If Labour does win I think the first thing Rudd should do is clean Howards lackys out of the Public Service,and by that I mean SACK them there will be short term pain for long term gain, try to replace them with long term public servants obliged to neither side.
He should then, though it will bring on more pain set up either an enquiry or royal commission into Howards scandals,IRAQ,the wheat deal,children overboard, SEIV 11,the Haneff stuff up,and nail Howard and his crooked liars hides to the door.

as the writer said: if you put a pollie in front of a fork in the road, they choose 'power' over 'purity'. why should they not? they, like all of us, are seeking to maximize some combination of wealth, power, status, and security. to get power, you must leave behind purity. but you must not admit it. people will go on putting their heads in nooses, year after year, but only if you assure them it's a fashionable tie. this lie allows the mugs to pretend they are not mugs, or pretend at least they are not craven mugs.

unfortunately, telling a few necessary lies requires telling more, to protect the initial batch. before long, the pollie has lost any respect for the credulous fools he imagines believe him. the fools become resentful, of the ever growing list of lies they must swallow, and the ever thinner possibility that they can believe the lies that provide their pretense of self respect.

the present result seems to be that the howard mob have worn out the psychological component of legitimacy, allowing them to be thrown out of office while still appearing competent to govern.

getting rid of them won't do any good. the functional imperatives of parliamentary government will rot the next one, just like all the others. this would be a description of a psychotic society if it were not typical of humanity.

Rudd has the opportunity to stand out in style and substance from the divisive, dictatorial style has been the signature of Howard's leadership.

In all incoming US Administrations, the first 100 days sees severance of all partisan public servants. This practice must be taken up by Rudd to remove all the neo-conservatives responsible for collaborating in the worst standard of national governance experienced in Australia's history. We do not want more of the same from their ilk.

Federal Police should lay charges under the Crimes Act where corruption has occurred and immunity may be allowed where necessary to secure prosection evidence against the highest perpetrators up to the Prime Minister's office.

Rudd's new team of advisors should be drawn from an international pool of experts, Law Reform Commissioners and particularly from emminent scientists with proven achievements and ethical behaviour.

In Rudd's first term, the stage should be set for a constitutional convention, where our broken 3 tier system of government is replaced with an efficient 2 tier system where local government delivers national programs according to regional/local priorities.

Until such time as a new constitution is in place, Rudd's government could enact federal legislation that takes over state responsibilities for water, energy, health, education, police, ports, roads, rail and local government.

Rudd has an ideal opportunity of engaging his sharp intellect and reform stamina to introduce a major re-structure to government decision making in Australia that will enable both social justice and economic reform to be achieved and delivered.

Massive productivity gains of up to $30 Billion annually are achievable by vigorously removing the dry rot that has penetrated the whole ediface of state and federal governments in Australia over the past decade.

So cogently and succinctly put Natasha - well done!
"But when and if Labor falls over the magic line … what then?"
What then indeed!
As you so compellingly conclude, "Decency and accountability don't rate a mention" among the "historically high-profile advocates of due process and civil liberties" within his Party OR the (squads of) "powerful mandarin(s) ... federal bureaucrats and connected acolytes, whose careers have advanced by virtue of their effective advancement of the Howard Government's agenda through episodes of national shame ..."
Given the history of his Party's performance over recently past decades - beginning with the Whitlam regime - and his recently being given the nod by the likes of Rupert Murdoch, it is highly unlikely that any significant change to the neo-liberal economic agenda would be allowed under such a 'pragmatic' apparatus.
As with the Hawke-Keating regime before him and the oft-compared 'Democrats' in the U$A, the significant 'players' both within and outside of Mr Rudd's Party are members of the millionaire class, and as such have little or no interest whatsoever in the worsening daily plight of the several million Australian families being forced to subsist on the margins of our mainstream society ... er, sorry, Economy!
j5o6hn is of course quite correct to call for the sacking of the coterie of treacherous 'executive' Public Managers who have served the interests of the hoWARd regime and their wealthy national and foreign 'stakeholders' so well, and the setting up of either an enquiry or royal commission into Howards (numerous) scandals. Most worriesome however is his mis-spelling and mis-understanding of the true role of the L-A-B-O-R Party: they took U out of labour a long time ago brother!

Who is Kevin Rudd? Lately I see two leaders of political parties both saying the same thing all the time. Howard says Boo and Rudd say Boo Too.

He should be ashamed of himself in letting Beattie take all the running in exposing the Haneef case for what is is. His actions in this affair smack incredibly of Beasley's total lack of spine on the refugeee/Tampa issue.

I am desperate for Howard to go and for the Coalition to go too. But Rudd I suspect will be as bad as Howard, or even worse. He wasn't called Dr Death in the QLD Public Service for nothing.

As to others comments on sacking public servants who were/are Howard lackeys. This is tough as in a senior job under any government of longevity you must either take a stand and face the inevitable end of your career or take the Nuremberg line. Just following orders.

Yes there are lackeys and so on, of course there are. Howard has appointed many. I include people like Cosgrove in this group, promoted before he should have been etc.

Don't forget too that every government we have had does exactly the same. Mates jobs, jobs for the boys. If you don't think so of Labor just look at your State government or Admin.

But how do you tell the difference? Are all public servants who serve under Howard to be sacked "just in case"? Tell me please, how do we know the difference? You see people must take the line of least resistance when their family's future is at risk. Obey and do what you are told or face the sack. Plus the inevitable labelling etc.

So what is the solution? Get rid of party politics. Full stop. Change the loyalty from party to electorate and the problems vanish. How to get there is the tough bit as most seem to think we have democracy. Crazy people!

I think voters are ready for a change. The average person is working harder than they have ever worked before and carrying a debt higher than they have ever had before. Voters are paying a fortune for basic services that we have never been required to pay such a high price for.
Yes the government coffers are full but government has been very busy selling off Australian public assets and State governments are bribed via the National Competition Policy system where payments are withheld unless state government ventures are making money rather than costing money.
Mr Howard is running the country as a business rather than a government and while the poor and the rich are being looked after, Mr Average is peddling too hard to prop up the system.
Another term with Howard? What will we get to pay for that we have never paid for before?