, 2016 at 6:44 am

This is a misleading and jaundiced article on Rudd, who deserves much more credit than the miserly concessions here.

It is wrong on the problems Rudd had in the polls, after the heavy and deceitful campaign by mining billionaires.
Whatever the problems Ministers had with his leadership ‘style’, he was still stabbed in the back.

Without his initiatives as PM at the time of the GFC, this small country might still be in an economic abyss.

It accepts that his 2013 changes to leadership challenges have been a big improvement for stability and accountability, but by claiming that he did it only to shore up his regained leadership. Rudd returned because they had no chance of winning the 2013 election under Gillard, and were heading for a major wipeout. This itself would have been very unfair, as Gillard’s government was generally progressive and achieved a great deal in very tight circumstances. But we should all know the gormless malleability of the electorate. Rudd’s return limited the damage. If he lost he was not going to hang around.

Turnbull’s refusal to endorse him for UN Sec. Gen. was the mean and partisan decision of a largely worthless individual – whose lack of passion for the job of PM, and the responsibilities it entails, contrasts so starkly with Rudd’s drive and capacities.

Rudd might have ‘temperament’ problems; and he did definitely work to undermine Gillard’s leadership – but complicity with the trashing of his reputation is unedifying and unfair.

paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 8:03 am

Rudd was in fact undermined by the right- faction for trying to curb its influence with federal Labor after the debacles in NSW and QLD.

He did a fantastic job rescuing this country from the neolib austerity measures Abbott later sought to impose, in response to the Global Meltdown.

No, there is a lot of difference between the erratic but basically honest Kevin Rudd and the malignant Tony Abbott.

Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 8:05 am

jantonius August 18, 2016 at 6:44 am

Well said,and a far more honest account than the article`s contributer

Trish CorryAugust 18, 2016 at 9:25 am

Comparing Rudd to Abbott should belong in the satire section.

This article is a huge stretch of the imagination, attempting to force correlation where there is none. Just because two former leaders have been in the news lately for very separate reasons, this does not mean there is any connection whatsover. It is like saying, Rudd eats vegemite for breakfast and vegemite is healthy and that is why Abbott is focused on fitness.

The author obviously has very little insight or has done no research on Labor Party Reforms (including the leadership reform).

The author is also missing that Rudd is very respected globally, even if the author has little regard for him. I would expect Australia looks to other world leaders like a tiny island of dummkopfs for not endorsing Rudd for the candidacy. It reeks of self-revenge.

The author is also not cognisant of the fact that the Libs are looking at internal parting preselection and voting reform changes because they are bleeding membership and their funds are low. Abbott has probably reflected on how Labor’s reforms do in fact give stability to leadership and are good reforms.

Labor led the way on this, as Labor consistently leads Liberals on all reforms, internally, locally, federally and nationally.

cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 9:52 am

Rudd did cause a bit of chaos within the ranks and made some poor decisions but to evaluate him against Cretin or Abbott is a bloody joke
A great deal of Rudds downfall, other than the huge attacks on him in regard to MRRT with the Miners millions, and Copenhagen came from within the ALP factional heavies.
It pains me to say it, but this was a case of Labor sacrificing their own, and anyone in Labor knew Kev was a goner after the Faulkner Review and his determination to implement it, almost in full.
Neither Left or Right Factions wanted full disclosure of the Faulkner Review and called together a handful of MPs from both factions to start undermining and attacking Rudd.Those within the Party know who the main culprits in the white anting to protect the factions are ,
Changes would have reduced the AWU/SDA influence, and the dinosaurs didn’t want that .
The review of Labor’s election performance, carried out by a panel consisting of former state premiers Steve Bracks and Bob Carr as well as Senator John Faulkner,
It includes public recommendations on party reform but large parts of the review are being kept secret.

Backing the report’s calls for party reform, Mr Rudd said all parts of the review should be made public, and fired a salvo at the factional leaders responsible for his downfall.

“Frankly I think it’s in the wider interests of the party and the broader community if at an appropriate time they’re made available for full and informed public discussion,” he said.

“It’s important that we see reform of this party of which I’ve been a member now for 30 years.

“To remain a viable party of the people we do need to undertake fundamental reforms, not least of which is the elimination of the power of factional leaders and factions in general.”

Kevin Rudd says Labor risks becoming the third wheel of Australian politics unless it moves to undermine powerful factions within the party.

Outlining his plans for sweeping reform within the ALP ahead of next weekend’s national conference, Mr Rudd called for the party’s 35,000-strong branch membership to directly elect the national executive and its secretary, as well as directly elect all delegates to the ALP national conference.
Mr Rudd’s proposals go further than the changes recommended by a post-election review by the party’s elder statesmen, and they are also more radical than changes Prime Minister Julia Gillard has proposed for discussion at the national conference.
But the former prime minister told Sky News factions are running rampant and the party risks fading away if nothing is done to curb their power.
“We need to be the party of the reforming centre of Australian politics,” he said.
“The party of working people, the party of small business, the party of nation-building, the party for the future.
“We have that in our DNA, but I think our organisational structure pulls us away from that.
“[What is needed is] a net transfer of power away from the factions to all those folk who go out and do the hard work for us come election time.” Kevin Rudd
“We need to be the party of the reforming centre of Australian politics,” he said.
It seems some here listened too much to the MSM hype and bought it hook line and sinker ,

FFS, even Abbott at least got this right

“”Kevin Rudd is particularly conscious of the role that the faceless men have played, first in his own political execution,……… Mr Abbott said.

