2012 is looking more like the year of a snap election, once K R knifes J G in the back.


Tough choices would confront a recycled PM Rudd



LET'S cut to the chase. What would political life be like if Kevin Rudd became PM again? Would there be a quick election? What would happen to the present frontbench? Would the carbon tax be scrapped, maybe before it started? How would Labor-Green relations be?

Obviously, answers must be speculative. But the questions will be occupying the minds of ALP MPs weighing up the future.

Rudd's previous inclination was to go to an election quickly but he has changed his mind to favour the long haul. He is popular now but support can be so easily squandered. Many in Labor would want him to try to consolidate, to re-establish some public trust in the government. A 2012 poll would also have the disadvantage of throwing elections for the lower and upper houses out of sync.

Anything but an instant election would mean big frontbench changes. Anyway, there would almost certainly be resignations after Gillard was deposed. The Rudd camp assumes these would be to the backbench rather than from Parliament - if the latter happened, the government would probably quickly fall.

Rudd and Wayne Swan, bitter about each other, surely could not work together as PM and Treasurer. (Mind you, if Swan toughed things out and managed to hang on to the deputyship, it would be an interesting situation.) Gillard would presumably go to the backbench. Realpolitik would mean Rudd and Bill Shorten would have to find an accommodation.

Just as, when she became PM, Gillard had to take over most of the Rudd agenda, so he would have to continue most of hers (which was his). There has been speculation he might scrap the carbon and mining taxes. Almost certainly he would not.

To walk away from either would further confuse and disillusion voters already fed up with Labor; it would be seen as the worst of expediency. He would probably, however, propose some changes to the carbon plan to lessen its impact until other countries took effective action.

Last year there was talk about how the crossbench independents whose support underpins the government would react to a leadership change. It was sometimes said they were a buttress for Gillard. But as her leadership has slipped, the independents' views are being regarded as more irrelevant. It's assumed they'd have to live with whoever was Labor leader and that they'd be unlikely to pull the pin (despite Rob Oakeshott's bolshie comments). They could, however, become more difficult (as Andrew Wilkie already is). On the other hand, one crossbencher not aligned with the government might become closer. In another of those strange twists in politics, Rudd and Bob Katter, who recently founded the Australian Party, have a personal rapport.

Rudd PM would be urged by some colleagues to more sharply differentiate the government from the Greens. The Liberal claim that Bob Brown is the real PM is biting in the electorate, according to Labor MPs.

Having a stoush with the Greens would not be particularly dangerous for Rudd. As an election approaches, the allies-of-convenience will be increasingly finding ways to promote their separate brands; the ascension of Rudd would accentuate this.

With all the history and the complications, Rudd could hardly expect a honeymoon second time round. His start would be rocky. But he'd be there and in his mind he would be vindicated.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/tough-choices-would-confront-a-...

The independents are utter idiots. This is the so called stable government they forced on us.

Liberals have been a stable government/party more so than labor for a very long time.

Hurry up and implode labor. We will be coming for the greens next.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:48am:




I think that was before the wilkie deal fell off the track..

Dnarever wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:48am:



So a minority government without control of the Senate. That would make T A a lame duck P M

cods wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:54am:



I desire a government more reflective of Australia. A Labor or Liberal Majority is not a reflection.

A hung parliament where many have influence is.

Greens and Independents are at their best within a minority government.

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 8:00am:




Yet both old party leaders are more unpopular than popular. That means Australians will not reward either with majority government.

So to do this, the old parties must be put last and second to last when voting.

cods wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:54am:



That is the reality we voted for and can work very well with a slightly less obnoxious opposition and more external honesty and respect from areas like the media.

Who knows the media may be less likely to want to work so hard to destabilise a conservative government and it would be nice to see the shoe on the other foot but traditionally Labor are more genuine in opposition and tend to make decisions for the country's benefit - they typically are not an opposition of the No No No NO persuasion.

You could not argue that the Liberal opposition are not the most obstructive opposition Australia has ever had with the least concern for Australias position even worse that the Fraser opposition.

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 8:06am:




25% of the voting public don't support the old parties ... this before LibLab CSG destruction of people's lives and homes in the cities of Sydney and Brisbane and states of  NSW, Vic, WA and Qld ... is an election issue. 

i am positive this 25% will swell towards 50%