If Julia Gillard really turns out to be a progressive PM, then today’s spill will be the first cheerful thing we’ve seen in federal politics for some time.
But I’m not optimistic. For one thing, it’s the powerbrokers from the Right that are pushing to have her there. For another, her record on issues like asylum seekers isn’t good. We lefties will have to be careful not to give her credit for having apparently been a lefty before she entered parliament: the issue is what she’s done since she’s been there. And what she’ll do as Prime Minister.
We’ll see soon enough. Does she immediately move to end the intolerable situation where we’re detaining refugees indefinitely and refusing to process them? Does she cancel the internet filter that will put children at risk? Does she change the ALP’s nasty anti- marriage equality position? Does she implement a proper mental health scheme? Does she take the fight on the RSPT to the corrupt big three miners or fold? Does she negotiate with the Greens to implement a real climate change policy?
Having a likeable leader is not much use if they’re still doing the same nasty stuff.
Although I’d love to be wrong, I suspect the answers to all of these will be no. The hint from Rudd last night is that the ALP Right is supporting her in the belief that they can get her to implement their policies.
If so, then she’s no more a hope for us than Kevin Rudd was, and the only way we’ll get real change is to vote Green. I suspect the ALP will take advantage of the confusion and call an election before the voters who abandoned Rudd but are willing to believe in Gillard realise that.
ELSEWHERE: Thoughts seen on twitter:
- Rudd speaks to ACL; three days later is crucified. Coincidence?
- BP is just pleased for once there’s a spill it’s not responsible for.
- Peter Costello is going to be kicking himself forever.
Moved On 
As I did Tanner, I believed Gillard was a lefty in 2007. Now I’m not so sure.
As least I hope she’ll tell the ACL to piss off.
I’d hope so – unlike Rudd, she hasn’t promised them anything – but I’m not willing to get my hopes up.
The Red Barren is now in charge of bringing Howard’s battlers back to the fold. Rudd did it once, but people are now just sick of the ALP brand.
Putting the other half of the duumvirate in charge may not represent much of a change, other than in personality.
Caucus is doing this to change the messenger, not the message. They were upset that Rudd did not pay them enough attention. Rudd tried to be govern for, and be answerable to, the Australian people rather than the faceless men of the factions. The factions have struck back, and Rudd has to buckle to their power.
To the extent that the ALP wishes to win back alienated outer urban marginal seats it needs to appeal to values ordinary decent Australians hold dear. This is not good news for the left. Interestingly, in the Rudd-Gillard stoush the only friends Rudd has are in the hard left faction.
Pingback: Link dump – leadership spill edition « Spray of the Day
“Now I’m not so sure.”
I think she’s demonstrated amply that she’s prepared to sell out her lefty beliefs for personal gain.
Will she wind back income quarantining, work for the dole and all the other underclass attacking stunts the Libs instigated, Therese Rein made a mint out of, and Rudd kept going/expanded.
??????
This change is nothing more than a change in face because Rudd had become so unpopular and as such, far less likely to win the election than somebody new.
Nothing substantial will change in terms of policies.
and the only way we’ll get real change is to vote Green.
Wrong, historically – here and around the world, real change hasn’t come about through voting, it’s come about through organised labour putting up a fight.
SB’s continued and highly ridiculous attempts to try and make out that lefties are all middle class latte sippers out of touch with “ordinary Australians” isn’t even worth debating. He may as well have cut and paste from some News Limited hack.
BT, this change has come about precisely by organised labour putting up a fight. The only talking head on Lateline last night was the AWU heavyweight stooge Paul Howes. Under a Labor government power ultimately resides in the unions. What more do you want?
I see SB, like other wingnuts (predictably) picked up on the fact that Gillard is childless.. What I’m wondering is why Julie Bishop doesn’t attract the same criticism from the wingnuts? After all, until this morning Bishop help the opposite position to Gillard.
C’mon RobJ, lighten up. Don’t go all PC on me.