If nothing else, Kevin saving us from the GFC, BER, bringing The troops home from Iraq and the Apology.Rank and file participation in Leadership etc ,which clearly separate the do something Kevin from the misfit Abbott/Credlin who it seems efforts are made to compare him with by some
Beat the MSM line ,,,,

p.s.
Nurses, stay off my computer

Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 10:02 am

Eight years ago this week Kevin Rudd spoke to and for the Australian people about what he termed “this blemished chapter in our national history”.

It was his first act as prime minister – opening federal parliament with the word Aboriginal and Islander people and a legion of non-Indigenous Australians had longed to hear: sorry.

It was an apology for “the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians”.

The speech – searing, challenging, cathartic and healing – spoke to the pain deep inside all Indigenous people
The words of the speech – searing, challenging, cathartic and healing – spoke to the pain deep inside all Indigenous people and especially those for whom this apology was intended: the members and survivors of the stolen generations.

As Rudd pointed out in his speech, between 1910 and 1970, between 10% and 30% of Indigenous children were forcibly taken from their families. Now was the time to offer amends.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/10/reflections-on-the-apology-kevin-rudd-in-conversation-with-stan-grant

paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 10:02 am

Thank you people. You are restoring my faith in human nature by the moment.

helvityniAugust 18, 2016 at 10:09 am

Even with his shortcomings (we all have those), Rudd was a million times a better man and a better leader than Abbott.

What did Abbott achieve….???

Michael TaylorAugust 18, 2016 at 10:10 am

Oh how it could have been a better country now if Rudd had have called the DD election when he had the chance in 2011. The only reason he didn’t was because he wanted to stay true to his word that he’d run his full three-year term. With Labor sky high in the polls it is likely that he could have wiped the Coalition off the map had he called an election. (Yes, this is hypothetical of course).

Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 10:42 am

Where`s Abbott`s comparison to this ?

Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd joins Awaken for a candid interview on the seventh anniversary of the Apology to members of the Stolen Generations and revisits the issue of compensation.
http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/video/401027651599/Awaken-S2015-Ep1-Kevin-Rudd-Stolen-Generations

Or please show me a comparison of Abbott to this
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqGi9b_WcAAYjFu.jpg

paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 10:47 am

Yes. That last few months…Lenore Taylor in “Shitstorm” claims he was and remained blown out after returning from the Copenhagen global reform conference at the end of 2009.. didn’t quite know how to pace himself properly and burned out and factional probs within Labor and Abbott and the Murdoch press on his back would not have helped.

Terry2August 18, 2016 at 11:10 am

“Abbott, to his credit, did ban lobbyists from holding organisational positions in the Liberal Party”

Abbott also banned his ministers and those of the National Party from appearing on the ABC’s Q&A program.

We are a liberal democracy so Abbott can do what he likes with his party arrangements but when the Prime Minister of the day starts telling elected members that they cannot appear on our national broadcaster we are edging towards the sort of fascism we are now seeing in Turkey.

helvityniAugust 18, 2016 at 11:14 am

Turnbull is already starting to look like a yesterday’s man, and he has hardly started….

townsvilleblogAugust 18, 2016 at 11:17 am

I enjoyed reading this article however Rudd’s claim that he democratized the ALP would not pass muster. When the majority of 30,000 ALP members could be outvoted by 100 politicians the party still has a long way to go to really democratize the party. The AWU/SDA alliance that dominates the Queensland Branch of the party governs conservatively making just a little progressive policy. Both major parties need real democratization and the first to do so on a one vote, one value system will gain respectability from the public. Rudd essentially gave members less than half a vote for the leaders position, the members should get a vote not only on the leader but also their Deputy, and also on the President and Vice President of the Branch of the party organization, so it these positions would not remain the play thing of the AWU/SDA alliance. I don’t recall any leadership ballot following this year’s election?

Some will argue the case with me as they may feel that they have entrenched positions either organizationally or parliamentary but for the long term good of the ALP I truly believe it should morph into a people’s party, still with union influence, but influence from ‘all’ unions and not under the dominance of just a couple of right wing anti-member unions.

townsvilleblogAugust 18, 2016 at 11:49 am

On the comparison between Rudd and Abbott, there simply is no comparison. Rudd was a ‘doer’ Abbott was a ‘preacher’ Rudd got things done, Abbott talked about doing thinks, that were never achieved. The neo-lib austerity policies that this composite conservative govt has handed to Australia is probably not felt very much by people employed in well paying jobs, but I can assure you the poor have felt the ugly hand of austerity, hard. Rudd’s compassion for the weak, sick vulnerable Australians will always be looked upon gratefully by us, the Abbott broken promises at cutting the services that the vulnerable rely upon will also not be forgotten in the long term.

Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 12:17 pm

townsvilleblog August 18, 2016 at 11:17 am

Rudd2 = he took over control of the NSW Labor Party and began the reforms which still go on today throughout all States

cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 12:52 pm

“townsvilleblog”
“I don’t recall any leadership ballot following this year’s election?”
Party rules allow for nomination for Leadership for 7 days .

