I don't generally favour changing leaders this close to an election, except in extreme circumstances. The ALP are probably in extreme circumstances and I think if I were in the Labor caucus I'd be voting for Rudd.

Labor desperately needs a leader who can promote the key issues. I think Beazley has passed the point where he is capable of doing that. I saw him speak at the Brisbane Institute about a month ago. He appeared to be on auto-pilot. Afterwards just about everyone was saying what a poor performance it had been.

Beazley appeared to be trying to enunciate a new policy position targetting families. I gather that he had chosen the Institute rather than the other way around. This was presumably a speech in the mould of the Howard "headland" speeches that he gave in the lead-up to the 1996 election. The point of this type of speech is to establish some policy credibility, but not to say anything that you can be criticised for. It then works in tandem with a small target strategy. When the leader is criticised for having no policies, the "headland" speeches are referenced.

So, getting a speech like this right, and selecting the right audience for it is critical. One reason the speech was criticised by the audience was because it was about families (defined losely as couples with kids) and the BI audience is well past that stage of their lives.

Rudd might be cold-hearted and lacking in the "common touch", but as my local member I've seen him speak at plenty of community functions, and he exhibits just the right touch. Presumably he, and his advisors, would have made a better fist of the BI speech, which suggests they would handle many other things better.

I have to agree with you on this one Graham. I'm not
looking for leaders that I love as they are warm and fuzzy.
I'd rather look up to leaders who are intelligent, even
if I agree to disagree with them on issues.

IMHO Rudd is by far the smarter of the two and Kim would
make a great Santa at Christmas time, surely loved by
all the kiddies etc, but there is a huge difference between
that and leading a Govt

Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader ..Australias best PM in my veiw.

As for the Beazley/Rudd scrap..Rudd seems to a fresher more 'on topic, on task' approach..does that mean the electorate will overlook his obvious lack of experience in favour of the more travelled and more 'portfolied' Beazley? Beazley does have the common touch about him, even his lack of spark cant negate his value in this area.

Im inclined to think stick with Beazley, Rudd is unproven and its wether he can convince voters that theyre vote wont be wasted on him in the end.He has to prove he has the political toughness and acumen to win the voters.
I dont think he can, not enough time.

"Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader ..Australias best PM in my veiw."

I hate how Howard keeps bringing up the interest rates with impunity. The recession was global. Everyone who knows anything about this understands this, but the Coalition still uses it to dupe the ignorant Australian public.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/the-real-reasons-why-it-was-the-1990s-recession-we-had-to-have/2006/12/01/1164777791623.html

"Of the 18 OECD countries of reasonable size and development, 17 experienced a recession in the early 1990s — a similar situation to the mid-1970s and early 1980s global recessions."

Yes Steel,

The Libs have made a meal out of their economic 'success' but it should be noted it came off the back of the groundwork Labor set down up to ,during and after the recession.


That you and I have to highlight this point is rediculaous in my book.It goes back to the heart of the problem in the Labor Party at present.

Why isnt Beazley out there driving all these things home to the voter?
This is his job..reminding the electorate of why and how they been duped lied too etc.

The 'children overboard'..AWB..Iraq..GST..IR reforms and on it goes.

Labors job is to clear up the misinformation, lies and ommissions of the Liberals..

They barely touched this.

There is something I find particularly uneasy in engaging in a comparison of Rudd or Beazley in that neither of them has really delivered anything of substance before.

Labor have been on a holding pattern for years. A new vision will require more than just a change in leadership - it will need something groundbreaking, something innovative.

In many ways we may just be comparing who is the best captain to man a sinking - or an already sunk ship.

6 months of post caucus-election / analysis of whether or not they got it right is not something I'm looking forward to.

I don't think Rudd would welcome the comparison with Keating. While I think Keating may have been the best treasurer we have ever had, he was a disaster as a Prime Minister. Being Prime Minister requires a lot more than intelligence and a cutting and glib wit.

Rudd will have seen the mistakes Keating made and probably learnt from them. He will have also seen the mistakes that Wayne Goss made while he was his Chief of Staff. Some of the mistakes were the same ones.

