Nick Efstathiadis

 Dennis Shanahan, Political editor From: The Australian

October 01, 2011 12:00AM

Bill Leak cartoon

Cartoon by Bill Leak. Source: The Australian

TOWARDS the end of 1991, I asked a grizzled member of the right wing of the NSW Labor Party what the prognosis was for the leadership of Bob Hawke, whom Paul Keating was openly stalking from the backbench.

The Delphic reply was: "Bob might meet George but he won't greet Liz."

The Labor oracle was suggesting Hawke might survive through to Christmas as prime minister to host the visit of the US president George H. W. Bush during the new year period, but he would not be leader for the visit of the Queen, scheduled for February 1992.

As it turned out the campaign to dislodge Hawke, which was assumed to be a foregone conclusion, rapidly accelerated and Keating became prime minister on December 20, 1991, in time to give Bush the honour of being the first foreign head to address a joint sitting of the Australian parliament in January 1992 and, in February, to warmly usher the Queen into the Great Hall of Parliament House.

After the long and debilitating Keating campaign to supplant Hawke, Labor's prolonged poor polling and the public expectation that Hawke's days were numbered, there was almost a relief the switch occurred when it did.

Today, with the 11-day royal visit to Australia starting in Canberra on October 19 as the Queen prepares to open the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth, and the visit of US President Barack Obama on November 16 and 17, the "meet and greet" test could be applied to Julia Gillard's leadership today.

But despite the best efforts of Tony Abbott and the campaign of destabilisation against the Prime Minister from within the Labor caucus, it is almost certain Gillard will pass the test and meet and greet both the Queen and Obama.

This is not to suggest there isn't a push to undermine Gillard and install Kevin Rudd, or that there aren't others positioning for leadership if the Labor caucus isn't panicked into sudden action.

The destabilisation campaign is already under way, the Foreign Minister is being presented in the best possible light across portfolios and some ministers are trying to play down the impact of the internal campaign, but they concede it exists.

For a variety of reasons the strategies of those intent on removing Gillard and those intent on defending her position are coalescing with the same aim, that Gillard will remain Labor leader until at least December and then through to February next year.

One Labor MP, who is working to have Rudd's leadership resurrected and was surprised by the sudden, positive reaction to reports Rudd was gathering numbers, told Inquirer: "We don't want to go too early, everyone's quietening down now until November at least and probably until next year."

Another senior Labor MP said this week: "We're in no rush to go to an election."

Put simply, those who want to replace Gillard with Rudd, and even those who may take advantage of a Rudd campaign to make their own bid for leadership, don't want to act in haste. For a start, there is an ever-present danger that any attempt to tip Gillard out of her job will spark an immediate election that Labor would lose horrendously based on recent polling.

Polls showing the Foreign Minister could "save" Labor are viewed sceptically, even by Gillard critics, and no Labor MP wants a poll now.

Second, Gillard will be expected to absorb all the odium attached to the broken promise on the carbon tax, the power-sharing deal with the Greens, the failure of her plans to send asylum-seekers to East Timor and Malaysia, her agreement to limit poker machine gambling and in clearing up the mining tax at last.

Finally, Labor strategists are now convinced a lingering death for a leader, as was the case with Hawke in 1991, is more acceptable to the public than a clinical assassination without warning.

As explained on Monday by Labor campaign manager and strategic guru Bruce Hawker: "You can make the case for a change in leadership. Obviously, changes in leadership happen quite regularly on both sides of politics these days," he said.

"So, if you are really trailing in the election, then that's a big plus.

"One of the things, as I have said before, [that has] always been a problem for the Labor Party is the way in which Kevin Rudd was removed. It was more akin to an assassination because it was done so clinically [unlike] the sort of leadership changes we normally see where there is a challenge, the leader staggers on for a few months and falls over and everyone says, 'Thank God the poor bugger is dead', and moves on with a new leader. That didn't happen in this case."

There are those who are determined it will not happen in Gillard's case, even though Labor MPs supporting Rudd argue that he is the only logical choice to replace the embattled leader because voters would accept Labor MPs and the "faceless men" had made a mistake last year and were rectifying it.

The lingering death option is bolstered by the view that the Labor caucus will have to be seen to be turning to Rudd as a saviour, apologising and drafting him to the leadership. Rudd has a cautious and canny history of not entering the leadership lists unless he's sure of the outcome as when he successfully destabilised Kim Beazley. Rudd also witnessed Beazley's strategic mistake in 2003 when the latter prematurely sparked a challenge against Simon Crean, failed and then failed again when Mark Latham was put up against the former leader with Crean's support.

Rudd is deeply aware of the danger going into a challenge early and under-prepared.

While the carbon tax appears set to pass the parliament, as will the mining tax, and while the asylum-seeker offshore processing bill is likely to fail before Christmas, the deadline for the real problem - the limits on poker machine gambling - will not be resolved until next year.

Tasmanian independent MP Andrew Wilkie demanded the gambling limitations in return for supporting a minority Labor government and insists he will withdraw his support if it fails.

Labor MPs in marginal seats are feeling the extreme heat of the clubs' campaign against the limits in NSW and Queensland, with some telling public forums they don't support the idea.

Senior Labor MPs have believed for some time the poker machine bill has overtaken the carbon tax in anti-Labor intensity because it threatens the clubs' support for social services, sporting teams and help for retired people at a local, personal level.

One Labor MP, who is directly affected in a marginal seat, told Inquirer he believed Labor's primary vote in Newspoll, now at a record low of 26 per cent, could go "below 25 per cent" while others cite the worst long-term trends in ALP history.

What's more, there is the question of whether a leadership change would trigger an immediate election and how long Rudd's projected second honeymoon would last, or how successfully another candidate such as Stephen Smith, Wayne Swan, Bill Shorten or Greg Combet would handle going straight into an election campaign.

This is where Tony Abbott's role in the destabilisation comes in. The Opposition Leader desperately wants an election while Labor is in the depths of despair and he has an overwhelming lead in the polls. He also senses the public wants an election to resolve uncertainty.

Abbott is making it known that he fears Rudd more than Gillard, and that a switch of leadership won't necessarily lead to an election. Abbott points to Greens leader Bob Brown's statement last week that his support is for the ALP, not an individual leader, and that Queensland independent MP Bob Katter, who supported the Coalition after the election, has stated he may have supported Labor if Rudd had been leader.

It's subtle encouragement to remove Gillard earlier rather than later, as the Liberal leader known as "'Mr Rabbit" plays the role of Brer Rabbit pretending to be thrown into Rudd's "briar patch", only to reveal later he has no real fear of facing the former leader.

Certainly Abbott wants as long as possible to face Rudd a second time, to wear down any sympathy vote he may attract, but there has to be a question about the extent of the sustainability of a "second honeymoon" if an election were held any time soon.

A change of leadership also means cabinet heads would roll as Rudd returned and he would be forced to shuffle Labor's team.

Already there are tensions between Rudd and his colleagues as well as suspicions between Gillard and some of her colleagues, who seem prepared to preen and eye off her job.

Whatever Labor MPs make of Abbott's claims, the number who believe Rudd should not move until much closer to an election adds weight to the argument for leaving Gillard in place for as long as possible.

For her part, Gillard has little choice but to deal with crises as they occur. She must try to change the focus to positive policy and reforms after warning her colleagues that the polls could remain bad for Labor until after the carbon tax is implemented in July next year.

The Prime Minister's announcement of a white paper on Australia's future in Asia kicks off a two-month period dominated by foreign affairs, official visits and world summits. At the end of this month Gillard will greet the Queen, host CHOGM for a week in Perth, go to the G20 global debt crisis meeting in France, go to Hawaii for the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation leaders' forum on trans-Pacific trade, host Obama's visit and attend the East Asia Forum in Bali before presiding over the last sitting of parliament for the year in the first week of December.

The odds are Gillard will battle on through to next year, but then again Rudd had his room booked at the Toronto G20 last year and lost his job two days before he was due to leave.

The slow move to replace Julia Gillard | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

 Paul Kelly, Editor-at-large From: The Australian

October 01, 2011 12:00AM

Tony Abbott

Tony Abbott is a conservative who shuns government-engineered schemes to remake the existing order. Picture: Stuart McEvoy Source: The Australian

FROM the progressive Left that loathes him to the right-wing free market lobby that distrusts him, Tony Abbott's political character as cautious, conservative and pragmatic remains the source of denial and alarm.

Abbott has been the most misunderstood leader of a major political party for many years. Blunder after blunder has been perpetrated by his opponents because they have failed to see what is in front of their eyes, and what Abbott represents.