“Under party rules, if Labor loses an election there is an automatic leadership ballot.
But despite the lack of a final result, Mr Shorten will be renominated as leader at a special caucus today.
He is expected to be the only candidate, but under the party’s rules the nomination could take seven days to be finalised”
No challenging candidate for Leadership , Shorten elected unopposed .

cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 12:57 pm

“Rudd essentially gave members less than half a vote for the leaders position, the members should get a vote not only on the leader but also their Deputy, and also on the President and Vice President of the Branch of the party organization, so it these positions would not remain the play thing of the AWU/SDA alliance.”
No, that is not what Rudd wanted.
He wanted the Faulkner Review implemented and that is where both Left and Right factions started to undermine him, fearing losing control. and they won

Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comAugust 18, 2016 at 2:27 pm

Bloody hell – you rusted on Labor supporters don’t give up, do you! The article was not a comparison of the political legacies of the two men, but a comparison of their actions in changing their internal party rules in order to try and shore up their own positions (in both cases unsuccessfully). Rudd was, in many respects, a great leader, but clearly not such a good manager. Abbott was neither, but relied on numbers and a supposed party loyalty (now forever shattered) that would never throw a sitting Coalition PM out of office.

Personally I thought the article made some interesting points. My eyesight might not be perfect, but at least it’s not myopic.

jimhazAugust 18, 2016 at 4:06 pm

Some interesting comments in this presentation while Rudd was still PM the first time around.

http://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/ideas-and-society/the-rudd-government-what-has-gone-wrong

wamAugust 18, 2016 at 7:19 pm

not so hypothetical michael the rabbott had rejected the carbon price arranged by wong and turdnbull for howard and aussies for climate change were in a huge majority. They would have bolted in. The rabbott sacked and maybe the loonies who supported him may have got a bath as well.
gillard had NO choice she couldn’t have the kevin o’lemon resign but she put him as far away as possible(funny but that was the rabbott’s solution to keep his cabinet female free) as FM.
You read too much into democritisation of the alp because rudd created an exclusion process preventing the pollies from sacking and electing a new leader but the process made certain the members could NOT elect a leader.
ps notice baird sent $2.3 billion for trains overseas because the koreans were 25% cheaper Surely wage-earner pay tax and pay GST and spend in aust.
The germans and the japanese put in sub offers less than half the frogs $50 billion
What sort of people are these libs???
Does anyone wonder what labor is doing???

Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 7:51 pm

What (Steve Laing – makeourvoiceheard.com @August 18, 2016 at 2:27 pm) said.

BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:08 pm

It seems at least you read and understood the piece Steve Laing!

Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:21 pm

Well it’s the ‘meaning’ I gave to the ‘piece’ as well. Not that I want to rain ….

BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:27 pm

LOL – yes MN, but at least the ‘meaning’ you gave bore some relationship to the ‘piece’. Some of the responses here are scarily similar (but polar opposite) to what I read in other places posted by rabid right-whingers in support of their own pre-conceived ideas… 😉

Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:34 pm

Yep Bacchus, if you start from a ‘theory’ then the ‘facts’ flow thick and fast. At least in your own mind.

Then there’s the problem of the ‘meaning’ you give to such ‘facts’. But I won’t go on.

As an aside, you would have noticed that the line of attack bore a strange resemblance. When will they ever learn?

Michael TaylorAugust 18, 2016 at 11:40 pm

Goodness, a few of the old-timers here tonight. I might have to open the cellar. ?

Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:49 pm

What’s with this ‘old-timers’ slur? LOL. Give me a break, I’ve only been retired for 17 years.

And I will admit, the ‘spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak’ Not that I am ‘into’ Matthew 26:4. Just sayin …

But the ‘flesh’ and the patience is certainly getting very much weaker.

BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:54 pm

Oi! Who are you calling old? 😀

Michael TaylorAugust 19, 2016 at 12:03 am

I meant as in the old team. But you guys knew that. ?

jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 12:12 am

What’s to understand?
The piece is yet another slur on Rudd, as have been some of the comments.
The likening of Rudd to Abbott is just childish prattle. On any topic.
It does not take Labor partisanship to see that.
Also it seems that while some want to make comments, they are not interested enough in the truth about how the ALP leadership voting arrangements were finalised. It was not Rudd’s choice.
And surely he must get credit for opening leadership selection to membership.
Rather than just the Daily Telegraph ‘interpretation’ of Rudd. Seriously, that is a reputable reference?
Have people forgotten the filthy Murdoch campaign against Rudd and his Government?

Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 12:15 am

@Steve Laing
Bloody hell – you rusted on Labor supporters don’t give up, do you! …..Personally I thought the article made some interesting points. My eyesight might not be perfect, but at least it’s not myopic

@Baccus: Some of the responses here are scarily similar (but polar opposite) to what I read in other places posted by rabid right-whingers in support of their own pre-conceived ideas… ?

Are you saying that because someone who supports Labor is criticising the content of the article, that it is actually an impossibility that the criticisms are warranted? Are you saying that some are unable to apply critical thinking, critique the article from a range of view points, apply a rational view, review and comment on the absence of facts, all because they support Labor?

Clearly, the same as the Author, you both have no idea about the Labor reforms; nor do you seem to be across the long standing debate within the Liberal party for reform (including reform for preselection of women). To state that both men have/are doing leadership reform to shore up their own leadership security completely lacks any substance.

Instead of being so insulting and implying that the people criticising are mindless sheep who can’t think for themselves, perhaps you could entertain us with your defence of the article; considering you rate yourself as one of the few impartial thinkers commenting, and not shortsighted like the rest of us here. Please…..bestow us with an education about the Australian Labor Party and the Australian Liberal Party preselection and leadership reforms and then defend that there is a correlation between these reforms and the security / advancement of leadership for both Rudd and Abbott.

