Labor is struggling to find a new leader. But all those in the running – Bill Shorten, Anthony Albanese and Tanya Pliberseck are well-known as strongly associated with old-school Labor and would not be likely to give the party the new lease of life that it desperately needs.

There is however one person who has been a Labor MP for a long time, who has demonstrated his broad visions and commitment to the long-term health of our society over many years, who stayed right out of the leadership wrangles and who is relatively unknown and hence able to really give Labor a freshen up and rebirth.

Australia desperately needs a fundamental political change away from continuous growth and the continuously increasing demand for everything, towards a sustainable future where the demand is stabilised, and done so well within our means of supplying everything that is needed in an ongoing manner.

Kelvin Thomson is almost unique among our politicians in realising this imperative. And he is now potentially in the position of leading the charge in this all-important direction.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/573/733/702/kelvin-thomson-for-alp-leader/

We are in complete agreement, Ludwig

It is worth pointing out that his electorate also agrees. As of now (from the Electoral Commission website), Kelvin Thomson was re-elected with the highest share of the two-party preferred vote of any Labor candidate.

http://kelvinthomson.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/statement-on-labor-frontbench-labors.html

Just the tiniest of flies in this ointment of yours, Ludwig.

The man himself has stated:

"As I told my campaign team on Saturday night, I will not be a candidate for the Opposition frontbench... Anyone who thinks my decision to return to the backbench means that I am looking to lead a quiet life and slip out the back door is very mistaken. On the contrary, it is a necessary pre-condition for being active in the debate about the issues which are of greatest importance to the world and this country"

So your campaign is doomed before it starts.

If Thomson changes his mind about the leadership/opposition front bench, it is equally likely that he will change his mind about anything and everything else, just as every politician does when faced with the reality of high public office.

If he doesn't change his mind, he will remain a small-but-annoying voice on the back bench, and will probably end up in that land of complete irrelevance, the Greens.

I could think of nothing worse for agriculture. Thomson has campaigned heavily against live exports, thus associating himself with the Greens, Animals Australia etc on this issue. If people want to pass judgement about agriculture, firstly they need to understand something about the topic.

Ludwig with nothing but respect for you a bloke I think of as a mate you are off track.
Labor has this task.
To pick a leader who can lead, that man is Bill Shorten.
Your pick is a good bloke but unlikely to ever seek or be offered such a job.
Tania P is the likely 2ic.
My preference is Albanese.
He however may not stand.
Shorten comes from the ALP right, now is not the time for marginal leaders who have only some behind them.
Mid Abbotts first term such will be Bills following ,Tony will not risk a DD.
He may however do it early.

I..FEEL..it will come down to preferances

ok i vote 1
for elbow.[albo']
cause he stood for his beliefs
[ie did'nt run and hide..and is still*,..mates with BOTH*../kev/jules]

who would he preference?

my second choice
short odds on shorten..only cause bellyknows him

3 rd choice is thommo..
cause a good guy vouched..for him

but istill say..instal keating..
like lib/nats did in..qld opposition

paul as CARETAKER..opp/lead..until
while..we all cast our first preference
not knowing who our number two votes will go
as lowest vote numbers fallout..and their vote..given..to who so-ever they chose..still..inthe game

anyhow im over it
like i said..i aint got a horse in this race

but i..gotta zipper

secret ballot of course

Pericles, I fully appreciate Kelvin Thomson’s desire to stay on the backbench and concentrate on speaking out about the big issues. He is certainly better-placed there than if he was to be unable to speak freely as a shadow minister. But I do note he has said nothing about accepting or rejecting an offer for the leadership.

As leader he would be able to both speak freely AND make a huge difference. So what we need to do is show that there a whole lot of support for him becoming leader, in the hope that he might put his name forward.

But of course it’s not going to happen. Looks like Shorten will be leader. Dear oh dear! ( :>(

Sure, as leader Kelvin would not be able to do things as fully as he advocates them being done. He’d have to compromise, and even though he says:

< If we did what voters want, on issues like population growth, migration, planning, foreign ownership, live animal export, rather than what big business wants, we would do a lot better > …

…he’d still be under huge pressure from the vested-interest antisustainability-oriented big business sector to tow their line.

But I have no doubt that he’d do a great job at starting to steer Labor, and hence our national politics and governance, towards the essential sustainability paradigm.

Yabby, I’m surprised. You are onside about the need to stop population growth and achieve a sustainable society, aren’t you?