The two great myths are Abbott as extremist and Abbott as ideologue. The Australian public shuns such traits and Abbott's poll ratings affirm this is not how the public sees him. The effort to paint Abbott as extremist and ideologue, once Labor's central strategy, has failed so far.

Labor, however, cannot give up. Undermined by its own dysfunction, it will keep playing the Abbott card because it has few other options and is convinced he is a destructive force unfit to become prime minister. Labor's last hope remains a bet against Abbott's political character.

This week Peter Costello, who understands Abbott better than most, rapped him over the knuckles for being too soft and cautious on industrial relations reform. Costello's complaint is that Abbott ruled out individual statutory contracts, a policy legislated by the Howard government in 1996 on Coalition and Australian Democrat votes, long before Work Choices. Abbott, in short, has positioned himself to the left of the Australian Democrats circa 1996. Sound extreme to you? No wonder Costello is unhappy.

In his book Battlelines, Abbott attacked Work Choices as "a catastrophic political blunder". Indeed, he was one of the least enthusiastic ministers when the Howard cabinet agreed to the policy. Abbott is making crystal clear his attitude in office to industrial relations - he will operate within Julia Gillard's existing laws. Radical IR reform is simply off Abbott's radar. The employer groups will need to get their heads around this reality.

Costello's pot shot follows that from Abbott backer and former finance minister Nick Minchin in the partyroom in May accusing Abbott of failing the "good reform" test by not supporting a Labor excise increase. In short, Abbott was too soft and cautious for Minchin's taste on fiscal discipline.

Such critiques penetrate both to Abbott's style and substance. Abbott, in case you missed it, does not seek a fifth term for the Howard-Costello government. As far as Abbott is concerned, that government is over. Abbott runs for a first-term Abbott government. It will be different in policy and style, even though John Howard remains his model.

How will it be different? Well, Abbott's first-term game plan is on the table now. It will be dominated by four items that reflect Abbott's conservatism applied to the times: the dismantling of the carbon price scheme (the most substantial and risky dismantling of any policy in Australian history), the scaling back and re-defining of the National Broadband Network, the removal of the mining tax and hefty spending cuts to achieve the promised fiscal consolidation. How much detail the Coalition provides on the fiscal side remains to be seen and it refuses to get its policy costed by any government agency. This agenda is heavily negative, but Abbott's retort is the public doesn't buy Labor's reform edifices and wants them dismantled.

Abbott's instinctive reply to Minchin in their partyroom exchange was memorable. He said faced with a choice between "policy purity and political pragmatism, I'll take pragmatism every time". It is the antithesis of ideology.

As for tactics, Abbott is tracking Howard's 1996 campaign. Just as Howard dismissed any GST, so Abbott dismisses IR reform to counter Labor's inevitable Work Choices scare. Abbott will give Labor nothing - no opening, no break against him. Abbott operates on the assumption of Kevin Rudd's possible return thereby reviving Labor's vote. How dumb would Abbott be to devise bold and risky policies against a weak Gillard only to gift a resurrected Rudd fresh weapons to use against him and reverse the political equation? For the record, Abbott won't be that dumb.

Much of the current debate misses the way Abbott frames the political future. His objective is to win and win big. Abbott wants the Australian people to mandate his judgment against Labor and to authorise his dismantling of the Gillard-Rudd legacy. The next election is the opposite of 2010: it will be a turning point poll between radically different programs.

Abbott now says his agenda may require two elections, an initial victory and then a double dissolution election to abolish Labor's carbon pricing scheme. Abbott can only prevail with an overwhelming majority in the country. Consider the situation he would face as PM: a hostile Senate, an antagonistic Labor Party and Greens, opinion-making forums horrified that Australia would repudiate carbon pricing, reject the international campaign for emissions trading and repeal such a pro-market economic reform.

Above all, Abbott knows his prime ministership would be destroyed unless he delivers on his promise to repeal carbon pricing. It is his first, second and third priority. Abbott's rejection of carbon pricing, the platform on which he won the leadership, remains his greatest gamble. The verdict on it will come from global events, notably whether the world moves towards or against emissions trading.

Meanwhile the bigger, disputed question remains: who is Tony Abbott?

There are three truths about Abbott. First, he has a conservative set of values that he champions yet his policy outlook is highly flexible and pragmatic (witness his famous changes of mind on multiculturalism, hospitals, carbon pricing and paid parental leave, among others).

Because Abbott is seen to stand for enduring values he gets away with multiple policy switches with impunity.

Second, unlike leaders of the past generation Abbott is not defined by economics and does not wear free-market economics as his badge. This is a sharp break from Paul Keating, John Hewson, Costello and even Howard. If Abbott wins, it will become a departure point for Australia. Abbott told me back in 2003: "I have never been as excited about economics as some of my colleagues." An understatement.

Throughout his life, Abbott's social philosophy has been paramount. He is a libertarian in neither personal nor economic terms. Abbott has never hidden this truth, declaring that while many Liberals stress the "individual" and "choice" his message is always "individuals as part of the social fabric".

For Abbott, it is society, family and community that count. Individualism must always be seen within society. This is the powerful legacy of his Catholicism. It has been apparent at each stage of his life, trainee priest, journalist, community volunteer and MP.

It is what makes Abbott a different Liberal leader and what makes the Abbott Liberal Party different. Such philosophy is likely to be popular with the public but hardly encouraging to free-market reform.

Third, Abbott is a community based politician rather than an inside-the-beltway policy wonk. He is bright enough and arrogant enough to think he doesn't necessarily need to genuflect before the latest policy advice or conventional wisdom (think carbon pricing or mining tax).

Abbott is a natural populist and has materialised into something Labor never imagined - a potent threat to its voting base.

The only basis for seeing Abbott as a radical lies in the fusion of his populism and social values. The feminists preaching his infamy are clueless, with Abbott easily batting away their attacks: "Am I worried about the extent of abortions and family breakdown today? Yes, I am worried. Do I intend in office to legislate against abortion and family breakdown? No, I don't." With this formula he projects his values yet claims immunity from imposing them.

Where Labor was convinced Abbott would narrow the Coalition's appeal, the opposite has happened with Abbott widening its appeal, a point verified by applying this test in terms of regions, class and values.

The Coalition is strong in the resource states of Queensland and Western Australia, much of NSW, manages to hold its own in the southern states.

Analysis by class shows Abbott is stealing the working-class vote through his persona and ability to re-mobilise the so-called Howard battlers. On values, Abbott embodies the large-scale transfer of the Catholic vote from Labor to Liberal. This is symbolised not just by his Democratic Labor Party origins but by the December 2009 Liberal leadership contest involving Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Joe Hockey, each of them Catholic, a situation inconceivable in the Menzian Liberal Party and testimony to the widening of the conservative net.

Abbott's political character has long been obvious: he is a conservative who shuns government-engineered schemes to remake the existing order, from carbon pricing to the republic.

Where does Abbott's conservatism lead him on the economy? The answer lies in the basics: low tax, small government, fiscal surplus. It is part of the Howard-Costello legacy (not always delivered) that Abbott accepts and would pursue in office.

Does Abbott work as a political package? So far he has exceeded expectations for many of the above reasons. It will be hard for Labor to halt Abbott's momentum from this point. The bigger question for the country, however, is whether the Abbott package works in office or becomes the train wreck that Labor expects.

The other side of Tony Abbott | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

October 1, 2011

"Last time Kevin Rudd and I were up against each other,the Labor Party dumped Kevin Rudd" ... opposition leader Tony Abbott.

"Last time Kevin Rudd and I were up against each other, the Labor Party dumped Kevin Rudd" ... opposition leader Tony Abbott. Photo: Justin McManus

THE Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, has indicated he does not fear Labor replacing Julia Gillard with Kevin Rudd, saying he has seen him off once before.

With Mr Rudd now firmly in the frame as the replacement should Labor change leaders again, Mr Abbott predicted yesterday such a move would only hasten the government's demise.

''My instinct all along has been that this government is fragile and impermanent and I think that, if there's a leadership change, that would just add to the fragility and the impermanence,'' he said.

A Galaxy poll published yesterday reflected the findings of the most recent Herald/Nielsen poll, which found Mr Rudd was streets ahead as preferred Labor leader. The Herald poll also found that Labor would be restored to an election-winning lead under Mr Rudd.

Mr Abbott said this boost in support would be ephemeral.

''Certainly if Kevin Rudd were to become leader, I suspect his popularity would peak the day after any leadership handover.''

Labor replaced Mr Rudd in June last year, seven months after Mr Abbott became the Opposition Leader and the government began to collapse.

''Last time Kevin Rudd and I were up against each other, the Labor Party dumped Kevin Rudd,'' Mr Abbott said.