BacchusAugust 19, 2016 at 12:47 am

Thanks Trish – I rest my case!

Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 12:50 am

Well I guess that is easier than you defending your argument that people are just blindly whinging and the article actually has some valid point to it.

BacchusAugust 19, 2016 at 1:03 am

Trish – the ‘attacks’ on the article have very little reference to the article. I (and probably 2353NM) share your support for the Labor party and disdain for all things Liberal, especially Abbott, but guess what – that’s NOT what the article’s about!

2353NM has taken two disparate approaches to internal political manoeuvrings within different parties and loosely tied them together. That the ‘rusted-on’ brigade chooses to read things into this that aren’t there cannot be blamed on the author – MN is right when he speaks of ‘meanings taken’ from words ‘spoken’. The ‘rusted-on’ brigade here has ‘arced-up’ purely because their beloved party has been challenged. I see it all the time with the mindless Abbott supporters…

jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 1:22 am

Bacchus,
Complete bullshit.
The article is about likening Rudd to Abbott, as much as it is about anything.
And, once again, it does not take a Labor partisan to see that.

Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 1:35 am

I’m so over the rusted on empty rhetoric about party (particularly Labor party) people on this site. The rusted on / blind sheep / Labor hack nonsense It is continuously used an excuse on this site for those who simply want to rubbish others, but can’t/won’t defend their opposing stance. The dumbing down of Australia has brought us Hanson, it can stop today! If people aren’t prepared to put up, then they really should as the saying goes….shut up. Fair enough, critique another comment, but the lameness of making the excuse it is because this person is a supporter of this party or that party, really just needs to stop. It is getting tiresome. If you think a person’s comment is empty and baseless, then use facts to refute it.

2353August 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

@steve laing (18/8 @ 2.27pm – Thanks for the short and correct interpretation of the article. The sooner those that strongly support any cause (not only a political party) realise that people have the right to an alternative opinion – the better off we’ll all be. Two eyes are better than one.

@jantonius (19.8 @ 1.22am. Go back and read the article again before you sprout bullshit in the comments. The article doesn’t say that Abbott and Rudd are alike. It does say they used similar tactics to (unsuccessfully to date) shore up their own positions – but what the hell would I know, I only wrote it.

@bacchus (19/8 @ 1.03am). You’re correct in both the intent of the article and the major party I believe would make the better government ‘if an election was held tomorrow’. By the way what were you doing up that late?

jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 11:06 pm

Just above:
“The article doesn’t say that Abbott and Rudd are alike. It does say they used similar tactics to (unsuccessfully to date) shore up their own positions – but what the hell would I know, I only wrote it.”

The article:

“However, lets dig a little deeper… Rudd and Abbott really are pretty similar. Both men were ruthless as opposition leaders.”.

And there’s plenty more of that drivel.

What you would know is a minor curiosity.

Bighead1883August 19, 2016 at 11:10 pm

2353 August 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

The clarity of your article is as much a discombobulation as the explanations you reply to

Try and loosely tie in Menzies and Whitlam next

Matters NotAugust 19, 2016 at 11:15 pm

Look above.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Hear no …

Bighead1883August 19, 2016 at 11:18 pm

Trish Corry August 19, 2016 at 1:35 am

Jolly well said Trish and I won`t ask why you`re up late

++++++++Look above https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqOaHaRUIAANCTr.jpg

Return to home page

Login here Register here

Matters NotAugust 17, 2016 at 9:53 pm

Accurate and insightful! On the money and all that. An excellent summary.
Matters NotAugust 17, 2016 at 10:38 pm

While Rudd can certainly be ‘compared’ with Abbott, perhaps a better comparison might be with Peta Credlin.

While Rudd was ‘driving the government bus’, Credlin was obviously a very interested observer who was also ‘driving the opposition bus’ at the same time. That they were both supremely arrogant in their dealings with ‘underlings’ should not be disregarded. Perhaps Credlin learnt too many things from Rudd?

But maybe the wrong ones? At least as far as political success was concerned.
Bighead1883August 17, 2016 at 10:50 pm

Matters Not August 17, 2016 at 10:38 pm

I`ve seen total crap passed as commentary but yours is pure diarrhea

So compare Abbott to this>

Kevin Rudd`s main achievements (2007 – 2010)
 Ratified the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change on his first day in office.
 Apologised on behalf of the parliament and the government to indigenous people
removed from their families under previous policies.
 Managed the Australian economy through the Global Financial Crisis, injecting
$77 billion into the Nation Building for Recovery Plan, guaranteeing bank deposits
in Australian banks and other financial institutions, and playing a leading role in
G20 responses to the international economic crisis.
 Withdrew Australian troops from Iraq while remaining committed to the NATO
intervention in Afghanistan.
 Replaced the previous government’s Work Choices policy with a new national
workplace relations system overseen by Fair Work Australia, a new national
workplace relations tribunal.

