<< Julia Gillard is an insubstantial leader of a major Australian political party, created by circumstances. >>

Geoff, it is far too early to judge whether or not she is an insubstantial leader.

She may be a very substantial leader indeed, with just a few relatively easy policy changes… such is the terrible legacy left by Rudd.

Actually, there is nothing insubstantial about what she has done so far, in terminating the mining tax fracas, albeit by way of a huge concession, or in striving to reverse Rudd’s disgraceful weakening of our borders.

Other simple substantial things that she could do would be to considerably reduce our record-high immigration rate, abolish the baby bonus, get a decent population policy up with a population cap not too much larger than the current level, and make some other basic moves towards a sustainable society and away from one that is based on never-ending rapid growth.

The time is right for the paradigm of sustainability to take over from the terrible paradigm of continuous expansionism. She has already spoken wisely about a much greener future.

Julia Gillard could become a very substantial leader indeed. The stage is set for it. So it remains to be seen whether she can actually steer this country towards it, with the urgency required or whether she will indeed be an insubstantial leader, or worse…a leader like Rudd.

“Julia Gillard may be the most insubstantial leader of a major Australian political party since Andrew Peacock. She is a person created by circumstances.”
Those words are an appropriately unsubstantial start for a soft-between-the-ears souffle of an article.

The most insubstantial?
What substance was there to Malcolm Fraser who also made use of circumstance in creating his day of glory; a leader who, contrary to the circumstance of his predecessor, had no political restraint on whatever legislation he might have proposed – yet repeatedly called early elections in fear of losing power; and when defeat eventually arrived, became weepy because - he said, he had not had sufficient opportunity to implement his ideas.
What substance to Rudd, who canvassed votes on the basis of tackling “the greatest moral challenge of our time”, yet once elected proceeded to put in place a scheme designed to ensure that action to address it would not proceed, and in a manner designed to muffle concern for it.

The author judges Julia Gillard as leader. Her short tenure in that position has not demonstrated any marked lack of substance; and the outline of her history as he presented it has as many holes as gruyere cheese. Whatever she may be, should she maintain her position, it might be one way or the other. This political hatchet job does nothing to inform us

Surprised and shocked. I hoped like hell that Gillard would not lead a coup. There was no need for it. Odd is the operative word. We many tried to warn her. Now alas, possibly presiding a lead forward, toward a spectacular political collapse. No hands to wash... just grime led factional with femocrats weight on heel.

So much genuine goodwill lost in one fowel stoop. While I may like Ms Gillard she now stands for everything I despise in rat-eating factional based silo ridden media and politics. No trust, no vision to stand on, no way forward amid treachery.

Betrayal of trust; deceptive action or nature, leads to more dirt, discomfort and seeds violence and war mentality. Not the way I want to fight where there are alternative values to choose.

Sorry. Sorry we are now in this mess.

We were on track depending on which part you saw in the line. Courage fell as did the stomach muscular spin for ALP.

This time the country will pay. No vote is worth a pledge on this paradigm shift.

If only.... she had listened to her better self.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

Why on earth would I want a leader?

When you look at the record of most of our governments you find, that despite being privy to much information hidden from us mere citizens, they have stuffed up more often than not.

We are often subjected to calls from one interest group or another for a government to show "leadership" in some area or other. Have you ever noticed that these calls are always from people with unpopular causes, which would often result in a loss to the general public.

Greens & academics are very good at promoting the use of taxes from the majority being spent on some pet project of dubious value to, if not to the detriment of, the general public. This always results in calls calls for "leadership".

Next we find someone being denigrated for being populist. Hell, isn't the nature of democracy supposed to be "of the people by the people", etc. Aren't they put there to do the peoples will.

So I for one, will be reasonably happy with Julia if she leads from back behind the opinion polls, she will be better than most if she does.

But, if for some reason, you must go gallop off the edge of a high cliff, find yourself some "leader" they will get you into free fall, quicker than you can blink.

If that "leader" happens to be a charismatic orator, run like hell. They are the type that get you killed, or broke, [or both] real quick.