Even if you are right about an end to live exports being very bad for agriculture, the bigger picture is surely much more important….. and that is to get away from very high immigration and never-ending growth, balance demand and supply, and live sustainably.

So I thought you would have supported a Thomson-led Labor government.

Ludwig, I'm for leaders which show good judgement. I have yet to see this apply to Kelvin Thomson on the subject of live exports. Being from city Australia, if he does not have a detailed understanding of the topic, he would be wise to keep out of the debate.

Ludwig you do understand do you?
Your one pet issue while having true substance runs mid field in this country,s current needs?
And too that many more are not yet concerned about the issue of postulation growth.
Harsh but true, add to that list concerns about taking true action on climate change, rejected at this election.
No party hoping to ever govern, can put such an issue first.
From within the ALP let me tell you this, your man is liked not loved.
Likes to be free to run his own race so stays away from positions that call for accountability.
Here is the heart of both why you want him and why he never is to be a chance.
Too in our insistence,all of us, that our views been the measure of good or bad politicians, we highlight it is us, not politicians who need improvement.

Yabby, could you summarise your concerns about stopping live exports.

It seems to me that we are exporting jobs with this line of trade.

I’d also be concerned that with a rapidly growing population, there will forever be more pressure for us to both increase live exports AND frozen meat exports, and everything else of this sort, along with increasing food supplies for the increasing domestic population.

We’ll need ever-bigger export income just to stand still in terms of earning revenue to pay for infrastructure and services for ever-more people.

So I come back to my point that heading towards a stable population is vastly more important than a reduction or even a complete cessation to live exports.

If Thomson were to become PM, I’m sure he’d do a bunch of things that I would be disappointed with. But his underlying principles re: population stabilisation and a sustainable society would (presumably) far outweigh these.

"we are exporting jobs with this line of trade (live exports)"

The problem is that the buyers want the beasts on the hoof until day of slaughter and sale because they and their customers don't have refrigeration.

Thomson would know that or he ought to know it. His solution is?

Thomson displays lack of judgement or at least convenient populism in other ways too. His letter to the US Congress about gun control is an example. He knows or is in a position to take advice on that too. His attention is better applied to the well-established link between violence and the 'Afro-American' sub-culture with its drugs and gang crime. Australia is in danger of creating similar sub-cultures, with similar problems.

While many would agree with you on the need for sustainability and would (should?) be equally exasperated with Labor and their treacherous Greens sidekicks, Thomson may only be masquerading as a commitment politician in respect of (over)population. Along with others he may be all fine intentions and publicity but no delivery.

On the other hand and as you might rightly say in return, what hope for sustainability with the other in Labor leadership hopefuls?

Ludwig, if anyone wants to process all livestock locally, they are free to do so. Buy them, find markets, build meatworks and do it. Nothing stops them. If they can't be bothered, then banning live exports means that the stock simply die in the paddocks, with mass suffering right here in Aus. We see that right now, in Queensland.

The whole live trade issue is a complex one, well above the heads of most people. The campaign against it is largely being driven by the animal liberation movement, as distinct from the animal welfare movement. They are mostly vegans/vegies etc, who think that sentient species should not be eaten. Their common solution is that they think that livestock farmers should give up farming livestock. It is fruitloop stuff, to put it kindly.

Meantime, putting livestock on trucks and carting them 4000 Km at 7$ a Km for the truck, is bad for farmers, bad for livestock and makes no sense at all, when the same livestock can go on a ship, with food and water on tap, 24/7, where they commonly gain weight on their journey.

Yabby far from the first time you confront a person not truly aware of why we have a live export industry.
And this time at least it is a decent bloke.
Animal welfare groups, some here under various names , like to forget live trade or nothing is some customers request.
Dreams of packing houses in far northern our back towns come with the thought employment will flow in huge numbers, and be taken up.
Not so, mining has to import fly in fly out now.
Yes a proposal for one packing house looks likely to go ahead but not suburban dreams of doing the right thing, but profits drive investors both away and toward such investments.
Kevin Thomson will not, ever, lead.
That may be for the best given the Mauling Ludwig, the ex Minister gave the industry.

Dear Ludwig,

I don't know enough about Kelvin Thomson to be able to
comment on him. However, I would have thought that
Anthony Albanese would automatically get the job
being the Deputy. But perhaps he doesn't want the
position? Bill Shorten has thrown his hat into the ring
even though he's denied he was going to,
and we'll see what happens next. I would have thought
that he's associated with the "old" Labor - and that a "fresh"
start would be preferabble. I'm not too enamoured
with this guy because of his past dealings -
But that's just my opinion.