Character
 ‘Rudd describes himself as a ‘very determined bastard’.’
– Glenn Milne, Sunday Mail, 3/12/07
 ‘Sydney 2GB’s Philip Clark, Rudd’s university contemporary, says he has an
ambition for power that transcends any politician Clark has ever met.’
– Paul Kelly, Weekend Australian Magazine, 27/10/07
 ‘In politics Rudd was a surprise – beneath his smooth exterior was a pulsating
energy, drive and ambition.’
– Paul Kelly, Weekend Australian Magazine, 27/10/07
 ‘Despite his manner, impeccable diction and unfashionable looks, Rudd makes
himself available to people of all backgrounds to speak on any number of topics –
perhaps a fall back to time spent working in overseas embassies, the political and
public service career that followed, or simply the challenge of being a good local
member.’
– Tony Koch & Annabelle McDonald, Weekend Australian, 2/12/06
 ‘His faith is absolutely central to everything he does… it’s not a piece of political
manoeuvring that he comes here. It’s absolutely because he believes in God and
that Christ is important to his life.’
– Tony Koch & Annabelle McDonald, Weekend Australian, 2/12/06
Did you know?
 First Prime Minister to be born after the Second World War.
 Rudd has cited German pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer as a personal inspiration.
Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran minister who was executed by the Nazis in 1945 for
his involvement in a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler.
 The only Prime Minister to speak fluent Chinese (Mandarin). He also speaks some
Swedish.
 Rudd is a descendent of transported convict Mary Wade, who had over three
hundred relatives when she died and is considered as one of Australia’s
‘matriarchs’.
 At the age of 15, wrote to Prime Minister Gough Whitlam asking for advice on
how to become involved in a diplomatic career. Whitlam suggested Rudd learn a
foreign language, which he did.
 Was present at Tiananmen Square in Beijing in 1989, shortly before the incident
which saw protesters killed. (Source: Canberra Times, 6 October 2007)
jantoniusAugust 18, 2016 at 6:44 am

This is a misleading and jaundiced article on Rudd, who deserves much more credit than the miserly concessions here.

It is wrong on the problems Rudd had in the polls, after the heavy and deceitful campaign by mining billionaires.
Whatever the problems Ministers had with his leadership ‘style’, he was still stabbed in the back.

Without his initiatives as PM at the time of the GFC, this small country might still be in an economic abyss.

It accepts that his 2013 changes to leadership challenges have been a big improvement for stability and accountability, but by claiming that he did it only to shore up his regained leadership. Rudd returned because they had no chance of winning the 2013 election under Gillard, and were heading for a major wipeout. This itself would have been very unfair, as Gillard’s government was generally progressive and achieved a great deal in very tight circumstances. But we should all know the gormless malleability of the electorate. Rudd’s return limited the damage. If he lost he was not going to hang around.

Turnbull’s refusal to endorse him for UN Sec. Gen. was the mean and partisan decision of a largely worthless individual – whose lack of passion for the job of PM, and the responsibilities it entails, contrasts so starkly with Rudd’s drive and capacities.

Rudd might have ‘temperament’ problems; and he did definitely work to undermine Gillard’s leadership – but complicity with the trashing of his reputation is unedifying and unfair.
paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 8:03 am

Rudd was in fact undermined by the right- faction for trying to curb its influence with federal Labor after the debacles in NSW and QLD.

He did a fantastic job rescuing this country from the neolib austerity measures Abbott later sought to impose, in response to the Global Meltdown.

No, there is a lot of difference between the erratic but basically honest Kevin Rudd and the malignant Tony Abbott.
Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 8:05 am

jantonius August 18, 2016 at 6:44 am

Well said,and a far more honest account than the article`s contributer
Trish CorryAugust 18, 2016 at 9:25 am

Comparing Rudd to Abbott should belong in the satire section.

This article is a huge stretch of the imagination, attempting to force correlation where there is none. Just because two former leaders have been in the news lately for very separate reasons, this does not mean there is any connection whatsover. It is like saying, Rudd eats vegemite for breakfast and vegemite is healthy and that is why Abbott is focused on fitness.

The author obviously has very little insight or has done no research on Labor Party Reforms (including the leadership reform).

The author is also missing that Rudd is very respected globally, even if the author has little regard for him. I would expect Australia looks to other world leaders like a tiny island of dummkopfs for not endorsing Rudd for the candidacy. It reeks of self-revenge.

The author is also not cognisant of the fact that the Libs are looking at internal parting preselection and voting reform changes because they are bleeding membership and their funds are low. Abbott has probably reflected on how Labor’s reforms do in fact give stability to leadership and are good reforms.

Labor led the way on this, as Labor consistently leads Liberals on all reforms, internally, locally, federally and nationally.
cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 9:52 am

Rudd did cause a bit of chaos within the ranks and made some poor decisions but to evaluate him against Cretin or Abbott is a bloody joke
A great deal of Rudds downfall, other than the huge attacks on him in regard to MRRT with the Miners millions, and Copenhagen came from within the ALP factional heavies.
It pains me to say it, but this was a case of Labor sacrificing their own, and anyone in Labor knew Kev was a goner after the Faulkner Review and his determination to implement it, almost in full.
Neither Left or Right Factions wanted full disclosure of the Faulkner Review and called together a handful of MPs from both factions to start undermining and attacking Rudd.Those within the Party know who the main culprits in the white anting to protect the factions are ,
Changes would have reduced the AWU/SDA influence, and the dinosaurs didn’t want that .
The review of Labor’s election performance, carried out by a panel consisting of former state premiers Steve Bracks and Bob Carr as well as Senator John Faulkner,
It includes public recommendations on party reform but large parts of the review are being kept secret.

Backing the report’s calls for party reform, Mr Rudd said all parts of the review should be made public, and fired a salvo at the factional leaders responsible for his downfall.

“Frankly I think it’s in the wider interests of the party and the broader community if at an appropriate time they’re made available for full and informed public discussion,” he said.

“It’s important that we see reform of this party of which I’ve been a member now for 30 years.