This is a ridiculous article. Julia has been in the job only a matter of a few weeks.

It's like hiring a new employee and carrying out a comprehensive assessment after a few days then dismissing them because they haven't performed.

This type of article seems to be part of an attempt to unfairly discredit Julia, perhaps to advantage Abbot the Rabbit and the party which looks after the interests of the greedy rich.

@David G;

Easy to forget she has been instrumental throughout this government's tenure in all they have done.

She's been there for every stuff up, working on the policies with Kevin, Wayne and Lindsay.
Her performance is well documented, and so far all we've seen is Rudd with lipstick. Same old policy, different delivery.

The cynicism of knifing Rudd, then blaming everything on him in the hope of calling an election during her honeymoon period is nothing short of a disgrace.

I love how you describe the rich as greedy also, as it pegs you one of these socialists from the "I want free stuff from people who work a million times harder than I do" set, i.e.: "I know how to spend people's hard earned better than they do".
Get a real job mate, and stop whingeing about how people who've worked their guts out, or created innovation have more than you.

The rich do a lot more for the underprivileged than thieving socialists like you make out, or indeed do yourselves.

Just watch Gillard get back in as I'm sure she will, since the Aussie electorate is mostly made up of people like you who want a free ride, and we'll see what she's done in another four years.

Pretty sure it won't be much, and we certainly won't be in the black due to her fiscal austerity, as the only way Labor could achieve a surplus is to look around for a someone doing well, and pilfer from them.

In my books, she and Rudd owe this country over $100 billion by the time interest is paid on their ridiculous spending spree which achieved NOTHING.

Geoff Robinson:>> Julia Gillard is an insubstantial leader of a major Australian political party, created by circumstances. <<

Geoff succinct, but lacking. You should also add "who moved forward in the manner of her predecessor” déjà vu.

David G:>> This is a ridiculous article. Julia has been in the job only a matter of a few weeks.<<

David it is amazing, it has only taken a fortnight to cock up, just like Kev, government governed by the direction of the wind.

David, it's your lefty mates that put everyone in the position of having no time to evaluate Julia as PM, not the libs, or the general public.

It would appear you think we should vote for her, because we don't know for sure, that she will be a bad PM. If your lot wanted a fair go, they should have given it to everyone else.

Judging by the lousy record labor have in choosing leaders, it is probably London to a brick on, as they say, that she will be the same total stuff up her promotion, & your previous leader were.

If people are cynical of your lot, ask your self, what else could they be?

Well, the OLO pundits have me pegged as a leftie. That's interesting!

I voted against Keating because I thought he was the greatest fool that had ever been born. His raising of interest rates to over 18% bankrupted many folk. His election loss was one of the highlights of my life.

Later on, Little John Howard came along. Initially he seemed fine. Then Little John brought in the GST and, as if this wasn't enough, then he set about advantaging the rich and screwing the poor with Work Choices. So I voted for Kevin Rudd and was euphoric when Howard lost his seat and the election.

I became disenchanted with Rudd but I was fearful of what Abbot the Rabbit, a disciple of Howard, might do if the Liberals were re-elected. Thank heavens for Julia!

I am a swinging voter. I vote for the person and party I think will best run the country and look after everyone, not just the rich.

Sorry folks, your mindless tag just doesn't fit!

Geoff Robinson says: She incarnates the accommodation of Australian social democracy with the contemporary social movements of globalised capitalism, feminism, secularism and multiculturalism.

Thank goodness for that. A positive tick on all items. She is a with it woman and so let us give her a chance to exercise some leadership if and when she wins the next election.

It is amazing that so many of those who criticised the proposal of "a big new tax" are now criticising that too much concession was made in the proposed resolution.

Judging Julia, is on. 21st August 2010, and we will see if Australia is ready to elect an atheist. She says she is but one never knows what can happen on the Road to Damascus, or the road to the Lodge. She may have an epiphany experience, now that Abbott has definitely ruled out Work Choices. She may work out that what it takes is to become a regular church attendee. She could go along to Hillsong, and make her peace with Jesus Christ or any of the multitude of good churches throughout Australia.

