They Just Keep on Giving

This blogger was truly concerned that a change in government might mean no more fun.... No more Liberal party antics to post about.

Well never fear, they just keep on giving!

ABC's 4 Corners had an episode that exposed the goings on in the Liberal party in the lead up to the 2007 election.... what fun!

Unfortunately I missed the show but I did catch this article in which Mr Joe Hockey announced that Cabinet did not fully grasp the implications of the changes to IR laws that WorkChoices heralded. Specifically that they didn't understand that "workers could be worse off under Work Choices".

Que?

You mean that the people who supposedly debated the policies, were responsible for tinkering with (read utterly destroying) Industrial Relations policies that seemed to be well, working just fine, that forced them on an unwilling and unsupportive public, didn't actually KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING?!!

Well that makes me for one feel so much better.... I mean what JH is saying is that they didn't really mean to screw us over. On the contrary they just weren't bright enough or didn't care enough to fully understand their own policies.

Whew, that's a relief.

But now, all of a sudden I am regretting the election result. You mean we chucked out a whole lot of well meaning ignoramuses, all because we want our rights at work protected... Goddammit, how short sighted of us!

The New Matilda also published an article about the problems within the Libs (yes indeedy there is a lot of good reading at the moment). Andrew Elder contends that their biggest problem is an inablity to create a post-Howard 'narrative' since the party was in effect Howard. Apparently JW destroyed dissent and opposition in his pursuit of absolute loyalty and now no one knows how to distance themselves from him or create a new set of guiding principals... or something.

Methinks they will have to find a better leader than the Good Doctor to do that.

As much as there is a part of me that rubs my hands and licks my lips in anticipation of a longterm Liberal meltdown, there is another that is more than a little worried by it.

We all know what happens when there is no strong opposition in a democratic system. If you don't, move to New South Wales.

In a recent poll the NSW Premier has only a 30% approval rating. Pollsters asked voters who they would prefer out of Iemma, Turnbull, Barry O'Farrell, Michael Costa and John Watkins to lead the state. Iemma still comes out on top (just) but interestingly his closest rival is Turnbull who is in the Federal parliament. Of the two who seem most likely to replace Iemma, O'Farrell, current state Liberal Party leader got a measly 17%. It comes as no surprise to me that NSW State Labor government thinks they can do what they like, you know like privatise our power despite the fact that over 60% of people in NSW don't want them to. There isn't anyone in politics to tell them they can't.

So while the sadist in me will continue to enjoy the thrashings of the Liberal Party, the political junkie will remain concerned. Then again.... perhaps accountability is overrated.

Baby with the Bathwater?

The next round of soul-searching and recriminations has begun for those on the right side of Australian politics.

Gerard Henderson had an entire column in the SMH last week devoted to eulogising the Libs entitled "No strangers to crisis, the Libs will pull through". For me all Gerard's desire to trumpet the fact that the Libs weren't utterly destroyed really did was serve to reinforce how truly screwed up they actually are. He points to their lack of "political depth" for example, reminding us just how reliant on the cult of personality that surrounded Howard and his closest cronies, Downer, Costello, Abbott, the party actually was. Is anyone else thinking that Turnbull is kicking himself for signing up with the wrong team?

Mr Henderson also points out that the good Dr certainly has some room for improvement in the leadership department. He highlights his rather odd vacillations around those "I have never voted Liberal in my life" comments (yes true believers I think Mr H is reading this blog too). In fact Mr H goes so far as to come up with a plausible but equally suspect story about all of that. Never fear, the good Dr is still a liar no matter which way you spin it. Mr H also takes issue with his inability to answer satisfactorily a question regarding his commitment to social justice as a member of the Howard government.

Right.... social justice and the Howard Government... isn't that like a google search that would turn up no responses? It is a total oxymoron.

But wait!

Apparently all Mr H needed from the good Dr was a mention of the lowering of unemployment and the government's commitment to families with dependent children. Yes folks in the world of the rabid right THAT is social justice. Notwithstanding that lowering of unemployment in and of itself means very little (even if you can believe the stats and in this case we can't seeing as word on the street has it that the stats included people on the dole involved in the welfare to work scheme for example). Simply saying that more people are working (not a bad thing mind) without taking into consideration wages and cost of living, housing stress and other important bits and pieces, tell us precisely nothing about the social conditions, or someone's commitment to social justice.