The Coalition is preparing for a snap election should there be a leadership change. Inside the Labor Party, there is no discernible momentum for a rapid move against Ms Gillard but chatter about the leadership is chronic as the party's primary vote languishes below 30 per cent.

While the factional bosses who pushed Mr Rudd are sticking with Ms Gillard, most MPs accept that if the polls do not improve, it is inevitable there will be a change of leadership, the only question being when.

Most accept it would be prudent to wait until next year.

One Labor MP said it would be much easier if Ms Gillard chose to step aside but neither he nor his colleagues could envisage her doing that for Mr Rudd.

The demands by the Tasmanian independent MP Andrew Wilkie for technology providing for mandatory precommitment on playing poker machines is helping to destabilise Labor ranks.

One theory being pushed is that Mr Rudd will stare down Mr Wilkie and his demands. If Mr Wilkie makes good on his threat and withdraws his support for the government, supporters of Mr Rudd suggest the former prime minister could woo Bob Katter, to whom he is close.

One Rudd supporter, who is a recent convert, said that ultimately, no one was prepared to march towards certain loss.

Mr Rudd has become highly visible in recent days, attending an indigenous ceremony in western NSW, reading to school children in Brisbane and, yesterday, delivering a lecture on the Group of 20 and its critical role in sorting out the economic mess in Europe.

Yesterday, Mr Rudd flew to Papua New Guinea for talks with the new Prime Minister, Peter O'Neill. Among items to be discussed will be Australia's on-hold plan for an offshore detention centre in Manus Island. Mr Rudd does not support offshore processing.

Bring it on: I've seen off Rudd before, says Abbott

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Katharine Murphy September 30, 2011

    "Tony Abbott is still set on forcing an election as soon as he can".

Unflattering portrait ... Tony Abbott. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

TONY Abbott is a sore loser, afflicted by ''innate and deeply embedded sexism and misogyny'', and would use a future prime ministership to impose his simplistic views on the country, according to a provocative new book to hit the shelves tomorrow.

The new polemic by academic Susan Mitchell paints an intensely unflattering portrait of the man who would be Australia's next prime minister, sketching Mr Abbott as a graceless, obsessively competitive ''man's man''; a ferocious partisan imbued with conservative Catholic social values.

The book was drawn from press reports, studies of the Opposition Leader, particularly Michael Duffy's 2004 biography, Mr Abbott's writings and the author's observed conclusions. Dr Mitchell deploys what her publisher describes as a ''blistering'' critique in narrating Mr Abbott's life from his childhood to his current period as Opposition Leader.

"There's a narrative missing about Tony Abbott in the political discussion" ... author Susan Mitchell.

"There's a narrative missing about Tony Abbott in the political discussion" ... author Susan Mitchell. Photo: Steve Baccon

Dr Mitchell told The Age yesterday she did not interview Mr Abbott for the project. ''That wasn't the sort of book I wanted to write. I wanted to do a more analytical piece than that.''

Mr Abbott's spokesman confirmed Dr Mitchell ''made no contact with Tony or his office in the preparation of her book. She has not sought to interview Tony as part of her research.''

Dr Mitchell said she was motivated to write the book because ''there's a narrative missing about Tony Abbott in the political discussion''.

Dr Mitchell said she saw no evidence that Mr Abbott's views had moderated with time, if anything ''he's become more right wing and fixed in his views''.

She said initiatives like Mr Abbott's paid parental leave scheme - mentioned only briefly in the book - and his decision to employ women as senior advisers, did not demonstrate an evolution in thinking.

Comments

Wow! None of that should come as a surprise to anyone. The question is, why would ANYONE on EITHER side of politics think he would be Prime Minister material?

J | Qld - September 30, 2011, 8:12AM

The thought of Tony Abbott as our Prime Minister scares me. Unfortunately there is unlikely to be a change of leadership before the next election and he will waltz into the Lodge. Where are the leaders of yesterday - men and women who would inspire us, provide leadership, change the country for the better, and not look out of place on the world stage. Other small countries can have this kind of leadership, why can't we? Political debate here is puerile and embarrassing.

atozed2005 - September 30, 2011, 8:13AM

Another Liberal nowhere man sitting in his nowhere land, and like Little Johnny, he will probably be PM.

BBJ | Dinner Plain - September 30, 2011, 8:14A

 

None of this comes as a shock, but it hopefully may be a splash of cold water to some foks about the demagogue who they're dangerously considering as a legitimate option for Prime Minister. It would be Howard all over again; a right-wing Christian extremist who treats our country like his own personal playground.
He suggested a carbon tax himself a few years ago, but now that it's being championed by the Labor party it's now the worst idea ever. No one is even educating themselves about it, they're taking the very Australian approach - the word "tax" gets used and the shutters go down. He's pandering to the fears and selective ignorance of our community in a bid to gain power, not better our society.
Also remember that Australians tend to disapprove of whoever happens to be in power at the time. Go ahead, vote for Abbott, and in less than a year's time the entire country will be shaking their heads in disbelief that they did. Only by then it will be too late and he'll have until the next election to do as much damage is he can.
Australian's hate people full of BS, but it seems they're willing to overlook it as long as he plays to their fears. Do we really want to be lead into the future by someone who knowledge on climate change extends only as far as "it's no hotter now than when Jesus was around" (not verbatim, but this is actually what he said).

Steve | CBD - September 30, 2011, 8:07AM


'Sexist' Abbott blasted in new book

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

 Rosanne Barrett and Christian Kerr From: The Australian

September 30, 2011 12:00AM

Kevin Rudd

Kevin Rudd in his latest role, as an ambassador of reading. Picture: Jodie Richter Source: The Courier-Mail

Julia Gillard

Julia Gillard blows out candles on her 50th birthday cake yesterday at a community centre in Werribee, helped by Kyle Taliana, 8, left, and Luke Ward, 7. Picture: Jon Hargest Source: HWT Image Library

 

More voters prefer Rudd over Gillard [Watch the video]

A poll shows 60 per cent of voters prefer Kevin Rudd to lead Labor compared to Julia Gillard's 26 per cent. Sky News30 September 2011

FOR a moment yesterday it was as if nothing had changed: Kevin Rudd was talking about Jasper, the cat, to a room full of adoring toddlers as the cameras whirred and just about everyone hung off his every word.

Welcome to the charm offensive otherwise known as Kevin 11, the undeclared campaign by the Foreign Minister to recapture the magic of his former iteration as Kevin 07 - and just maybe his old job. As Julia Gillard celebrated the milestone of her 50th birthday in wintry Melbourne, Mr Rudd was revelling in the attention he has drummed up as Labor's fortunes in the polls plummet while his rise in equal measure.

Mr Rudd discussed the finer points of fowl colouring with a gaggle of three-year-olds - "anyone ever seen a duck that's green?" he asked - revelling in his new role as Queensland's ambassador for Dads reading. Children wandered, fidgeted and wailed but the Foreign Minister persevered, taking them through Some Dads and We Went Walking.

Related Coverage

But after wowing Mandarin-speaking Brisbane mum Danying Ren with his language skills, and counting to 10 in Japanese with one of his junior charges, Mr Rudd offered his congratulations to the woman who took his place in The Lodge 15 months ago.

"Turning the big five-o is a big milestone in anyone's life," he said. "I wish her a happy birthday."

Asked if Ms Gillard had wished him happy birthday for his 54th last week, he said he couldn't quite remember but he was sure the PM "had other things on her mind".

While Mr Rudd was being mobbed by toddlers, the Prime Minister was blowing out candles with a group of schoolchildren and being serenaded with Happy Birthday in her western Melbourne electorate. Sporting birthday jewellery courtesy of "first bloke" Tim Mathieson and his family, Ms Gillard declared that 50 felt fine. "I think any birthday with a zero at the end of it causes people to take stock and think about their life," she said, but that was all the birthday introspection she had to offer.

"I am living an amazing life, this is an incredible privilege to be Prime Minister, but of course my focus, whether it's my birthday or any other day, is making sure that we've got jobs for the future, jobs for the kids that I've met today, we've got prosperity and we've got that sense of fairness, that we're not leaving anybody behind.

"That's the great Labor tradition and that's what drives me. Thanks very much."

Transport Minister Anthony Albanese wished her the best but admitted he had forgotten a present. Greens leader Bob Brown sent a bunch of flowers.

A Galaxy poll last night showed 60 per cent of voters would prefer Mr Rudd to lead Labor, compared with 20 per cent for Ms Gillard.

Tony Abbott offered brickbats about Labor's lowly states in the polls.

"I wouldn't expect Julia to get me a present on my birthday, and I don't think she's too eager to get anything from me today," the Opposition Leader said.