It’s OK SB, you didn’t need to respond, I think if you read my post you’ll realise it’s about you, not to you. But since you did respond could you link me to a post where you’ve been derogatory toward Julie Bishop regarding the fact that she’s childless? Or at least explain why she doesn’t receive the same treatment from the wingnuts?
Anyway what’s wrong with PC? It seems to me that those who rail against PC are those that want to reserve the right to call black people ‘niggers’
Rob J , PC is for Proper Cunts. No wonder you don’t see anything wrong with it.
Bishop doesn’t have red hair. Maybe she needs a new hairdresser. Red Barren is kinda funny, and I use it from time to time for my own amusement.
SB – So you can’t link me to you making derogatory remarks regarding Julie Bishop being barren. There’s a surprise!!!
True enough, but so what? I am not obliged to knock everyone equally, and ‘Red Barren’ doesn’t quite work as well with Julie.
Look at it this way, you are a bigger twat than me, but I don’t see you making that point very often.
In what respect? That unlike you I’m not a hypocrite? That unlike you I don’t trip myself up at almost every opportunity? Put like that SB I’m proud to be a bigger ‘twat’ than you 🙂
SB, i would hardly call a few corrupt union bureaucrats with eyes on cushy ALP roles “organised labour”.
Howes an co want to maintain the ALP in government to maintain and extend their cushy lives. This will not affect any real policy change and certainly doesn’t reflect any political awareness and mobilization from the rank and file within the AWU.
Under a Labor government power ultimately resides in the unions
More News Limited / Coalition scaremongering, why don’t you just link to the articles instead of trying to pass this shit off as your own independent thought?
If that statement were true – why do we still have the ABCC? why do we have Work Choices Lite?
Most unions are against the NT intervention yet that hasn’t been rolled back.
You’re sole contribution to is blog is as Rob says – amusement for others with your displays of absolute baffoonery.
You silly baffoon BT. There are more than a few corrupt union bureaucrats. Most of them devote their time to feathering their own nests and dreaming up ways to spend other peoples’ money.
I don’t understand your point SB.
Why is buffoon italicized? Were you pointing out the spelling mistake? If so, you should probably not make the same typo as I did.
Also, i never suggested that most union bureaucrats were not corrupt.
In fact, your most recent comment about union bureaucrats undermines your claim that the move by the AWU leaders is a reflection of the desire of organised Labour as a whole.
Don’t you ever get tired of being such a tool?
BT, I thought it was a cute neologism – a contraction of baffled buffoon perhaps?
Sometimes I grow tired of it, especially when I realise how far out ahead of the pack you are in these stakes.
BTW, Gillard gave a masterful exhibition of evading the question in her first question time today.
BTW, Gillard gave a masterful exhibition of evading the question in her first question time today.
It was indeed extraordinary. I only saw part of the session but she evaded the question from Abbot re the mining tax allocation in the budget three times. Was that the last count?
Although, considering almost all politicians are spin doctors and bullshit artists I was hardly surprised.
BT, I thought it was a cute neologism – a contraction of baffled buffoon perhaps?
No you didn’t, you just fucked up. And considering you wont even own up to such a trivial issue would indicate whose really ahead in those stakes.
But again I’ll take one from Rob and let the readers decide on that.
see obama’s legacy for a summary of what will change
BT, I did think it was a cute neologism, but perhaps I gave you too much credit.
Here is one policy that is not changing.
Yes, depressing.
Since she’s not religious, what’s her reason for discriminating against gays and lesbians? I dare her to enunciate a single one.
Gillard is now a creature of the Labor Right factions who put her in power. She can be expected to act accordingly.
Usually I commend politicians who take notice of voters’ opinions, but that should not be the case where, as here, principles of equality and non-discrimination are at stake.
Given that the ALP was elected on a platform that was against gay marriage, would you condemn her for changing that now?
No. There’s no democratic right to oppress the minority.