Wednesday 17 September 2008

Same, same but different

There are lots of candidates for catchy - but cliched - titles for blogs about the change in Liberal leadership.
Methinks he protests too much
is one. His need to convince the legendary 'battlers' that he is not a 'silver tail' was obviously uppermost in some strategists minds. I don't think he was very convincing but time will tell.
Turn Bull into reality
could be another one. Again we will wait and see.


Should we worry too much that he is rich? In one way this is a sign that this is a man who knows how to achieve, and surely we want successful people in key leadership positions.
Any way I suspect in six weeks all this will be academic, he will either be chewing it up or stuffing it up. I suspect the former, and the personal critique will then all be a bit beside the point.
Certainly will be interesting
Personally, I was in agreement with Turnbull, that it was disappointing to see that the one of the first comments the PM made was that the Republic would now be a key issue.
This is such a political ploy, aimed at agitating the Liberal Party from within, about what is essentially a minor issue.
For heaven's sake a strong opposition is a good thing(here for example). On the other hand it was good to see an encouragement from Rudd to identify key bi-partisan issues. As these troubled times go on it is clear that there are more and more issues that are just important and not just or substantially political.
I could and would name the River, education, the intervention, the War and health as just some. of these

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is such a political ploy, aimed at agitating the Liberal Party from within, about what is essentially a minor issue.
For heaven's sake a strong opposition is a good thing


Yes, but in a two-party system do you really expect either Labor or the Lib/Nats to promote unity and stability in the opposing side?

Stephan Clark said...

Nope I don't, I think I am just sorry that from now we won't deal with the Republic on its own merits, rathert it will be a political ploy on both sides

Anonymous said...

Out of curiosity, which model do you prefer?

Stephan Clark said...

You mean "model" with regard to republic or with regard to Parliamentary structure?
Republic...I generally accept the argument that directly electing the President woiuld politcise the office. This may not necessarily be a bad thing, it may add a new level of discussion to political issues.
But I would be a happy with a President (GG) appointed by joint sitting.
Parliament...I think the two parties have stitched up the voting processes too tightly (particularly, voting above the line in the Senate can only advantage the Liberal and Labor Parties)
In the best of all worlds I think we should have proportional representation in both chambers...but realistically it ain't going to happen
I think there is wisdom in getting rid of one of the tiers of government but I also think that's not going to happen either