"I wish her happy birthday. I'm not sure how many more she's going to have in The Lodge but I certainly wish her happy birthday for today."

Mr Albanese said he believed Ms Gillard would still be Prime Minister when her next birthday rolled around - despite speculation that an increasingly anxious Labor caucus is warming to Kevin 11 and the extraordinary prospect of replacing Ms Gillard with the man it dumped to elevate her.

"Julia Gillard is the Prime Minister. She retains the absolute support of the caucus," he said.

Mr Rudd is doing his utmost to live up to another former moniker, Kevin 747, with the frenetic pace he has set since returning to duty from heart surgery this month.

After returning from the US, he drove 500km to the western NSW town of Condobolin and then fulfilled yesterday's duties in Brisbane.

For the record, Jasper the cat, the subject of a children's book Mr Rudd wrote with children's television presenter Rhys Muldoon while prime minister, is purportedly happy as a vegemite.

Many happy returns. But whose, Julia Gillard's or Kevin Rudd's? | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Dennis Shanahan, Political editor From: The Australian

September 23, 2011 12:00AM

 

IT has begun.

The destabilisation of Julia Gillard's leadership is under way, there is no knowing where it will end or what the result will be, but be in no doubt - it has begun.

No leadership challenge is under way. There is a huge reluctance for many MPs to even contemplate the thought of knocking off another leader, it's not clear who would emerge as a contender or contenders, and the Prime Minister has overwhelming support.

But the frustration and desperation of Labor MPs, who simply can't believe the dire and bizarre situation they find themselves in only two years after being on top of the world with a fair expectation of being in office until the end of the decade, are eroding reason and creating a febrile atmosphere.

Related Coverage

What is different now within the caucus is that some Labor MPs have decided the Prime Minister's leadership is terminal and they are determined to convince their colleagues that it is so.

These MPs are active in the first phase of destabilisation, whereas previously they just have been gloomy and grumbling.

If they can recruit enough people to their view that Gillard can't revive her leadership then they can move to the second and third phases, which are to consider change and then put up an alternative.

Given the speed with which momentum for change moved against Kevin Rudd, it is impossible to provide any timetable for the development of these phases, or whether they will even be reached. But it would be a mistake for Labor to deny such a change is occurring and simply deflect attention on to the intense Coalition campaign to unseat Gillard and force an election.

The two campaigns cannot only coexist but also feed off each other.

Tony Abbott, desperate for an election as soon as possible, is trying to do everything he can to destabilise Gillard. He is trying to give encouragement to those on the Labor side who see Gillard as irrevocably damaged, to feed the public perception that there should be an election, and he is arguing that a defeat on the floor of the House of Representatives means the Prime Minister no longer has the confidence of the parliament and should resign.

Abbott's preparedness to sacrifice sensible long-term policies in pursuit of this aim means that it is hardly surprising that he will inflate and exaggerate Labor indiscretions and cross-party gossip to heighten a sense of crisis.

But it would be a foolhardy leader who dismissed the latest change in some Labor MPs' attitude as a "Liberal beat-up".

Central to this change of attitude has been the rejection by some of the argument that Gillard's personal satisfaction rating and Labor's primary vote are no worse than the darkest days of Paul Keating and John Howard, who managed to recover and win an election.

When Gillard's personal ratings and Labor's primary vote dropped to record lows in the polls there was a defence that Keating's personal ratings were worse - and they still are by a few points - and that both he and Howard had recovered from bad ratings to win a subsequent election.

This argument fitted with Gillard's own plan to have a year of delivery on policy and then wait for the public to form the view that Abbott's claims about the carbon tax was empty fear-mongering and the public would realise the compensation was more than adequate for price rises.

The theory was that Gillard and Labor could recover to a winning position and that others had done so previously.

The problem now is twofold. Some Labor MPs who remember the Keating government recognise the same sense of electoral doom, and that the Gillard government's primary vote polling, at a new record low of 26 per cent in the latest Newspoll survey published on Tuesday in The Australian, is the longest, worst period of polling in modern political history.

The government is now in a worse position than the Keating and Howard governments at their worst, and even they were at the depths for a shorter period.

One Labor MP this week pointed to the Howard government's relatively short period at 35 per cent in March 2001 and a rise back to the 40s by April-May, and the Keating government's worst was 31 per cent in August 1993 from which it quickly recovered although it lost the next election.

"In 1993 Labor went from 31 per cent to 39 per cent in a very short time, just under three months," one Labor MP told The Australian.

"We've been under 30 per cent now for three months, how long can we bear this?"

Another Labor MP told The Australian he didn't support Rudd previously but could now. He said if he had to pick a Labor leader to save his seat "it would be Kevin".

The point of Labor MPs analysing these polls and sharing them with their colleagues is to emphasise that Labor can't recover.

The other argument being put forward by those supporting Rudd for whatever reason is that the former leader has been absent from the political scene and parliament for weeks because of his heart-valve operation and duty overseas as Foreign Minister. They say Labor has plumbed new depths and become tangled in its policy failure on asylum-seekers while Rudd has been completely absent.

And they are making these points because, despite the ill-feeling towards Rudd in the Labor caucus, there are different groups with the potential to change sentiment and shift away from Gillard.

There is a small core prepared to be recognised as outright Rudd supporters, a group that numbered less than 10 a few weeks ago. Then there are those who felt sympathy towards Rudd for the way he was treated as prime minister. There are some who have never liked Gillard, and then there are those who are looking at the margins in their own seats from a point of survival and think Rudd's popularity is a better bet. The first group doesn't include ministers or factional leaders, but the other groups are showing signs of firming in favour of a leadership change, even if it isn't in favour of Rudd.

The other problem for Gillard and those who argue that any change of leadership would be suicide is that people operating on behalf of Rudd could trigger a crisis that forces a premature challenge or another contender into the field. It's all part of the destabilisation phase.

Frustration only builds | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Matthew Franklin, Chief political correspondent

From: The Australian July 21, 2011 12:00AM

Watch

Spreading fear: Julia Gillard says Tony Abbott will do anything to spread fear about a price on carbon.TEN 20 July 2011

TONY Abbott has sought to put pressure on Julia Gillard's leadership by insisting that dissatisfaction among Labor MPs over her carbon tax could see her dumped as leader.

The Opposition Leader has also accused Greens leader Bob Brown of having "gone missing" on the proposed new tax after forcing Labor to accept "a rerun" of the Greens' election policy on climate change.

But the Prime Minister has launched her own attack, accusing Mr Abbott of misleading voters by falsely claiming in a radio interview on Tuesday that he had never supported carbon emissions trading.

Mr Abbott had supported emissions trading, she said, when it had been proposed by former Liberal leaders John Howard and Malcolm Turnbull.

The claims came as the two leaders continued to campaign over Ms Gillard's plan to put a $23-a-tonne tax on carbon emissions from July 1 next year.

Related Coverage

With Labor's support in opinion polls continuing to flag, despite the finalisation of the design of the tax, Mr Abbott said Labor had dumped former prime minister Kevin Rudd over his unpopular 40 per cent resource super-profit tax and that Ms Gillard could face the same fate over the carbon tax.

"I think there is a very real chance that there will be a revolt inside the Labor Party," Mr Abbott told Melbourne Talk Radio.

"I just don't assume that Labor is going to stick on this carbon tax because it's doing too much damage in their heartland."

Mr Abbott also said Senator Brown seemed to have stopped talking about the carbon tax, which he said the Greens had forced upon Labor.

"For months, he's been the Prime Minister's principal defender and he seems to have gone AWOL as it's become more and more obvious that this carbon tax is a dud and it's toxic with the public," he said.

In recent days, senior Labor sources have told The Australian Ms Gillard's leadership is safe, with caucus having agreed to "hold its nerve" in the hope the Prime Minister will be able to claw back support in coming months and then return to level pegging with the Coalition once the carbon tax is introduced and people realise it will not have a major impact on their lives.

Ms Gillard visited a wind farm outside Canberra yesterday to promote how the carbon tax would "turbo-charge" investment in renewable energy sources.

She also savaged Mr Abbott over his claim on Tuesday that he had never supported a carbon tax or an emissions trading system.

Additional reporting: Joe Kelly

Labor MPs will dump Julia Gillard over carbon, Tony Abbott says | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Dennis Shanahan, Political editor

From: The Australian September 22, 2011 12:00AM

TONY Abbott wants a Labor leadership change so badly he can taste it.

The Opposition Leader and his colleagues are doing everything they can to turn the longest, worst period of polling for any modern federal government into the end of Julia Gillard.

There are two reasons for Abbott's intensity and determination to turn Labor's desperation into a fatal panic on leadership: first, he wants an election; and, second, he fears Kevin Rudd.

