Seven months out from the next election and Julia Gillard has just realised that she now has so much spare time on her hands that she can start pretending to be a prime minister.

I think that's because the public will elect a strong leader, whereas to be effective in a hung parliament is to be the master of compromise. Compromise in a leader is not usually seen as a strength.

I see too much misery around me despite of record public funding to ever make me tick the square next to Labor on the ballot paper again. I fail to see what Julia Gillard could do to make me support her. she'd need to turn me into a self centred moron first.

I could possibly support Gillard the person if she:

Gives us a total disclosure of Slater and Gordon, the slush fund, the house purchased with union funds, and the chunky union boyfriend.

Admits she lied when she told Australia she'd talked to East Timor's President.

Admits she lied about a carbon tax because she knew that it was going to happen if she had to form govt with the Greens.

Admits she lied to Wilkie.

Admits she stabbed Kev in the gonads as supported by a victory speech written by her office staff two weeks before the Ides of March.

Finally admits that she will say anything to anybody to further her personal ambitions, and then I might find her risen from the ashes like a chaste Phoenix.

But until then she is just another lying politician with an obscene pension to look forward to and no reason to look back at us.

When politicians like Gillard can become prime minister (albeit by stealth) it just goes to demonstrate that democracy is far from perfect. But it is still the best political system around. We just have to be content to take the bad ones from time to time.

You can't really blame her for being a liar. After all, she is a lawyer.

<<Julia Gillard has just realised that she now has so much spare time on her hands that she can start pretending to be a prime minister.>>

Thank you, Mr. Opinion, now I finally understand why I am not a prime minister.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgM1Df76S5c

Individual do not blame her for that you did that long ago your self.

It seems to me that it's so easy to blame
the Prime Minister for the general behaviour
and direction of the party she formally leads.
However is she really solely responsible for
the mess the party is in at present?

As Eva Cox points out:

"She's done a good job holding together a
diverse and quite difficult group of votes in the
Senate and the House of Reps and has pursued the
business of government with some efficiency with many
bills going through unopposed and many others passed
with narrow margins.
In that sense, her role as head of the executive
process of government has been impeccable. So why are
people suggesting she goes?"

Eva Cox tell us that:

"Personally the Prime Minister has many characteristics
to be admired. She's got a strong sense of who she is,
what she stands for, she has many negotiator skills,
the ability to stay cool and collected under considerable
pressure, she's a good parliamentary performer,
and I suspect a warm personality up close."

Fixing the problems of the Australian Labor Party requires
more than changed leadership. The control by right-wing
party machine men will still be there if the PM was
removed or left.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You're welcome. Anything else I can help you with?

Lexi, that's the problem, she doesn't lead any party, as she is simply the front person, a puppet, who's strings are pulled by others (the faceless men).

You have to remember that these are the same faceless men who knived the most popularly voted labor PM since Bob.

It, ( the faceless men) is the fundamental flaw in the labor party structure, that, and their pandering to the unions.

Julias problem is that there are only 24 hours in each day, and when you take out the hours spent trying to stabilize the sinking ship, there is little time left to govern.

Even when she does sleep, she does so with one eye open, in fear of yet another challenge from Kevin, or whoever else the faceless men send to the chopping block.

This whole hung parliament experiment, with her support from the independents, condured out of sheer desparation, has been a total failure, and will ultimately be her, and her supporters (Oakshot and Windsor) downfall.

I am now starting to think that it was the faceless men who set the election date, as the extremely long period would give them time to replace her should the polls turn badly.

I guess we have to wait to see what their definition of 'badly' is.

I also see a change in Tony Abbott, and although some of his newfound popularity has come from the smell of laor, I think he will continue to gain in popularity in his own right.

Finally, I also think people can see through labor's attacks on the libs lack of policy, as most people know that in order to make a finacial prediction, you need a starting point, and that's something even labor themselves are not sure about, evidence being in their failure to achieve the PROMMISED surplus.

To Be or Not To Be? That Is The Problem.

Wrong!

Much to do about nothing? That is the problem.

You mob carry on about the colour of the cars. Underneath the paint job it’s the same car with different drivers that drive it in much same tired, stop start way. Both cars are powered by the same engine, productivity. The engine is getting progressively smaller. The load is getting progressively bigger as the freeloaders demand more space putting more stress on the sagging springs and bald tyres.

I personally believe the car needs an overhaul. Get rid of as many freeloaders as possible. Increase the size of the engine but decrease the size of the car. Allow more the opportunity for others to drive. Reward those that maintain the car more than the freeloaders as currently happens.

The best result in my opinion for the September election is a hung parliament. We need more Windsor’s and Oakeshott’s, not less. We need a democratic proportional voting system. The one we have now allows a minority to get majority control. We as a society need to have a more DIY mentality. Not the one we have where WE give US via government less the considerable amounts they skim off.

For those who can remember here are a couple of Redgum songs. Nothing much has changed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLrJa-fKIvw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-uJhvPDIpQ

Dear rehctub,

As John Howard pointed out on Sixty Minutes -
there's nothing wrong with ambition. Sure
the PM wanted the job and helped dispose
of her predecessor but that only proves the
power of the party itself.

Today it's difficult to see significant differences
between the policies of the major parties, except
on a few issues. It is impossible to predict with
any confidence how either party will respond to
changing circumstances. This modern fact of political
life is a result of new technology which allows political
parties to see what policy responses will produce an
electoral advantage in key marginal electorates.