Secondly, the Howard government's commitment to families with dependent children amounted to well what exactly... family tax benefits? A welfare to work scheme for parenting payments (15 hours a week work volunteer or paid that can include studying, even at postgrad level, but that also includes a direction from the minister to lie to applicants and tell them their masters or PhD doesn't count?!), and Costello's immortal comment to have one for the country. Awesome.

No mention of refugees, Indigenous people, the poor, housing prices, war, same sex marriage rights, discrimination, sexism. But hey, all that falls outside of the Henderson view of social justice I suppose.

Mr H also has academics in his sights... not unsurprisingly, they are a fairly safe target for the rabid right. He writes:

When the Liberals go into opposition, some academics step forward to proclaim the end of the party. In July 1993 Judith Brett declared that "the Liberal Party in the 1990s seems doomed". But it was back in office within three years. Last January Norman Abjorensen wrote that a "Coalition defeat in 2007 will almost certainly herald a major realignment of the non-Labor side of politics, but it is problematic whether the Liberal Party, as now constituted, will survive".

Stuff and nonsense according to Gerard. The Libs will survive as they have always done.

Perhaps someone should tell them that.

Currently the night of the long knives (weeks of the long knives?) have now come down to this.... should the conservative parties merge and be done with it? No academics here, this is Chris Pyne and others in the party calling for a branding change so the party can, in the words of Queensland Liberal Peter Slipper, "like a Phoenix [rise] from the ashes" (no really.... that's a quote, someone get that man some media training stat!).

It's okay to laugh... I am.

Yes the post-election hysteria has reached fever pitch and now everyone is surveying the options on the table and deciding whether a new marketing approach will save conservative politics. I note that the good Dr is very quiet on this subject. Mr Abbott was the cautious Liberal voice of the day (things are certainly getting increasingly weird over there). There seems to be serious talk about creating an entirely new party.

I do not deny the Libs need an image change. But think about the way that government was identified, usually as the Howard Government, rarely as the Coalition. The parties weren't the brand at all, either unified or individually, Howard was. And god knows a little distance from him and some of the policies associated with him (you know, all the ones responsible for destroying social justice...okay so their entire policy platform), will not any conservative any harm.

I think they are all taking this Menzies thing a little too literally. I know the man lost an election (well Gerard says he was trounced actually), formed a new party and went on the lead the country for forever, but honestly the good Dr is not Menzies and this is not the 1950s and if they don't stop running around like headless chickens what little faith people have in them really will be gone!

What will save the Liberals is less of this endless navel gazing, soul searching and finger pointing and a little more of being in opposition (although Dr Nelson has already signalled his antipathy to that course of action). In fact I suspect that Howard's final act of hubris and stupidity was calling the election a little to early or a little too late. There is not much business to be done at the moment so all the political hacks have to do is endlessly disect the election... The Libs really need to leave them to it.

At any rate I can only say the less likelyhood there is of a conservative government the happier I am, but a word to the wise. Don't throw the baby out with bathwater... sure no one likes a loser but people might warm to a battler, to the underdog. Goodness knows no one will ever warm to a snivelling, cowering, whinger.

So.... Suck it up Liberals and get ready for the next round or you may in fact find you are out for the count.

Spare a Thought for Janette

Imagine the conversation at Kirribili house on the morning after the night before. In my mind it runs like a Your Rights at Work advertisement... it goes a little something like this:

John: They've taken away my job, my seat, my houses, my cars... they've taken everything!

Janette: Can they do that?

John: They have...and what worse, the Commonwealth says its okay. Apparently elections pass the fairness test.

I mean really, talk about a tough day at the office, a popularity test where retrenchment is the prize for the runner up.

But I ask who is the real loser in all of this? It has to be Janette. The long suffering wife who for years has stood by her man. She has no job, the kids are all grown up and now she has to move back to Woolstonecraft at Christmas! All the while watching that Queensland upstart and his working wife and Asian son in law prepare to move into the Lodge, while banning fundraising at Kirribilli House.... oh the humanity!

And, unlike the rest of us, she can't even mitigate her personal trauma by gloating about the change in government. Can you see her in a Kevin07 tshirt?