Rudd does seem to understand that winning elections is partly about the battle for Australian culture. He's the only Labor politician to be trying to engage as a Christian and to take on some of the Christian Right. Beazley has the credentials to do this too, but he hasn't attempted anything.

I suspect Rudd's problem will be going beyond the fashionable issues. If he sticks with the things where he is comfortable, such as Foreign Affairs, then he's probably heading for a hiding.

I feel deeply sorry for the Labor Party, as they seem to be in a quandary with no solution. We have moved from a society with large factories (now relocated to China) with unionised workers, to individual contractors with no interest in unions. As unionism seems to be the essence of the Labor party, this means that they are on a steadily downward path, and it matters little who leads them.

Take no notice of the media, who have a vested interest in change (it makes news), and no interest in anything but themselves. I don't take any notice of media opinion polls, as they never offer any evidence for their conclusions. The only thing I watch is the odds at Centrebet, as they HAVE to be right. Current odds for the next federal election are:

Howard $1.40

Labor $2.75

As I see it, the basic problem the Labor party has was typified by the Tampa issue, where the strongest supporters of Howard were the Labor party's heartland. The party seems to be divided between a heartland and an elite, with the elite in charge. Until they sort this out they may well remain in perpetual opposition federally.

I would agree with Rudd that the next federal election could be the most important for a generation, as a success by Howard will cement the changes he has introduced. That is why I think it is so important that Labor be defeated, so we can reduce wages and build shareholder value. With the end of the age of cheap oil there has to be a considerable cut in the standard of living of the ordinary person, and the sooner the better.

GY, yes it will be interesting to see if the Boy from Nambour can think outside the square of adversarial oppositionality (ie, what Howard et al are doing wrong) and come up with 'visionary' policies and issues.

While he may be an ex Goss cabinet boss, playing with social and economic policy on a national scale and with the Murdoch Media requires an ability to tap into the psyche of the electorate.

This is a skill few Labor leaders have had in opposition.

It’s been a long time since Labor had to win government from the starting blocks.

Yes Rudd is a major God botherer and conservative.

• Howard versus Rudd?

Now this introduces a whole new set of variables.

Howard could get away with the 'he's got no ticker’ slag at the Bomber.

Latham was much too juvenile and dug his own political grave.

Will it matter what Rudd proclaims or does if you have an electorate that is just sick of Howard, Iraq, AWB and Bush?

Lastly I must declare that I went to the same High School as Rudd and Swan and it wasn’t exactly a school that was focused on grooming future political leaders. But perhaps it was?

• Have you seen this piece? -:

Labor ahead no matter who leads: poll

"A new poll has put Labor ahead of the Coalition no matter who wins the party's leadership ballot tomorrow".
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200612/s1802994htm

"Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader"

I actually think that history will judge Keating kindly, as one
of the few politicians who understood the global picture, economics
and our role in the world. What he lacked was people skills,
which Howard has, thats why he wins. Howard can read the electorate
fairly well and knows which emotional buttons to push, something
that Keating simply wasn't concerned with.

IMHO if we should land up with a Beazley Govt, we'll go back to the
past, which is not what Australia needs for the future.

So I hope that Rudd wins, as if we should land up with a labour
Govt, with a smart leader there is at least some hope. The election
of George W shows us the dangers of having a dumb dumb as leader,
no matter the advisors etc. Voting for so called experience means
voting for more of the past and I don't think that Kim has such
a great record that I want more of that past.

Kevin Rudd is a career bureaucrat,what sort of mind set would he bring to the table of business?Julia Gillard is an avid socialist.Are we going to see a Swedish model of high taxes which punishes small businesses?

I fear the pedulum under the auspices of this duo,will just swing the other way.The Coalition are making positive ground in IR reform,however there neeeds to be a delicate balance that does not give total power to the employer.The Coalition could very well lose the next election over IR reform and with an incompetent Labor Party at the helm,we will see discipline disolve and economic anarchy again reign supreme.

Well perhaps its time for greedy small businessmen to start having a grander vision of this nation?

There will be no change of Government until an ALP leader has the courage to give voice to this Nations repressed outrage.

Australia's Pysche has dramatically changed over the last 5 years. Howard has played Mephistopheles to our Faust and we have accepted the bargain for the mirage of economic security. In return, we have sacrificed almost every value one could argue was distinctly Australian.