“To remain a viable party of the people we do need to undertake fundamental reforms, not least of which is the elimination of the power of factional leaders and factions in general.”

Kevin Rudd says Labor risks becoming the third wheel of Australian politics unless it moves to undermine powerful factions within the party.

Outlining his plans for sweeping reform within the ALP ahead of next weekend’s national conference, Mr Rudd called for the party’s 35,000-strong branch membership to directly elect the national executive and its secretary, as well as directly elect all delegates to the ALP national conference.
Mr Rudd’s proposals go further than the changes recommended by a post-election review by the party’s elder statesmen, and they are also more radical than changes Prime Minister Julia Gillard has proposed for discussion at the national conference.
But the former prime minister told Sky News factions are running rampant and the party risks fading away if nothing is done to curb their power.
“We need to be the party of the reforming centre of Australian politics,” he said.
“The party of working people, the party of small business, the party of nation-building, the party for the future.
“We have that in our DNA, but I think our organisational structure pulls us away from that.
“[What is needed is] a net transfer of power away from the factions to all those folk who go out and do the hard work for us come election time.” Kevin Rudd
“We need to be the party of the reforming centre of Australian politics,” he said.
It seems some here listened too much to the MSM hype and bought it hook line and sinker ,

FFS, even Abbott at least got this right

“”Kevin Rudd is particularly conscious of the role that the faceless men have played, first in his own political execution,……… Mr Abbott said.

If nothing else, Kevin saving us from the GFC, BER, bringing The troops home from Iraq and the Apology.Rank and file participation in Leadership etc ,which clearly separate the do something Kevin from the misfit Abbott/Credlin who it seems efforts are made to compare him with by some
Beat the MSM line ,,,,

p.s.
Nurses, stay off my computer
Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 10:02 am

Eight years ago this week Kevin Rudd spoke to and for the Australian people about what he termed “this blemished chapter in our national history”.

It was his first act as prime minister – opening federal parliament with the word Aboriginal and Islander people and a legion of non-Indigenous Australians had longed to hear: sorry.

It was an apology for “the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians”.

The speech – searing, challenging, cathartic and healing – spoke to the pain deep inside all Indigenous people
The words of the speech – searing, challenging, cathartic and healing – spoke to the pain deep inside all Indigenous people and especially those for whom this apology was intended: the members and survivors of the stolen generations.

As Rudd pointed out in his speech, between 1910 and 1970, between 10% and 30% of Indigenous children were forcibly taken from their families. Now was the time to offer amends.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/10/reflections-on-the-apology-kevin-rudd-in-conversation-with-stan-grant
paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 10:02 am

Thank you people. You are restoring my faith in human nature by the moment.
helvityniAugust 18, 2016 at 10:09 am

Even with his shortcomings (we all have those), Rudd was a million times a better man and a better leader than Abbott.

What did Abbott achieve….???
Michael TaylorAugust 18, 2016 at 10:10 am

Oh how it could have been a better country now if Rudd had have called the DD election when he had the chance in 2011. The only reason he didn’t was because he wanted to stay true to his word that he’d run his full three-year term. With Labor sky high in the polls it is likely that he could have wiped the Coalition off the map had he called an election. (Yes, this is hypothetical of course).
Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 10:42 am

Where`s Abbott`s comparison to this ?

Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd joins Awaken for a candid interview on the seventh anniversary of the Apology to members of the Stolen Generations and revisits the issue of compensation.
http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/video/401027651599/Awaken-S2015-Ep1-Kevin-Rudd-Stolen-Generations

Or please show me a comparison of Abbott to this
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqGi9b_WcAAYjFu.jpg
paulwalterAugust 18, 2016 at 10:47 am

Yes. That last few months…Lenore Taylor in “Shitstorm” claims he was and remained blown out after returning from the Copenhagen global reform conference at the end of 2009.. didn’t quite know how to pace himself properly and burned out and factional probs within Labor and Abbott and the Murdoch press on his back would not have helped.
Terry2August 18, 2016 at 11:10 am

“Abbott, to his credit, did ban lobbyists from holding organisational positions in the Liberal Party”

Abbott also banned his ministers and those of the National Party from appearing on the ABC’s Q&A program.

We are a liberal democracy so Abbott can do what he likes with his party arrangements but when the Prime Minister of the day starts telling elected members that they cannot appear on our national broadcaster we are edging towards the sort of fascism we are now seeing in Turkey.
helvityniAugust 18, 2016 at 11:14 am

Turnbull is already starting to look like a yesterday’s man, and he has hardly started….
townsvilleblogAugust 18, 2016 at 11:17 am

I enjoyed reading this article however Rudd’s claim that he democratized the ALP would not pass muster. When the majority of 30,000 ALP members could be outvoted by 100 politicians the party still has a long way to go to really democratize the party. The AWU/SDA alliance that dominates the Queensland Branch of the party governs conservatively making just a little progressive policy. Both major parties need real democratization and the first to do so on a one vote, one value system will gain respectability from the public. Rudd essentially gave members less than half a vote for the leaders position, the members should get a vote not only on the leader but also their Deputy, and also on the President and Vice President of the Branch of the party organization, so it these positions would not remain the play thing of the AWU/SDA alliance. I don’t recall any leadership ballot following this year’s election?