As a result of the latest Newspoll - Labor's primary vote was a record low 26 per cent and has been under 30 per cent for three months, the same period that Abbott has been preferred prime minister - Liberals and some Labor MPs believe Gillard's leadership is terminal. The Labor leadership change thermometer isn't anywhere near boiling, but it's gone up a degree or two in the past three days.

Related Coverage

Abbott's attitude is to knock over an opponent whenever possible, but his main aim is to spark an election he would be certain to win on the current polling.

There is an added reason for Abbott's wish to act as soon as possible against Gillard, which includes the short-term opportunism of assisting the snuffing-out of offshore processing of asylum-seekers.

Abbott, like many Liberal MPs and more than the handful of Labor MPs who are die-hard Rudd supporters, believes Rudd is the only logical choice to replace Gillard, and the only one who can save once-safe Labor seats.

Rudd's continuing popularity, his previous preference as prime minister over Abbott, his Queensland connections and a sympathy vote all worry the Liberal leader.

But Abbott's biggest fear about Rudd is that the former prime minister will be held back as a last-minute change and go to an election before a second honeymoon wears off.

If Abbott has to face Rudd, he wants time to remind voters why they were turning off the former prime minister before he was dumped by his colleagues.

Tony Abbott aims to crush Julia Gillard while he can | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Tony Wright

September 20, 2011

Bronwyn Bishop

Leader of the pack: Bronwyn Bishop prepares for a ride around Canberra as part of the annual Federal Members and Senators Motorcycle Ride. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

In Canberra, some laws are immutable:

The Gillard government, given the choice between a broad highway and a cul-de-sac, will invariably find itself up a blind alley; the Abbott opposition will likely close off the exit and send in a hit squad … and Bronwyn Bishop's hairstyle can withstand a thermo-nuclear strike.

We have no actual proof of the latter, of course, though we can report that Ms Bishop donned a motorcycle crash helmet yesterday, rode pillion through the streets of the national capital aboard a monstrous Kawasaki and emerged with not a hint of what is known among bikers as helmet hair.

The second annual Federal Members and Senators Motorcycle Ride - designed to prove people of all stripes ride motorbikes - proved the single harmless political event of the day in Canberra.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and her Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, having tried to be tougher than the Bandidos on border protection, looked as if they'd been subjected to a kicking by a chapter of the Hells Angels by late afternoon.

And Tony Abbott? Why, he was feigning to be a Vespa sort of guy, a friend of the inner-city Left. Having finally subjected Ms Gillard's desperate wish to send 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia to a fatal stomping, he presented himself as a champion of human rights.

Up to a point. He'd send would-be refugees to Nauru instead of nasty Malaysia, but he'd also reintroduce temporary protection visas and he'd endeavour to ''turn around the boats'' and send them back to Indonesia. But didn't that bit about turning around the boats undermine his own argument that Ms Gillard was wickedly misguided for wishing to send asylum seekers to a country like Malaysia because it wasn't a signatory to the Refugee Convention? Indonesia, after all, wasn't a signatory either.

Not at all, Mr Abbott blithely declared. Why, the boat people would still be at sea, so Australia's obligations to them wouldn't be triggered.

With logic like that, Ms Gillard's argument that her wish to return asylum seekers to Malaysia was simply to prevent people smugglers from putting lives at risk on the high seas sounded almost plausible. But her assurance that Malaysia would uphold all its obligations to do the right thing by the asylum seekers?

It seemed a long way from Paul Keating calling the former Malaysian prime minister ''recalcitrant''.

By the end of the day, the only absolute certainty in Australia's extremely weird Parliament was that Bronwyn Bishop's hairstyle would remain serenely flawless.

At a time like this, you need reassurance that some things will never change, whatever happens.

Tony Wright is Age national affairs editor.

Abbott And Gillard Reject Each Other's Asylum Seeker Policy

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

September 20, 2011

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott is finding strange bedfellows in his stances on the asylum seeker issue.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott is finding strange bedfellows in his stances on the asylum seeker issue. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

ANALYSIS

Just when you think you've seen everything, you find Tony Abbott and the Labor Left cuddled up together in opposition to Julia Gillard. This is surely a wonderful sight to behold, especially when he's also holding hands with the Greens.

Both Abbott and the Left want the government's legislation redrafted. But the government is deaf to him and some of its own.

Mind you, it did a bit of redrafting itself over the weekend. Friday night's version was tossed out by Monday.

Not, according to the PM, that the new draft was really any different from the earlier one. It says the minister has to ''have regard'' to whether the country he's dispatching people to won't send them off to be possibly persecuted and will see they're processed. But if he only has a very cursory ''regard'', he can't be taken to court.

Gillard will blame Abbott when her legislation goes down in flames and boat arrivals likely increase. But the blame game will be tricky. Not just the parliamentary Left but many of the party's rank and file have been outraged by the Malaysia solution - and some are even resigning. And it was only on Friday that the PM was wanting to empower these grassroots - up to a point.

The government looks worse by the day over this legislation. Both versions strip away asylum seekers' rights. Gillard has turned her back on her words of July 2010: ''I would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention.''

Now the government is busy pointing out the convention has all sorts of dubious signatories - including Iran, Afghanistan, and Zimbabwe.

The government now knows it has to swallow bitter medicine, but what comes next is the alarming unknown for it. Will it really face an armada?

When she became PM, Gillard named carbon pricing, asylum seekers and the mining tax as problems she'd address. She'll get the carbon scheme through thanks to the Greens' help and the mining tax as well.

On carbon, Gillard is (more or less) back where Labor was before Kevin Rudd did his spectacular retreat; on mining tax she gave away billions; on the boats, she's frustrated, humiliated and worse off than ever.

Michelle Grattan is Age political editor

Abbott Says No To Migration Act Amendments Wants His Own Changes

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Jeremy Thompson

Updated September 21, 2011 11:14:54

Video: Compare me to the Boss: Swan (ABC News)

Related Story: Swan named world's best treasurer

Related Story: IMF issues global recession warning

Treasurer Wayne Swan says he is happy to be compared to US rocker Bruce Springsteen after being named 'the boss' of the world's finance ministers.

The award, born not in the USA but in Europe, was conferred on him by leading banking and investment magazine Euromoney on advice from global economic experts.

The only other Australian winner of the award was Paul Keating in 1984, who later famously called himself the "Placido Domingo of politics" as he launched his ultimately successful bid to wrest the keys to The Lodge from Bob Hawke.

Asked which maestro he would compare himself to on ABC News Breakfast this morning, Mr Swan said: "I'm not really into classical music".

"What I'm into is rock and roll and I'm a great Bruce Springsteen fan - so there you go," Mr Swan told interviewer Virginia Trioli.

His message? Clearly, 'I'm on fire' - although he said it wasn't quite time for him to don one of Mr Keating’s famous Zegna suits.

But he was happy to credit the former treasurer with economic reforms that modernised the Australian economy - and even tipped his hat, albeit obliquely, to his predecessor, Peter Costello.

Audio: Listen to Wayne Swan on AM (AM)

"We've not seen an award like this in Australia for 27 years," he told AM.

"I think the award underscores the importance of long-term fundamental economic reform, starting 27 years ago with those great reforms of the Hawke and Keating era, and of course there were reforms during the period of the Howard government as well."

Euromoney said it has contacted Mr Keating for comment on Mr Swan's award, but had been greeted with a volley of expletives.

The magazine said the former treasurer "curtly offered what appeared to be travel advice, suggesting we visit some place called 'buggery'."

But he then cooled down, praising Mr Swan for "his ability to comprehend danger and act decisively to minimise it" in the wake of the 2008 Lehman Brothers collapse.

"Keating singled out Swan's decisions to guarantee bank deposits and splash on stimulus as crucial in helping Australia to avoid recession during the Global Financial Crisis," the magazine said.

"If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, Wayne Swan's treasurership brought us through this profound crisis," Mr Keating is quoted as saying.

The magazine said it contacted Mr Costello for comment - but he didn't have one.

Weathering the storm

The prestigious award came as Australia continued to weather the worst of the global financial storm.

Overnight the International Monetary Fund warned that the US and the eurozone were at risk of tipping back into recession, with chief economist Olivier Blanchard urging political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic to "get their acts together."

But the IMF said Australia had enough economic firepower to avoid a recession, saying the Federal Government did not overspend in ensuring Australia avoided becoming a victim of the last financial crisis.

"No absolutely not, the Government's debt to GDP ratio is very low in Australia - very, very low," the IMF's Jorg Decressin said. "So much lower than in many other advanced economies that there is plenty of space to respond to future eventualities."