If Norm of "life be in it" was representative of our now lost "long weekend culture" it has Morphed into Norman, an overweight financial planner who after a 12 hour day in the office loves nothing more than to watch reality TV. What's wrong with that, well Norm had values, family and mates. Norman he has a plan and a network. Norman, may go to the gym and stay relatively fit, he probably does not smoke or drink excessively but he suffers from a myriad of anxieties and needs anti-depressants to cope with the sterility in his life. His wife if she is still with him is perpetually dieting and his kids wont leave the house. Lifes highlights are a new investment property, upgrading the car, mobile and internet access.

Of course that is the best of it. In the meantime, Norman is far too busy to have any self formed opinions. Names like Hicks, Rau, Jihad Jack Thomas, Habib, Avarez Solon cannot enter his consciousness. Vaguely, he occassional recalls a picture of a dry river bed, arguements regarding global warming, or Iraq. But to be honest all of that does not rate with his primary concern: the value of his home, and investments.

We all know this country is performing well economically only because of China's demand for what is in our earth. The Howard Government has not introduced any major initiatives. By any measure our export sectors have regressed. Simply, Howard has allowed us to double the value of our homes and than use the increased equity to bank roll what ever it is we wanted. The best we can say about this government is that it has balanced the books. Congratulations.

Much that I dislike him, I think that the ALP hasn't got a prayer in next year's election unless they vote decisively today to elect Rudd as leader. Of course, if he succeeds it means that we're likely to get another right wing practising Christian PM, with the only salient difference being that Rudd's party pretends to represent workers' interests above those of their bosses.

Morgan,

Unlike you I know not a lot about Rudd as a Politician, but as you say we need someone there who has a 'prayer' pardon pun, of getting Labor elected..if he does pretend to represent workers thats better than nothing.

Get rid of the IR laws and then figure out the rest.

This morning it seems that rudd is well in front..so Rudd it is.

Is that good?..time will tell and its either a huge plus for Labor, or slip further into the bog that is Labors lot these days.

C.J. well at last there is something about which we can agree.

[Rudd's party pretends to represent workers' interests above those of their bosses.]

EXACTLY.. 'pretends'. What are 'workers interests' ? They certainly are NOT promoting ever increasingly unsustainable wage and condition packages which continue to elevate us into the clouds of uncompetitiveness. UNLESS one has resigned ones-self to the idea that there will be massive unemployment in all sectors which are being swallowed up by the 50c an hour Chinese slave labor rates, and you are naively optimistic that the small remaining segment of employed people will have enough political clout to keep you in power for the sake of their pay and conditions.

HENCE my now infamous 'sign'. But the truth is, workers pay and conditions and security will only ever be guaranteed by attacking slavery at its source.
Workers and electors have to choose one of 2 options:

1/ Allow all uncompetitive work to goto China and India etc (and face the social cost) (uncompetitive against 50c/hr has nothing to do with 'efficiency')

2/ Reduce the attraction of such places by taxing slavery and blatant economic opportunism. (India etc)

I don't think there is any other choice. Unions always try to remain relevant by fighting for more pay and less work so.... where to ?

Rudd won't do anything, Howard SURELY wont... and we will just have another sudden 'refugee' crisis just before the next election and Howard will be returned.
So... in short, we are screwed. "We" meaning most of us who don't have jobs in un-outsourcable infrastructure, or law. Perhaps Accountants are still safe.

Any real world thoughts ?

Shadow,
The problem is that the Labor party will not 'figure the rest out later' (ie,Rudd's conservativism). They are suffering from a lack of self belief now. Doub they would even know if they are Left or Right.

If the next election is based solely on Labor repealing laws then they won't win.

However, if they begin to daggle some carrots to the greedy middle Australians, they might have a chance.




PS> Has anyone listened to what that tosser is saying in that microsoft ad planted in our discussion list?

Well I trust Mr Rudd will do a better job than the Labor government in Western Australia who has allowed former WA Inc members and a gaol bird to roam the halls of their parliament.

Google "Corruption and Crime Commission", then "Hearings", then "Transcripts".

Better than reading the "Godfather" chaps - and more to come!

"They sicken of the calm, who know the storm!"