Perhaps that is why she is encouraging JW to get out of the house. The SMH dutifully informed us that our former intrepid leader was getting back to normal life by playing a few rounds of golf (and anyone who has ever seen footage of JW attempt to play anything involving a ball and basic handeye coordination is right to find the concept of him playing golf innately amusing). The article also mentioned that he was playing his round of golf alone bar two security personnel.

Hmmm am I right in thinking that 30 odd years in politics with at least 11.5 of them spent as an utter dickhead leaves you friendless and alone, playing 18 holes of golf with rentacops? Either that or being on the wrong side of a landslide makes you want to shorten the odds and play a game you know you can win.

How apt....How delicious!

Of course JW's golfing excursion further serves to reinforce how out of touch he is with the common person, or rich wanky golf lover for that matter (and aren't they after all the Lib's core constituents?).

This week the SMH also felt compelled to share with us the revolution in golf hitting a Sydney club near you. Nine hole, kinda the one day cricket of the fairway. Apparently we are all too time poor in Sydney to play the game properly and if the mountain won't come to Mohammed the golf clubs will halve the length of the game and come to you! I wonder if the golfing world has ever considered that maybe people just don't like golf.

So JW is starting his ordinary life playing a sport that most ordinary people can't play (this gives me faith in people's sanity broadly speaking) because they are working too hard to pay off the dreams JW cynically sold them for the last decade or so while he stripped away all their rights, devauled their infrastructure and disinvested in everything from welfare to education (except the armed forces of course), privatised telstra and generally made a big f***ing deal of spending any of our own money on us.

Despite this I say spare a thought for Janette.

After all she has him for life!

you got to know when to fold....

Can't say I am unhappy about last night.

Actually I am ecstatic. Certainly the result more unequivocal than I could have possibly have dreamed. There was a clear statement made about what Australians think about the direction of this country. I just hope it wasn't all about interest rates.

Certainly Federal Labor has benefitted from a strong anti-Howard feeling. The Coalition is very much linked to Howard's leadership and people have clearly lost faith in that leadership. I think it would be foolish, however, to assume that Rudd's proclaimed new leadership will be much more than simply a changing of the guard. Well that is unless we make sure it is. Labor has made few strong policy statements, and fewer promises. Not unexpected considered the pre-election polling, why make promises when people are going to vote for you anyway.

This may represent an opportunity though. It means that there is an agenda to be set. And it means that we should think about how we are going to set it.

One of the other interesting results in this election is the swing to the Greens. And that despite the mood for change and the fear of "narrowing polls" (and I feel tempted to say 'yeah right' to that considering the results) which might lead strategists to assume that people will vote more conservatively in order to assure a Labor victory. The Greens look also to have picked up some seats in the senate, 3 new seats according to the ABC online today. This is great news for the party and goes some way to deal with what is potentially the greatest threat to Australian Democracy; having one party controlling both houses of parliament. Without that we wouldn't have had WorkChoices, VSU or many other pieces of legislation that the Coalition felt (clearly to their detriment) that Australia needed.

I am extraordinarly happy that Mal Brough has gone. I am also happy that Lindsay spoke at the polls against bigotry, lies and cheating. I wish Turnbull was similary nursing a hangover and disappointment, and while it was always unlikey, if Joe and Tony had fallen my happiness would have know no bounds.

It is too early yet to know if Howard has lost his seat... God knows I am hoping against all hope. Nevertheless, that Maxine McKew managed to have such a large swing in a safe seat, held by the same member for 30 or so years and one that was held by the current Prime Minister, is an astonishing achievement. And a huge statement by the electorate. Even Howard is conceding in the press today that it highly likely that he will lose, meaning that he will join the ranks of sitting PMs who have lost their seat (yes there is only one and it hasn't happened since 1929).

Howard's Menzies complex, his own ambition, and his arrongance have cost him government and perhaps his seat. Well they do say pride comes before a fall and boy has Howard fallen.

Perhaps Howard should have listened to a little more Kenny Rogers. He overplayed his hand and worse than that he didn't know when to cash in his chips.

So, the King is dead...long live the King.

P.S. Well well, always the bridesmaid never the bride!

I have just found out on SMH online that Costello will not seek nor accept the nomination for the leadership of the Liberal Party. That is despite Howard's endorsement (kiss of death?) pre-election. Who will be the next leader? $50 says Turnbull.

At least Costello knows when it is time to go.