Luke 11:46 and 52 casts a curse on lawyers, woe to ye ye lawyers, and they have been a monumental curse on Australian Society, that KR almost lifted, as an openly Christian man, but has not quite finished, and Almighty God was not pleased. KR had the Parliamentary draftspeople go through a lot of Acts and change Court to court, and while they have missed a few the Commonwealth Statutes now comply mostly with Ch III Constitution. He fell short however in refusing to install the compulsory judges of Ch III Constitution in those courts.

You would think lawyers would learn. The Federal Court of Australia has been rocked by the sudden death in Paris of Justice Peter Hely. Justice Hely, 61, is the fourth Federal Court judge to die this year. October 3rd 2005. Headlines in the SMH. The first commandment is You shall have no God but me. The English Roman Catholics took this to heart, in 1215 and made the Magna Carta. The King ceased to be a divinity, and Almighty God was recognized as the real King, with King John as his delegate on earth. Rome was not impressed.

There is no doubt Abbott recognizes this, but as the head of the party that dismantled Christianity, and installed atheism as the State Religion, he may not be judged suitable by either Almighty God or the big jury. The big jury is the whole of the Australian People. We still have the big jury, the Grandest Jury of all. The summons is issued.

Peter, do you believe in Santa too?

Just asking.

Labor did so much good under Keating, after he told Hawke to walk, and history will treat him kindly. Hawke on the other hand, as a Christian hater, the son of a preacher, harbored an aversion to Christianity that caused him to strengthen the atheist grip on the law. KR continued the good work, but just as Heaven was in sight, fell by the wayside mainly because he listened to atheists and other odd sods and bods, in the public service.

Howard lost because he was clearly no longer a Christian. Workchoices relied heavily on the pagan concept of revengeful punishment. That revengeful punishment which was threatening almost 100 workers, ordinary working men and women in the construction of the Mandurah Railway, with fines of $100,000 inflicted summarily: That is inflicted by a Judge. A Judge cannot be a Christian if he inflicts punishment on behalf of the State. The Bible, in the Sermon on the Mount makes that abundantly clear. ( Matthew 7:1-7)

The Christian community breathed a collective sigh of relief, when Howard departed. We were ashamed of his conduct. We were and still are ashamed of the way that the Liberals treated refugees, old people, and were hoarding money, and the one thing that would have pleased Almighty God the most, would have been for KR to have restored Christian juries, in every court.
Hawke removed the Queen’s name from all legislation enacted after 7th January 1991. He was rolled in December of that year, and Keating set about reforming heaps of laws. He amended the Trade Practices Act 1974 to extend it to Local Government and the Public Service, he defined the word business to include all government activity, in the Evidence Act 1995, but he did not reform the judicial system, and the Christians revolted.

Julia may not come to Christ but she should heed his teachings, because they have stood the test of time. Tony should read his Bible regularly, and abolish the Judges of the Old Testament, so beloved of Jews and Muslims, and install the judges of the New Testament in courts

This past week, I emailed Julia about a Sri Lankan couple, who have been pressured and frightened into returning to India. They are Tamils and deadly scared of their own Government. India will accept them. She has been busy I know, but one stroke of the Prime Ministerial pen, and the utter stupidity of Chris Evans and his dead beat department could be instantly reversed. His dead beat Department is currently threatening other residents of Sri Lankan with deportation, and these Public Servants should be severely chastised. If Julia is defeated it will be because she is a closet racist, not because she has red hair.

Julia can read, she is after all a lawyer. Why in God’s name does she allow public servants to offend against S 268:11 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 which bans deportation and other forcible transfer of population, on pain of 17 years imprisonment. The Minister can deport people, but only after they have been convicted. The Migration Act 1958, in S 200 says The Minister may order the deportation of a non-citizen to whom this Division applies.

However, the conditions that follow, s 201 says that the the Minister may deport a person who has been here less that ten years if that person “has been convicted”, in 203 on security grounds, 203 serious offences. (2) S 200 does not apply to a Non citizen, unless the Minister has served a Notice of Deportation on a person.