BTW: what do you think about Indonesia wanting to buy
land here in Australia to raise their own cattle?
An I the only one who thinks - why can't they lease the
land instead? This would still give them what they want -
put money in the hands of the farmers, and
provide jobs for this country - but we'd keep our own land -
as we should.

Foxy, "but we'd keep our own land - as we should."

While I agree that foreign ownership of land ought be restricted and many other countries will not allow it in the first place, the problem is that there isn't the venture capital here to develop.

The previous government could have directed taxpayers' $$ into that instead of such failed ventures as home insulation. There will be deaf ears to that I know, but just saying..

The problem is more fundamental than that. If Labor doesn't stand for socialism (old Labor), and it doesn't stand for capitalism (sell-out Labor), what does it stand for apart from cronyism, and just any vocal interest group crying to get its snout in the public trough? "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything". So if people aren't voting for Labor selfishly because they expect some kind of corrupt advantage, then they're doing it because they don't understand that government doesn't create magic benefits by forced redistributions, and all they're doing is supporting a protection racket.

And that describes anyone who vote Labor. They have no principle but only grasping, and endless appeals back to socialism. But no-one can ever defend any socialist theory of any kind without falling into endless circularity, as we see on here non-stop whenever any of them is challenged. The reason is, because it's wrong! If they had any better argument, they'd put it forward!

Contrary to left wing thinking that is limited slogans, there is such a thing as and reality, and logic, and illogic and error. Everything is not just political opinion, and "ideology" and social constructs. You can't just re-fashion the world closer to your hearts' desires by mere threats a.k.a. "policy". And what has Labor got but threats? What are all their claims of social benefits but merely claims of social benefits from threats and thieving? It's not a coincidence that their leaders keep showing themselves smirking incompetent thugs who stand only for their own power - it's because that's all socialism is, all it ever was, and all it ever can be!

WHO CARES what next leader Labor has for the snout-in-the-trough vote, and the unprincipled moron vote?

It could only matter to those who think that force and fraud are the basis of the good society because in the last analysis, if you're not going to respect other people's person or property, force and fraud are all that Labor has on offer.

Got a great idea.

Craig Thompson.

He would make the ideal Labor leader going forward. He stands for everything that Labor stands for, and would maximise the vote for Labor from all those people in the population who stand for the same thing.

Dear OTB,

Do you approve of our land being sold to Indonesia?
Why not allow them to lease it?
The farmers can then invest it surely?
Or am I being naive?

Foxy, I think it varies by State, but most stations are leaseholds anyhow. When you sell a station, you sell the cattle, the infrastructure (windmills etc) and the right to lease them. That is the case in WA anyhow, not sure about the NT. Stations are quite restricted as to what they can do with the land, what they can grow etc. No matter what, the land stays in Australia, even if it has foreign owners. Most of those stations in the North were originally developed by the British.

He is a "saint' ! Ralph...will get even old rusted-on Labour people like me back........however the present lot are a pack of.....

Dear Yabby,

Thanks for that.

I'll have to do a lot more research.

I don't know why but I still don't feel
that much more re-assured.

Dear Ludwig,

How would you feel about the combination of
Anthony Albanese and Tanya Plibersek leading
Labor?

Foxy, "Do you approve of our land being sold to Indonesia?"

No, I don't.

Remember though that other countries also own parts of Australia.

That doesn't justify more foreign ownership, of course.

Yabby, as I understand it, Kelvin Thomson wanted to ban live exports to Bahrain or Pakistan after they were ‘clubbed, stabbed and buried alive.’

It seems that the inhumane treatment of animals is an ongoing problem.

Thomson has repeatedly called for a transition away from live exports towards domestic meat processing to enhance local job prospects, economic prosperity and improve animal welfare outcomes.

He wants a transition out of this trade, not a sudden stop.

I don’t have a problem with the live export trade per se, but I certainly do have a problem with agreements being reached and then breached, thereby putting us in an invidious position of either ignoring the breaches, suspending or shutting down the trade with the relevant countries or running into diplomatic difficulty in trying to assure that the breaches stop.