But despite Australia's strong economic performance, the Opposition reckons Mr Swan is dancing in the dark.

Nationals Senate leader Barnaby Joyce said he thought the award should be named after the captain of the Titanic, Edward John Smith.

"The award was true to form. Paul Keating got it before we got the recession we had to have," he told journalists outside parliament.

But acknowledging Australia has weathered the world's financial meltdowns of recent years, Senator Joyce said the success had "nothing to do with Wayne Maxwell Swan".

"The reason we never went into recession was that we were selling red rocks at a record price, iron ore, we were selling black rocks at a record price being coal."

Each year the Euromoney award honours the finance minister, treasurer or central bank governor whose decisions "have directly benefited both the performance and perception of their country's economic and financial achievements".

Mr Swan has presided over an economy which grew 1.2 per cent in the June quarter while most of the world's developed economies stalled, while unemployment at 5.3 per cent is roughly half that of the United States and Europe.

Australia also has a low level of debt and consumer confidence is also up - again, in contrast to that of other advanced economies.

Australia's economy has relied to a large degree on the health of China's manufacturing sector and the coal, gas and iron ore Australian companies provide to the Asian giant.

Mr Swan has had failures though. His mining tax proposal under the Rudd government was thwarted by an effective campaign by mining companies and was replaced by a far less lucrative minerals resource rent tax acceptable to the miners.

Mr Swan will be presented with the award in Washington next weekend.

As for the next election - Mr Swan will be standing. After all, he was born to run.

 

Featured Video

 

 

Investigative Unit Logo

Glory days for Swan after best treasurer accolade - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Jeremy Thompson

Updated September 21, 2011 07:54:18

World's best treasurer: Wayne Swan

Treasurer Wayne Swan has been awarded the prestigious finance minister of the year award for his handling of the Australian economy.

The award is judged by leading European banking and finance magazine Euromoney on advice from global bankers and investors.

Each year the award honours the finance minister, treasurer or central bank governor whose decisions "have directly benefited both the performance and perception of their country's economic and financial achievements".

Australia survived the global financial crisis without suffering the recession that crippled most Western economies and has registered strong growth during the latest downturn which has hit other countries hard.

Mr Swan oversaw the cash handouts in 2008 and the schools building program that were widely credited with quarantining Australia from the economic woes of the GFC.

The only other Australian treasurer to win the coveted award was Paul Keating in 1984 after a raft of economic reforms including deregulating banking and floating the dollar.

Mr Swan has presided over an economy which grew 1.2 per cent in the June quarter while most of the world's developed economies stalled, while unemployment at 5.3 per cent is roughly half that of the United States and Europe.

Australia also has a low level of debt and consumer confidence is also up - again, in contrast to that of other advanced economies.

Australia's economy has relied to a large degree on the health of China's manufacturing sector and the coal, gas and iron ore Australian companies provide to the Asian giant.

Mr Swan has had failures though. His mining tax proposal under the Rudd government was thwarted by an effective campaign by mining companies and was replaced by a far less lucrative minerals resource rent tax acceptable to the miners.

Mr Swan will be presented with the award in Washington next weekend.

Swan named world's best treasurer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Chris Bowen From: The Australian

September 16, 2011 12:00AM

WE'VE heard the mantra so many times: John Howard stopped the boats. Well, in September 2001, in response to the Tampa affair, the Howard government introduced its Nauru solution and about 1800 asylum-seekers arrived on boats in the first 100 days following that announcement.

In a radio interview nine days before the Tampa incident, Howard said: "We won't turn people back on the sea, we can't behave in that manner." But with the boats continuing to arrive after Nauru, that's exactly what he did.

The failures and ineffectiveness of Nauru and temporary protection visas have long been a topic of debate. But it is one of the least talked about elements of Howard's and now Tony Abbott's policy that is perhaps the most flawed and hypocritical: the policy of turning back boats on the high seas.

While the turn back the boats policy was reckless and dangerous for all those involved, it did have a deterrent effect. Combined with key international events - such as the large-scale return of asylum-seekers to Afghanistan following the fall of the Taliban and the decrease in Sri Lankan arrivals with the hiatus in the conflict - the policy did discourage boat journeys. But the execution is where it falls over.

Under the Howard government, Australia's border protection agencies turned back the boats on several occasions, with the last time in 2003 before the practice was quietly set aside.

This is still Coalition policy. It is still Abbott's policy to take control of a boat on the high seas, and turn it back to Indonesia no matter who is on board, no matter how many women or children. Is it any wonder we question the crocodile tears from the opposition about protections in Malaysia, when they would turn children away with no protection, no access to schooling or healthcare and no one to process their asylum claims?

There are three key reasons why the Opposition's turn back the boats policy is just not feasible. The first is that Indonesia has made it abundantly clear that it will not be party to such action and indeed that it would affect relations and co-operation between our two countries. Only last week, Agung Sabar Santoso of Indonesia's National Police, who has responsibility for that country's anti-people smuggling taskforce, was quoted as saying: "It will certainly affect relations if [Australia] turns boats away," and "We don't want them to die at sea. You can imagine that there are children and women as well."

This is certainly not an isolated view. In March 2010 the Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said, "simply pushing back boats to where they have come from would be a backward step".

However, Indonesia's co-operation is just one key obstacle to turning back the boats. The second is the welfare of asylum-seekers. Unfortunately, we have seen incidents in the past of overloaded boats being sabotaged by desperate people faced with forced turn-back. All advice points to this again being a real threat if the policy was reintroduced. Even the fear of a tow back has led to serious incidents.

As the Northern Territory coroner found in 2010, a boat was set on fire due to fears the passengers would be turned back. Five people were killed and dozens were injured.

"It was apparently these fears that sparked a plan to burn the vessel to prevent its return to Indonesia. A fire would also necessitate rescue of the passengers by the [Australian Defence Force] and their transfer to an Australian vessel," coroner Greg Cavanagh said in his report.

The final point about the opposition's irresponsible turning back the boats policy is that it endangers the wellbeing not only of asylum-seekers, but of Australian Navy and Customs personnel. It requires the high-risk boarding of what are generally decrepit and overloaded vessels on unpredictable waters.

Senior officials under the Howard government have made no secret of disdain for towing back boats. Retired Australian Army brigadier Gary Bornholt recently said on ABC television, the turn around policy "puts all of our own people directly into harm's way". He also said: "What we're creating is a potential high-risk situation where it's in the interests of the people on the boat to sink the boat."

The evidence is overwhelming that turning back the boats is a crude policy that is neither safe nor viable. Yet this is where the elegance of the Malaysia transfer arrangement shines through: turning people back in a safe and orderly way, and providing a massive deterrent for people considering that dangerous boat journey to Australia.

The best advice and intelligence we have - which the government has shared with Abbott - clearly shows that people-smugglers now know that if asylum-seekers are sent to Nauru and are found to be refugees, they will be resettled in Australia. That is not an effective deterrent.

What that advice also shows though, is that sending people back to where they started the boat journey does work. The best disincentive is for people considering that journey to know that it is all for nought, that they will be out of pocket and that they will be risking their lives, only to wind up back where they started, which is overwhelmingly Malaysia.

The deal negotiated with Malaysia provides a genuinely effective plan to remove the product people-smugglers are selling - a ticket to Australia - by virtually turning back boats, but in a safe and orderly fashion.

It is why we are determined to introduce legislation to put beyond doubt and enable the transfer of irregular maritime arrivals to third countries under the Migration Act.

The message it sends is that if you take the boat journey to Australia then you'll be returned by plane to Malaysia, and be processed in the mix of more than 90,000 others.

But it also delivers significant humanitarian outcomes in the region - an increase in our refugee intake of 4000 people, people who have waited a long time for resettlement, poor people who couldn't in their wildest dreams afford to pay a people-smuggler.

Chris Bowen is Minister for Immigration and Citizenship.

Safest way to stop the boats | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

Sam Dastyari From: The Australian

September 12, 2011 12:00AM

 

Labor could win if Rudd returns - poll

The latest poll figures show Labor could reverse its popularity slump if Kevin Rudd was to return as PM. Sky News12 September 2011. Labor could win if Rudd returns – poll

 


A YEAR before the May 1991 NSW election, there was speculation in Labor ranks that then opposition leader Bob Carr could be dumped.

It was mid-term, an election was looming and the polling did not indicate that Labor would make ground on the Greiner government.

Carr's policy interests including a stronger school curriculum, environmental protection and fiscal conservatism were not seen as catchy election winners.