The mainstream media plays a vital part in this
process, since the loudest voices in the dominant
outlets play a major part in shaping the views which
will be expressed in news polls. Party founding principles
and philosophy have disappeared as significant
forces in policy formation it seems.

Why is Julia Gillard on a 5 day election junket in western Sydney?

Hasn't she got a job to do as a pretend prime minister?

What a bludger! She probably intends not to do any work at all between now and the election. What a bludger!

Dear Mr Opinion,

You're obviously not one who - flamboyantly
believes in throwing a lot of words around.

Yes Lexi, one doesn't need to spend unnecessary words to get the meaning across.

Producer>>For those who can remember here are a couple of Redgum songs. Nothing much has changed<<

Thanks for that, I really enjoyed seeing the boys again but then again "it doesn't matter to me in the long run."

Mr O >>What a bludger! She probably intends not to do any work at all between now and the election. What a bludger!<<

Your such an Aussie mate...lol

What's an Aussie?

Oh yes, I remember now. There used to be a lot of them when I was growing up.

But they don't exist anymore. I wonder where they all went.

>>But they don't exist anymore. I wonder where they all went.<<

They're all working behind the bar of pubs in Earl's Court. All 21 million of us.

Cheers,

Tony

Dear Tony,

Someone should let them know that they'll need to brush up on their Chinese if they ever decide to come back to Australia.

Dear Mr Opinion,

Nah. Only if they're highly skilled and want
high-paying executive jobs
that do business with China or if they
have political ambitions - such as the job of
PM.

Dear Lexi,

Sorry to be the one to tell you but Australia is now a bilingual nation: English and Chinese. And is heading towards the situation where Chinese will become the dominant of the two.

If you are happy about this you can send your thanks to Bob Hawke. And make sure you slip a bottle of gin in with your thank you note if you want him to read it.

Not entirely sure what your motivation is, Mr Opinion, but you are being pretty cavalier with your facts. And your prognostications.

>>Sorry to be the one to tell you but Australia is now a bilingual nation: English and Chinese. And is heading towards the situation where Chinese will become the dominant of the two.<<

Here's a tiny touch of reality for you:

"The latest Census of Population and Housing data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) shows that more than 300 different languages are spoken in Australian households... 76.8 per cent of Australia’s population speak only English at home. The most commonly spoken languages other than English include Mandarin (1.6 per cent), Italian (1.4 per cent), Arabic (1.3 per cent), Cantonese (1.2 per cent) and Greek (1.2 per cent)"

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/CO-60

And while we are about it, here is a little more background to amuse you: the percentage of our population with Chinese ancestry - that's born here, plus all the prior generations, is a massive 4.3%

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+features902012-2013

You are not just having a stir, are you?

Surely not.

Dear Pericles,

That is indeed very very low.

I must then apologise for imagining that there is a substantial number of Chinese in Sydney.

is a massive 4.3%
Pericles,
And here I am thinking the conservatives were the denialists ! I happen to think of the chinese as rather fine people after all they don't have fanatical religious agenda & they built my Macs. ( I have yet to see a good australian made laptop.)
The question I want to ask is what is the present chinese population here & how many would 4.3 % be ? You really shouldn't use percentages anyway, they're deceiving. Percentage is used by Government when they give themselves a pay rise i.e. $50,000/year but they revert to actual numbers i.e. Dollars when the workers get a pay rise i.e. $10/week.
Anyway, how do the chinese immigrant numbers stack up to the document-less boat arrival numbers ?

Interesting statistics, Pericles.
As one who has -very deliberately- always lived in the 'bush', I've always felt a bit hamstrung in discussions on multiculturalism. I'm pretty sure the stat concerning speaking English would be considerably higher in country towns; in fact it's quite possibly risen in the last few decades.
I seem to recall meeting many more Italians and Greeks back in the 60's, particularly in the fish shop/ green grocers and milk bar trades, as well as immigrants from all areas in the construction industry.
We do get a number of back packers passing through, but I doubt they'd be listed as “house holders”, would they?
On the rare occasions when I've been forced to the Big Smoke (Sydney or Brisbane) I've been astonished at the number of signs -in some suburbs- that I couldn't read.
It seems our perception of how multicultural we are is largely a matter of locality, as “Mr Opinion” suggests.

Ummm... that's why I provided the links to the ABS web site, individual.

>>The question I want to ask is what is the present chinese population here & how many would 4.3 % be ?<<

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+features902012-2013

If you can't be bothered to actually click the link, I have to wonder what your agenda might be.

>>Anyway, how do the chinese immigrant numbers stack up to the document-less boat arrival numbers?<<

Oh, right.

Let's move on.

Grim opines...

>>On the rare occasions when I've been forced to the Big Smoke (Sydney or Brisbane) I've been astonished at the number of signs -in some suburbs- that I couldn't read. It seems our perception of how multicultural we are is largely a matter of locality, as “Mr Opinion” suggests.<<

That would be absolutely correct.

If you landed today from outer space (or from Hobart, say) in the middle of Hurstville, you might be forgiven for thinking that the population of Australia was primarily Chinese. Much as if you had landed in London's Earls Court in the late 1960s, you'd think it was populated entirely by young Australians.

But the numbers tell a different story, do they not.