I totally respect Thomson’s desires in this regard, although I wouldn’t take it that far. I would prefer to keep this line of trade open with countries that will only take live animals, for as long as we stick to our principles and demand that the agreements we make with them about how the animals will be processed are upheld.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/labor-mp-kelvin-thompson-calls-for-live-animal-export-ban/story-e6frg6n6-1226489911596

OTB, my fellow beachbum mate, you wrote:

<< Thomson may only be masquerading as a commitment politician in respect of (over)population. Along with others he may be all fine intentions and publicity but no delivery. >>

I think if anyone has shown his genuineness, over a period of many years, it is Thomson. I reckon if anyone can deliver, it would be him. But then, who knows…. especially with the enormous power of the pro-growth lobby and the entrenched concomitant mindset.

<< On the other hand and as you might rightly say in return, what hope for sustainability with the other in Labor leadership hopefuls? >>

Indeed. And I can’t overstate how vitally important this is.

Helloow Foxy!! Where you been ‘iding for tha last three years??

You asked:

<< How would you feel about the combination of Anthony Albanese and Tanya Plibersek leading
Labor? >>

Awful queazy and plitty sick!!

Ludwig, if there were stuff ups in Bahrain and Pakistan, they could have been avoided with a smart Minister for Agriculture, who runs DAFF. There were simple solutions, they were never implemented.

If Thompson wants live exports banned, let him go ahead and open new markets for processed meat, as NZ has. Our Govt has not done so. Let him remove red tape and costs from the meat industry. No need to ban the live trade, if the Govt gets its act into gear. Banning the live trade is not required, if your meat processing industry is working as it should, which it is not.

Don't go shutting down productive export industries, until you have shown viable options. They have never done so.

At times like this being a member of the ALP and actually understanding it is of little help.
We should first remember our leadership elections are not as federal elections are.
It is the party its self that makes up its mind.
This time, bank on it, much thought and very little hostility is given before we do so.
Like the Liberals, exactly like them! we have factions.
While presenting us with problems in the last few years they exist for a reason.
Bill Shorten comes from the biggest, while named the right, it is mostly in about the middle, Tania is his running mate.
Albo, a much loved bloke, is from our left, both our greatest, and sadly sometimes our worst come from there.
Both would make great leaders, forget the words of FROG MOUTHED Conroy he farms power for him self.
Labor will emerge much the better for todays Caucus meeting, in my view lead by Bill Shorten.
Australia is about to awake from its recent removal of Labor[ I blame no one for that] to find it has the strongest opposition it has had for decades, that has to be good.
Bill Shorten has that some thing few have.
Ludwig Foxy has not been far away

Jarden RUOK?
Do you understand with one post you condemn half this country, well very near.
Our history shows folk who vote Labor in every war we fought.
Out defending homes and farms against storm fire and tempest.
It is my view far too much *NICENESS* exists here.
A willingness to ignore hate/spite and in the end insulting junk comment.
I have no intention of putting such as your comment down to other than the remarks of a dreadful person.
A SEED IS ON VIEW HERE A CHANCE TO GROW A HATE THAT NEVER ENDS TO JUDGE A WHOLE CLASS OF PEOPLE.
To divide our country and start us on a trail that ends in tragic circumstances.
My first act on Saturday was to shake the hands of Liberal poll staff and my last to congratulate them on a victory not yet [at that time] won.
Haters are lessor beings.

<< …what do you think about Indonesia wanting to buy land here in Australia to raise their own cattle? >>

Not on, Foxy. As you say; it could be leased. And I can’t see why the venture capital would be any less difficult than if they owned the land outright.

Of course one of the big provisos would be that it created jobs for Australians with priority over Indonesians working in Australia.

<< The problem is more fundamental than that. >>

I agree Jardine that the problem with Labor and indeed with our whole political makeup is much more fundamental than which leader Labor may choose.

But I reckon Thomson would not be afraid to tackle this sort of thing head-on, whereas Shortarse, Albanese, etc would remain embedded in the current system and mindset, and consequently remain absolutely beholden to big business and continuous rapid growthism.

One of Thomson’s fundamental desires is to make Labor much more tuned into the people and less influenced by the big end of town. He reckons that if this can be achieved, we would be well on the way to achieving a sustainable future.

So it is not a matter of the leader being irrelevant until the basic problems are fixed up, it is a matter of them installing a leader who will move in this direction.

Again, there is an absolute world of difference here between Thomson and the three others whose names are being bandied around as leader and deputy.