Some will argue the case with me as they may feel that they have entrenched positions either organizationally or parliamentary but for the long term good of the ALP I truly believe it should morph into a people’s party, still with union influence, but influence from ‘all’ unions and not under the dominance of just a couple of right wing anti-member unions.
townsvilleblogAugust 18, 2016 at 11:49 am

On the comparison between Rudd and Abbott, there simply is no comparison. Rudd was a ‘doer’ Abbott was a ‘preacher’ Rudd got things done, Abbott talked about doing thinks, that were never achieved. The neo-lib austerity policies that this composite conservative govt has handed to Australia is probably not felt very much by people employed in well paying jobs, but I can assure you the poor have felt the ugly hand of austerity, hard. Rudd’s compassion for the weak, sick vulnerable Australians will always be looked upon gratefully by us, the Abbott broken promises at cutting the services that the vulnerable rely upon will also not be forgotten in the long term.
Bighead1883August 18, 2016 at 12:17 pm

townsvilleblog August 18, 2016 at 11:17 am

Rudd2 = he took over control of the NSW Labor Party and began the reforms which still go on today throughout all States
cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 12:52 pm

“townsvilleblog”
“I don’t recall any leadership ballot following this year’s election?”
Party rules allow for nomination for Leadership for 7 days .

“Under party rules, if Labor loses an election there is an automatic leadership ballot.
But despite the lack of a final result, Mr Shorten will be renominated as leader at a special caucus today.
He is expected to be the only candidate, but under the party’s rules the nomination could take seven days to be finalised”
No challenging candidate for Leadership , Shorten elected unopposed .
cornlegendAugust 18, 2016 at 12:57 pm

“Rudd essentially gave members less than half a vote for the leaders position, the members should get a vote not only on the leader but also their Deputy, and also on the President and Vice President of the Branch of the party organization, so it these positions would not remain the play thing of the AWU/SDA alliance.”
No, that is not what Rudd wanted.
He wanted the Faulkner Review implemented and that is where both Left and Right factions started to undermine him, fearing losing control. and they won
Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comAugust 18, 2016 at 2:27 pm

Bloody hell – you rusted on Labor supporters don’t give up, do you! The article was not a comparison of the political legacies of the two men, but a comparison of their actions in changing their internal party rules in order to try and shore up their own positions (in both cases unsuccessfully). Rudd was, in many respects, a great leader, but clearly not such a good manager. Abbott was neither, but relied on numbers and a supposed party loyalty (now forever shattered) that would never throw a sitting Coalition PM out of office.

Personally I thought the article made some interesting points. My eyesight might not be perfect, but at least it’s not myopic.
jimhazAugust 18, 2016 at 4:06 pm

Some interesting comments in this presentation while Rudd was still PM the first time around.

http://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/ideas-and-society/the-rudd-government-what-has-gone-wrong
wamAugust 18, 2016 at 7:19 pm

not so hypothetical michael the rabbott had rejected the carbon price arranged by wong and turdnbull for howard and aussies for climate change were in a huge majority. They would have bolted in. The rabbott sacked and maybe the loonies who supported him may have got a bath as well.
gillard had NO choice she couldn’t have the kevin o’lemon resign but she put him as far away as possible(funny but that was the rabbott’s solution to keep his cabinet female free) as FM.
You read too much into democritisation of the alp because rudd created an exclusion process preventing the pollies from sacking and electing a new leader but the process made certain the members could NOT elect a leader.
ps notice baird sent $2.3 billion for trains overseas because the koreans were 25% cheaper Surely wage-earner pay tax and pay GST and spend in aust.
The germans and the japanese put in sub offers less than half the frogs $50 billion
What sort of people are these libs???
Does anyone wonder what labor is doing???
Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 7:51 pm

What (Steve Laing – makeourvoiceheard.com @August 18, 2016 at 2:27 pm) said.
BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:08 pm

It seems at least you read and understood the piece Steve Laing!
Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:21 pm

Well it’s the ‘meaning’ I gave to the ‘piece’ as well. Not that I want to rain ….
BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:27 pm

LOL – yes MN, but at least the ‘meaning’ you gave bore some relationship to the ‘piece’. Some of the responses here are scarily similar (but polar opposite) to what I read in other places posted by rabid right-whingers in support of their own pre-conceived ideas… 😉
Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:34 pm

Yep Bacchus, if you start from a ‘theory’ then the ‘facts’ flow thick and fast. At least in your own mind.

Then there’s the problem of the ‘meaning’ you give to such ‘facts’. But I won’t go on.

As an aside, you would have noticed that the line of attack bore a strange resemblance. When will they ever learn?
Michael TaylorAugust 18, 2016 at 11:40 pm

Goodness, a few of the old-timers here tonight. I might have to open the cellar. ?
Matters NotAugust 18, 2016 at 11:49 pm

What’s with this ‘old-timers’ slur? LOL. Give me a break, I’ve only been retired for 17 years.

And I will admit, the ‘spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak’ Not that I am ‘into’ Matthew 26:4. Just sayin …

But the ‘flesh’ and the patience is certainly getting very much weaker.
BacchusAugust 18, 2016 at 11:54 pm

Oi! Who are you calling old? 😀
Michael TaylorAugust 19, 2016 at 12:03 am

I meant as in the old team. But you guys knew that. ?
jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 12:12 am

What’s to understand?
The piece is yet another slur on Rudd, as have been some of the comments.
The likening of Rudd to Abbott is just childish prattle. On any topic.
It does not take Labor partisanship to see that.
Also it seems that while some want to make comments, they are not interested enough in the truth about how the ALP leadership voting arrangements were finalised. It was not Rudd’s choice.
And surely he must get credit for opening leadership selection to membership.
Rather than just the Daily Telegraph ‘interpretation’ of Rudd. Seriously, that is a reputable reference?
Have people forgotten the filthy Murdoch campaign against Rudd and his Government?
Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 12:15 am

@Steve Laing
Bloody hell – you rusted on Labor supporters don’t give up, do you! …..Personally I thought the article made some interesting points. My eyesight might not be perfect, but at least it’s not myopic

@Baccus: Some of the responses here are scarily similar (but polar opposite) to what I read in other places posted by rabid right-whingers in support of their own pre-conceived ideas… ?