When Carr steered a course, he often risked losing the support of party powerbrokers and caucus colleagues. That was the case when he committed Labor to backing the creation of the Independent Commission Against Corruption, which some wrongly feared would be the Liberals' royal commission into the Labor Party. A handful of MPs and others began the drip of leadership instability stories. A leading Sydney broadsheet paper had deemed him "unelectable". Surely the best thing the party could do was dump the leader and start afresh. Well, not so?

Carr went on to become NSW's longest continuously serving premier and with Neville Wran and Bill McKell stands among NSW Labor's titans.

His government's record of achievements including the "best ever" Sydney 2000 Olympics, new national parks, smaller class sizes in early school years, drug, tort law and police reforms would all have been lost if Labor had not held its nerve 20 years ago.

Political leaders succeed because their parties support them, not the other way around. The message from the Labor Party's history is clear. In the middle of implementing difficult and essential reforms which have far-reaching and positive consequences for future generations of Australians, Labor must stand united to promote and defend its reforms. It must focus on defeating its political opponents and their divisive conservative agenda.

Australian politics is hard and competitive and when certain pressures prevail, political parties of all persuasions examine the issue of leadership.

There are examples throughout Australian history where a party's MPs have needed to demonstrate they have lost confidence in a leader and remove them.

I don't envy those who need to make these decisions; they are fraught with criticism and come at a high personal cost.

Changes in party leadership should be rare and infrequent. They should be a last resort when a party has lost its way and can never be allowed to transform into a prevailing culture. I have been a public advocate for major reform within the Labor Party and for a new style of politics.

In NSW we are trialling US-style primary elections to select candidates, a new collegiate way of developing policy and working to end factionalism that has divided our party.

While party modernisation is about forging a new path forward, we must never lose sight of what has been the Labor Party's historical strengths -- an ability, superior to our opponents, to develop good policy and the courage to see our reforms through.

Ideas and not power are the life blood of modern, reformist democratic political movements and parties.

In NSW, naked power-broking and factional deal-making at a parliamentary level, exemplified by a rotation of leaders, disappointed Labor's base and its rank-and-file membership. Good leaders were tarnished by a culture of quick fixes and conditional support.

The notion of short-term leaders is not simply confined to one state or one party, as Brendan Nelson and Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberals can attest.

For rank-and-file members and supporters, the Labor Party leadership must be measured through the outcomes delivered for those who rely most on the success of our party.

The truth is that big policy changes are usually hard and often controversial. When you tackle them, you take a hit in the polls. As a former Keating government minister recently reminded me, if they were easy someone would have done them already. But that doesn't mean they are not worth doing -- quite the opposite. If the Labor Party is to continue as a modern centre-left political party it must take action on climate change.

And, over the next two years, Labor must keep reminding Australians of our resolve to tackle this issue.

We must also remind the public of the risks that come with making Tony Abbott prime minister. This is a man who does not believe climate change is real and who will, if elected, immediately return to the worst of Work Choices, stripping away the rights and conditions of millions of working Australian men and women.

While commentators and pundits often have disproportionately loud voices in the Australian media, the voices of Labor's true believers are often silent. They are proud to be part of a movement that is tackling climate change. They are proud to be part of a movement that is implementing economic reform and building Australia's future capacity through the National Broadband Network.

And they are proudest to be part of a movement that will always stand up for the rights of working Australians.

Opinion polls will come and go, but Labor's true believers remain and it is to them that the Labor Party owes it to show the courage of our convictions.

Sam Dastyari is the general secretary of NSW Labor and a member of the national executive.

Rally round the PM and banish the NSW disease | The Australian

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

September 13, 2011

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop. Photo: Andrew Meares

THE federal opposition has been advised to prepare for a snap election should Labor replace Julia Gillard with Kevin Rudd.

Following the Herald/Nielsen poll yesterday that showed Mr Rudd at the helm would restore Labor to an election-winning lead, the Deputy Opposition Leader, Julie Bishop, told a meeting of the shadow ministry that the Coalition must be ready for such a move.

As senior Labor figures stressed Ms Gillard should be given at least until February or March to try to reverse Labor's fortunes, there was a consensus in the shadow ministry that Ms Gillard could not recover and would be replaced.

Ms Bishop, who forecast Mr Rudd's dumping before others in the Coalition, and Ms Gillard's own decline, told colleagues she did not believe the poll boost that Labor would receive from changing to Mr Rudd would be sustainable and Labor would rush to an election to capitalise on it.

The Herald poll showed Labor trailing the Coalition by 27 per cent to 48 per cent on the primary vote and by 42 per cent to 58 per cent on a two-party-preferred basis.

When voters were asked how they would vote if Ms Gillard were replaced by Mr Rudd, Labor's primary vote rose 15 percentage points to 42 per cent and the Coalition's fell 5 points to 43 per cent. Labor led the Coalition on a two-party-preferred basis by 52 per cent to 48 per cent.

Mr Rudd, the Foreign Minister, has returned to work after six weeks recuperating from heart surgery. He is due to fly to the US tomorrow for ministerial meetings in San Francisco and could stay on for another week for the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

Despite his public popularity, Mr Rudd remains a polarising figure within the ALP and there are doubts about the sincerity of his pledge - as communicated by supporters - that he would change his style if brought back and would not exact vengeance.

There was grumbling in some Labor quarters yesterday that Mr Rudd did not attend an early-morning cabinet meeting to try to find a solution on asylum-seeker policy but managed the day before to make a public appearance with the French Foreign Minister, Alain Juppe.

''It was the Kevin of old, able to make a self-serving photo op but nowhere to be seen when there was a hard decision to be made,'' one ALP figure said. Mr Rudd had a doctor's appointment yesterday afternoon to seek the all-clear for his overseas trip.

The NSW Labor general-secretary, Sam Dastyari, a leading figure in the NSW Right, wrote a newspaper article yesterday urging the party to hold its nerve during this tough period and see through its controversial reform agenda.

''Australian politics is hard and competitive and, when certain pressures prevail, political parties of all persuasions examine the issue of leadership,'' Mr Dastyari says in the article, which does not mention Ms Gillard.

But he says leadership changes must be a ''last resort when a party has lost its way'' and ''can never be allowed to transform into a prevailing culture''.

One source said Mr Dastyari's article was a sign to the Right to give Ms Gillard more time.

Expect snap poll if Rudd is restored, says Bishop

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

September 12, 2011

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA - DECEMBER 27:  Australian Cricket legend and Channel Nine commentator Shane Warne chats with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd  during day two of the First Test match between Australia and Pakistan at Melbourne Cricket Ground on December 27, 2009 in Melbourne, Australia.  (Photo by Mark Dadswell/Getty Images)Click to play video

Kevin Rudd doubles the popularity of Shane Warne on twitter, becoming the most popular tweeter in Australia with one million followers.

OOPS. We have long known that seven out of 10 Australian voters were unhappy with the way Labor discarded the prime minister they thought had been elected by the people.

And we have long known that the former leader is by far the most popular of all possible Labor leaders, at least twice as popular as Julia Gillard.

Now we also know that, if Labor restored Kevin Rudd to the prime ministership and went to an election today, Labor would win, completely reversing its fortunes, according to today's Herald/Nielsen poll. A Rudd leadership would lift Labor's dire primary vote by a transforming 15 percentage points.

Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd, holding a candle in remembrance at the Tenth Anniversary of the September 11 attacks in New York, national commemoration ceremony in Canberra on Sunday 11 September 2011.Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Yesterday's hero ... Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Instead of facing an electoral wipeout of half its caucus, it would be able to win power in its own right, with a two-party preferred vote of 52 per cent to 48.

The poll does not tell us why but we can reasonably suppose the main reason is legitimacy. In the eyes of the people, Gillard never had it. Rudd never lost it. This presents Labor with a terrible dilemma. The poll is fresh evidence that Labor made a mistake of historic proportions in unseating Rudd for Gillard, suggesting its best hope is to undo the blunder and admit the error.

Oops. Sorry. Please welcome the 28th prime minister of Australia, who happens to be the same one you welcomed as the 26th. We took him away. Now we bring him back.

But would Rudd's popularity survive his return? Rudd is martyr popular. If his martyrdom were reversed, would his popularity reverse too?

Restoring Rudd is the obvious solution for Labor. But it is not the easy solution. And maybe it is no solution at all. It's not easy because the Labor caucus is not ready to admit its mistake. It is unhappy and uneasy with its lot but it is also confused and confounded about its future.

In particular, the Right factional operatives who staged the coup, the faceless men, are determined to keep Rudd out. Their misjudgment has cost them their political credibility but they retain their organisational prowess. And the Right still has the numbers. And it's not easy because a returning Rudd - or any leader other than Gillard - would need to negotiate a new agreement with the independents and the Greens who keep the minority government in power. And maybe it's no solution at all. Once justice is seen to be done and the rightful ruler restored, is he then subject to judgment by the ordinary criteria?