We'll know in a few days time the make-up of both parties.
I would like to see new ideas, new unities emerge. I would
like genuine conversation about policy free of the backroom
manipulation that normally accompanies the development of
platforms. I would like to have Labor get closer to its
base and map out a strategy of opposition that shifts the
public dialogue in favour of politics for the common good
instead of the politics of envy, greed and selfishness
so effortlessly mastered by some politicians.

I stated earlier that I don't know enough about Kelvin Thomson.
But whoever is appointed as the leadership team of Labor -
my fingers will be crossed that new ideas, and new unities
will emerge resulting in better outcomes.

We tend to focus far too much on the flim-flam
possibly because things have been dour and lifeless.
Let us trust that in the future we shan't be deprived of
serious analysis and scrutiny. That there will be lots of
good stuff out there and that we shall have forensic
interviews. Perhaps then we shall all do better as a result.

Labor would benefit greatly from having someone like Kelvin Thomson as leader or deputy. Yabby, Kelvin Thomson is my local Member and I have seen up close his deep understanding of Australian biodiversity and farming systems. His family has farming background in Western District of Victoria and he able to speak sensibly on agriculture (see his speech during recent Federal election campaign on food and agriculture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpYi6zwXnz4). I heard that one of Kelvin Thomson's uncles owned farms that adjoined Malcolm Fraser's Nareen property and set up his own branch of Labor Party. Kelvin Thomson is in touch with what most Australians want and that is an end to the cruel Live Trade Export Industry, a sustainable population policy and proper planning to end urban congestion and loss of green wedges, conservation of our unique and threatened biodiversity, real action on climate change etc. Kelvin Thomson has also made his views known on plans to sell off our agricultural land to overseas owners see http://kelvinthomson.blogspot.com.au/

Alexander, most Australians are city based and live in Eastern Australia. The live trade is all about WA and NT, its a complicated debate and most Australians are not against it, as they are unable to pass an informed comment about it. Living in Melbourne or Sydney and owning a poodle or similar, does not qualify people to pass judgement about the live trade. That is the job of qualified livestock experts. Just because some people have been sucked in by propaganda on animal liberation websites, does not make what they read as objective, up to date or correct. Having relatives who own farms, does not make people experts about farming and farming in Victoria is quite different to farming in WA or the NT.

Yabby, I did my PhD dealing farming systems in southern Australia and Agriculture in south-western and south-eastern Australia has similarities and similar challenges like frequent drought, dryland salinity etc. OK farming systems in Victoria and NT (and NW Australia) are quite different. People with an interest in animal welfare, including many farmers, are just horrified by the poorly regulated live trade industry. Have you ever been in Fremantle or anywhere else and seen a live trade vessel being loaded?

I find the knowledge that large tracts of Australia
can be sold to foreigners deeply disturbing and
regardless of whether the buyers are from Indonesia,
China, or elsewhere, such enormous areas of country
must remain in Australian hands for future generations.
As one reader asked in Saturday's The Age, Sept. 14th, 2013,
"What's wrong with a clearly defined long-term lease that
includes immediate annulment should land, water, or animal
mismanagement occur?"

Once the land has been sold, they can do what they want.

BTW: - Not all opinions need to be brushed aside as
being made by city-dwelling "poodle owners."

Some of us
actually happen to come from farming backgrounds,
and also happen to have in-laws that still own and farm
cattle properties.

Indonesia won't lift a finger to stop the boats yet we'll
apparently willing to let them buy our cattle farms and
give them millions of dollars in aid.
No wonder they don't take us seriously.

Alexander, I'm in touch with friends who work on ships, work as part of ESCAS supervising feedlots in places like Indonesia and all the rest. The live trade has made huge strides over the decades and mortalities are half of what occurs in land based feedlots. As always there will be exceptions to the rule and mistakes made. Given the tens of thousands of reports which the RSPCA deal with from pet owners abusing their pets, I think we should clean up our own backyard first before crowing too loudly.

Fact is that WA is an isolated place and moving livestock in a hurry, is a major drought mitigation strategy, or they land up dying in the paddocks. Ships can do that. Local processing facilities can't cope. We are not in Victoria here, where you can truck them down the road to the next State.

Crikey, how long ago was the election…. and Labor still doesn’t have a leader! How bizarre!

And as for the two candidates… ( :>(

What a crying shame Kelvin Thomson didn’t put his name forward.

<Crikey, how long ago was the election…. and Labor still doesn’t have a leader! How bizarre!>

They can't even run a ballot for their leader, apparently.

Yes, it is funny.