This Government is incapable of obeying the laws of the Commonwealth. The Liberals nobbled the Courts and made them totally ineffectual by S 474 of the Migration Act 1958, on Howards watch, in 2001. He had to tampa with the Courts. He was headed for a monumental defeat in 2004, but an avowed athesit was made leader of the ALP. He eventually lost in 2007. While Rudd was reforming, he was good, but he stalled. We can again be ashamed of ourselves collectively, for the way we treat aboriginal Australian, and our guests in this essentially decent and Christian country. Will Julia see the light

The reason I am so passionate about Christianity is that it makes so much sense. You shall have no God but me, said the Lord, The English took that on board, and insisted that the King and all his privies shall have no jurisdiction over any mans estate. That was in 1640. Habeas Corpus Act 1640. That was so that no Judge, who was in English Law, the delegate of the KING, could arbitrarily punish another so that the King’s peace would reign throughout the Realm.

Even the Muslims and the Jews believe that, but they have no answer to the separation of powers, promoted by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, as the champion of democracy proposed and told us that in a Christian court, there would be a Judge representing His Father, which art in heaven, so that his will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. So that the words of John 5: 22 and 23, are given effect, and the promise of Jesus Christ to remain with us always, is fulfilled when twelve people gather on the right hand of the Father represented by a Judge.

The spirit of the Constitution is that the word court be understood in its Christian connotation, as it appears 21 times in Ch III. This is the court of the Bible, in Psalm 92 Verse 13. Those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. Part of the argument establishing the “ Kable Principle” was that the Parliament is a court.

Tony is already planted in a House of the Lord. Julia should get planted, in one also and give herself an even break. Being planted in Parliament is one thing, and they get a bit of Bible instruction there, from Standing orders 43 and 50 which includes the passage from the Sermon on the Mount. If they all took their membership of Parliament and their Oath of Allegiance to the Queen, as God’s representative seriously, we would have nothing to fear in this country. God Save our Gracious Queen

Geoff,
I do not believe Julia's assention to PM is one of circumstances.

I think Julia is a very careful, creative and extremely political person who would have carefully created mulitple opportunities for her to ascend to power.

Looking back at the way Kevin Rudd was forced to compromise on things like the ETS, suggests to me that there were many other instances when he was undermined and manipulated into not achieving the things he set out to do. I think that in the end, Kevin was isolated by the party power players rather than being the one-man-band that the media portrayed. It appears to me to be to be a severe case of workplace bullying.

Julia is a very astute pollie, a real player, and she plays to win. She is a poll driven, articulate politician. It will be interesting to see what kind of PM, or leader of opposition, she will make.

Gillard sold us down the river!! The deal she did reduces the forecasted revenues from mining down from $20bill, to just $4bill. They include $6bill as income from commodities, but that is determined by current reduced commodities being sold due to the mining industries' reduced investment of the last few months while politicking this BS. In short, for a few million dollars in advertising, the Australian public have (as usual) bought the BS, and we are now down $16bill in revenues, by changing PM's. Not a bad investment for the mining companies, is it?

I mean, where else were they going to go to get their resources?!? It was us that had them over a barrel, but they convinced the Australian public that they had us over the proverbial barrel.

And my money says that the Libs will win the next elections anyway, despite deals done with Gillard. The Libs will be negotiating as we speak to further reduce that miserable $4bill to nothing, and therefore will win their financial support to win the next election.

Robinson,
are you in the habit of playing oracle in politics?
Many readers are already taking you to tsak for your immaturity which is indicated by impetuosity to be cranky for little or no reason.
In a year's time or about then we shall have some reason to be judgemental.Not now,faint of heart.
You may well be right.But why can't you wait? it is too temptimg to take an early shot just to be able to claim prescience later, should that be the case?

Come on, Robbie.Be a bit more responsible.Your proto-liberal colours are nailed to the mast for all to see.

socratease

And as for you,Hasbeen. You are just what your nomdeplume is...a has been ....it says it all.
That's a good idea you offered. Why not cut and run and plase dont come back

socratease