"This whole situation is unique in history," says the Herald's pollster, John Stirton, of Nielsen. "If you give it back to Rudd, he's then the legitimate leader. But he still owns the problems created in his first term."

The big policy problems facing Gillard are the same ones bequeathed her by Rudd - carbon pricing, asylum seekers and the mining tax. This is Labor's dilemma - the strong likelihood of defeat under Gillard, or a wild gamble on Rudd. And it's all self-imposed. Oops.

Yesterday's man may not be fit for tomorrow's problems

| |
Nick Efstathiadis

September 3, 2011

<em>Illustration: Rocco Fazzari</em>

Illustration: Rocco Fazzari

At least one of Labor's next generation of leaders isn't shy about his ambitions, but no one wants the top job - yet.

Bill Shorten left the businessmen around the table in no doubt about his views on Kevin Rudd, or his own ambitions. It was a gathering over lunch in Sydney some weeks ago. The assistant Treasurer of Australia may have been there representing the Gillard government, including its Foreign Minister, but he seemed to be speaking very much for himself.

One of the business people later summarised Shorten's exposition over lunch this way: "There's no way we're bringing that prick Rudd back again." And: "I'm ready to serve as leader." The businessman said: "When we walked out of the room, we all looked at each other and said, 'Wow'."

Shorten was careful not to say that he was running for the prime ministership. But he made it clear that was his inevitable destination. For a 44-year-old junior minister who has spent all of four years in the federal Parliament, his audience of elite businessmen thought it was a spectacularly brash performance.

But it was not an exclusive one. A US diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks this week showed that the former union leader had been preening himself, even in front of foreign governments, as long as two years ago.

The US consul-general in Melbourne, Michael Thurston, wrote a report to Washington after meeting Shorten, then the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities, in 2009:

"Shorten makes no bones about his ambitions in federal politics. During a June 11 meeting, Shorten told consul-general that 'he did not take this job to stand still'. He explained that he had been overlooked for promotion in Prime Minister Rudd's June 6 cabinet reshuffle . . . in order to keep the geographical balance in the cabinet between Victoria and NSW. (Comment: Despite words to the contrary, Shorten appeared disappointed while he was discussing this topic. End comment.) …

"Shorten, who is somewhat rumpled in appearance, prefers to get down to business quickly in meetings … Despite his lukewarm relationship with Prime Minister Rudd (he sided with Kim Beazley in the 2006 ALP leadership ballot), Shorten struck us as highly ambitious but willing to wait - at least for a while - for his moment in the sun."

Shorten does not conceal his ambition. "Bill is pathological about being leader," said one of his colleagues in Labor's Victorian Right faction this week. And he seemed completely nonchalant about the cable's publication. His response to reporters was perfect: "The nice comments are all true but the less flattering comments I don't agree with."

As the Gillard government's fortunes took another blow this week with the High Court rebuff to its Malaysian plan for asylum seekers, leadership speculation intensified. Shorten's name was in high-velocity circulation. So was that of the Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, also from Labor's Right. The Climate Change Minister, Greg Combet, from the Left, is also much-mentioned. These men constitute the next generation of Labor leadership candidates.

The reality is that none of these men is campaigning. And no one is trying in any serious way to enlist them. The accelerating velocity of the game of who-will-be-leader whispers indicates three things. First, the Labor caucus increasingly believes Gillard cannot win an election. Second, there is a creeping desperation about what to do. And third, Labor has conditioned the media to be on standby for a leadership challenge whenever a Labor government gets into trouble.

And there are good reasons why Shorten, Smith and Combet are not campaigning. It was the gleeful excitement with which Labor decapitated itself last year that has it in so much trouble today. Labor thought that the coup against Kevin Rudd was an emphatic pronouncement on Kevin Rudd. It was not. It was a verdict on Labor itself.

It conveyed graphically to the public that federal Labor, like its NSW chapter, was not a party committed to governing well and soberly. Its supreme loyalty was to the perpetuation of its own power, at any cost. The strike against Rudd was a strike against Labor's own credibility and seriousness.

The underlying reason for the Gillard government's woes is its perceived legitimacy. By every rule and by every law Gillard is an entirely legitimate Labor leader and Prime Minister. But in the public mind she has never recovered from the way she seized power. It's harsh enough for a deputy to destroy a leader.

But it's worse that Gillard's strike was without warning. And Gillard has never given a real explanation for why it was necessary. Merely saying the reason was that it was "a good government that lost its way" is not only dismissive of Rudd, but of the office of prime minister and of the electorate. With weak legitimacy in the public mind from the outset, two further blows have undercut Gillard's claim to rightfully occupy the highest office in the land. One was her party's failure to win the 2010 election. The other was her breach of an undertaking that she would not introduce a carbon tax. This allowed the opposition to plausibly argue that she had only been able to get through the election under false pretences.

On top of that triple failure to establish legitimacy in the public mind, what would another change of leader achieve? Could Bill Shorten, Stephen Smith or Greg Combet claim to be any more legitimate than Gillard? Of course not. "Knocking off Julia Gillard now would make us look even more ridiculous than NSW Labor," one cabinet minister said, correctly, this week.

When Rudd stood before the Labor caucus for the last time as its leader, he said: "I'm deeply concerned about the importation into the federal parliamentary Labor Party of practices we've seen elsewhere, whether it's with Morris Iemma, whether it's with Nathan Rees, or with others in NSW. I don't believe these sorts of tactics have a place in the federal parliamentary Labor Party."

He was, of course, right. Labor is now paying the high price for catching the NSW disease.

Some in the Labor caucus argue a fresh face in the leadership would at least win the government a chance to be heard afresh. But here is the second reason Shorten, Smith and Combet are not running. They would be fresh faces, certainly, but all polling suggests they would be less popular choices than Gillard.

Stephen Smith is preferred as Labor leader by just 7 per cent of voters in a seven-way comparison by Essential Media published on August 3. Greg Combet attracted support of 2 per cent. And Bill Shorten? Exactly 1 per cent. Gillard's support was a dire 12 per cent in the same poll, but still higher than any of the next-generation alternatives.

To change to any of these "fresh faces" would be a change without an improvement. And this is the third reason none is organising a challenge. To take the leadership now would be a poisoned chalice. Shorten may be pathological about being leader, but he is not insane. Paul Keating and John Howard each served 22 years in Parliament before becoming prime minister, Kevin Rudd 9 and Julia Gillard 11. Only Bob Hawke managed it in two. Bill Shorten is not Bob Hawke.

But there is one other leadership alternative, the man who attracted 37 per cent in the Essential poll. As a cabinet minister said yesterday: "The obvious thing to do it to put Kevin back. 'Oops, sorry, we got it wrong'."

In a Herald/Nielsen poll that pitted Rudd and Gillard head to head in June, 60 per cent preferred Rudd as Labor leader and 31 per cent the woman who replaced him. Rudd receives a rock-star reception when he campaigns for Labor colleagues.

But what about Rudd's own warning against the revolving-door syndrome? Among the leadership candidates, Rudd is the only one Labor could present as not being just another blundering bid to hold power, but the reversal of an earlier blunder. He is the last Labor leader to win an election.

So why not make Rudd leader? There is a substantive electoral reason. And there is a big obstacle of internal Labor politics. The electoral reason is that, even if Rudd were to return, he would still face the same policy problems Gillard confronts, the ones he bequeathed her. Can Rudd solve the asylum seeker problem, for instance? Rudd would have to persuade his colleagues that he could solve the policy problems of Labor.

The internal obstacle is the pride, fear and self-interest of the Right faction bosses who dispatched him, the so-called faceless men. Remember, the Right dominates the caucus.

As one said this week: "What, we all have to put the shackles on and file obediently back into the North Korean concentration camp?" And this Right faction boss, who was rewarded by Gillard with a promotion, spoke of his fear of Rudd retribution: "I would be dismissed in the first 15 minutes of the new regime, and that doesn't do anything for my enthusiasm."

Rudd, five weeks into his eight-week leave for heart surgery, is not organising a challenge either. One of his caucus supporters said yesterday: "Rudd isn't campaigning and his view of the world is pretty clear - he doesn't have to." The party would need to ask him to return.

Labor has some hard thinking about a tough choice. On the current polling, most of the caucus will lose their seats at an election. Are they prepared to forgo their only realistic leadership hope in order to protect the pride and promotions of the faceless men? Or can the Right eat large lumps of crow and bring "the prick" back?

Peter Hartcher is The Sydney Morning Herald's political editor.

Keen to serve, just not now

| |