Are you saying that because someone who supports Labor is criticising the content of the article, that it is actually an impossibility that the criticisms are warranted? Are you saying that some are unable to apply critical thinking, critique the article from a range of view points, apply a rational view, review and comment on the absence of facts, all because they support Labor?

Clearly, the same as the Author, you both have no idea about the Labor reforms; nor do you seem to be across the long standing debate within the Liberal party for reform (including reform for preselection of women). To state that both men have/are doing leadership reform to shore up their own leadership security completely lacks any substance.

Instead of being so insulting and implying that the people criticising are mindless sheep who can’t think for themselves, perhaps you could entertain us with your defence of the article; considering you rate yourself as one of the few impartial thinkers commenting, and not shortsighted like the rest of us here. Please…..bestow us with an education about the Australian Labor Party and the Australian Liberal Party preselection and leadership reforms and then defend that there is a correlation between these reforms and the security / advancement of leadership for both Rudd and Abbott.
BacchusAugust 19, 2016 at 12:47 am

Thanks Trish – I rest my case!
Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 12:50 am

Well I guess that is easier than you defending your argument that people are just blindly whinging and the article actually has some valid point to it.
BacchusAugust 19, 2016 at 1:03 am

Trish – the ‘attacks’ on the article have very little reference to the article. I (and probably 2353NM) share your support for the Labor party and disdain for all things Liberal, especially Abbott, but guess what – that’s NOT what the article’s about!

2353NM has taken two disparate approaches to internal political manoeuvrings within different parties and loosely tied them together. That the ‘rusted-on’ brigade chooses to read things into this that aren’t there cannot be blamed on the author – MN is right when he speaks of ‘meanings taken’ from words ‘spoken’. The ‘rusted-on’ brigade here has ‘arced-up’ purely because their beloved party has been challenged. I see it all the time with the mindless Abbott supporters…
jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 1:22 am

Bacchus,
Complete bullshit.
The article is about likening Rudd to Abbott, as much as it is about anything.
And, once again, it does not take a Labor partisan to see that.
Trish CorryAugust 19, 2016 at 1:35 am

I’m so over the rusted on empty rhetoric about party (particularly Labor party) people on this site. The rusted on / blind sheep / Labor hack nonsense It is continuously used an excuse on this site for those who simply want to rubbish others, but can’t/won’t defend their opposing stance. The dumbing down of Australia has brought us Hanson, it can stop today! If people aren’t prepared to put up, then they really should as the saying goes….shut up. Fair enough, critique another comment, but the lameness of making the excuse it is because this person is a supporter of this party or that party, really just needs to stop. It is getting tiresome. If you think a person’s comment is empty and baseless, then use facts to refute it.
2353August 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

@steve laing (18/8 @ 2.27pm – Thanks for the short and correct interpretation of the article. The sooner those that strongly support any cause (not only a political party) realise that people have the right to an alternative opinion – the better off we’ll all be. Two eyes are better than one.

@jantonius (19.8 @ 1.22am. Go back and read the article again before you sprout bullshit in the comments. The article doesn’t say that Abbott and Rudd are alike. It does say they used similar tactics to (unsuccessfully to date) shore up their own positions – but what the hell would I know, I only wrote it.

@bacchus (19/8 @ 1.03am). You’re correct in both the intent of the article and the major party I believe would make the better government ‘if an election was held tomorrow’. By the way what were you doing up that late?
jantoniusAugust 19, 2016 at 11:06 pm

Just above:
“The article doesn’t say that Abbott and Rudd are alike. It does say they used similar tactics to (unsuccessfully to date) shore up their own positions – but what the hell would I know, I only wrote it.”

The article:

“However, lets dig a little deeper… Rudd and Abbott really are pretty similar. Both men were ruthless as opposition leaders.”.

And there’s plenty more of that drivel.

What you would know is a minor curiosity.
Bighead1883August 19, 2016 at 11:10 pm

2353 August 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

The clarity of your article is as much a discombobulation as the explanations you reply to

Try and loosely tie in Menzies and Whitlam next
Matters NotAugust 19, 2016 at 11:15 pm

Look above.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Hear no …
Bighead1883August 19, 2016 at 11:18 pm

Trish Corry August 19, 2016 at 1:35 am

Jolly well said Trish and I won`t ask why you`re up late

++++++++Look above https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqOaHaRUIAANCTr.jpg

Dutton is a man of little compassion and…

Compost: a climate action solution

The River Road

Balancing eSafety and Online Censorship, 2024

Ignorant. Woke.

Violence in our churches

Treasuring the moment: a military tattoo

Top water experts urge renewed action to secure…

Rudd and Abbott: saviour of their parties

Like this:

Related Articles

45 comments

Leave a Reply

The Harman Undertaking

New Zealand is under siege by the Atlas Network

Share this:

Like this:

Related Articles

45 comments

Leave a Reply