The best pick of a bad lot for Liberal Party leader and Prime Minister would have been Peter Dutton. Forget the 'broad church' nonsense: the Liberal party was dragged to the left by Malcolm Turnbull (Bill Shorten is really upset that his 'plant' is no longer PM), and Dutton was – still is – one of the few capable conservatives remaining in the tattered party. Turnbull is beavering away in his $4 million New York apartment to have Dutton referred to the High Court, and Morrison was Turnbull's pick, evidenced by the slippery trick that saw a three way contest where previously there was only one contender. So, how is the far from suitable Scott Morrison doing so far? Not very well, according to an article posted in the Catallaxy Files on September 13.

According to the author of the post, Morrison had three “top priority” structural changes to make in order to shift the “policy debate” to the sensible centre right. The Cabinet and the Ministry had to change; ministerial departments realigned to the “core strategic priorities” of the government; and, Martin Parkinson should have been sacked. Morrison has dipped out on all three.

The Ministry is a “mish mash” of “baffling positions”; duplication and overlapping responsibilities are “mindboggling”. It is filled with Ministers who have no “talent”, experience or expertise. The author sums up the Morrison's ministry as a “.... triumph of mediocrity and factions over talent and direction”.

Martin Parkinson - who should have been sacked – is, of course a top pubic servant and Secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet. A very powerful man, ex-Left wing Grattan Institute, and the architect of all Turnbull's failures. Full details of his sins are presented in Catallaxy Files under “Justinian the Great: Is Martin Parkinson Labor's Best Weapon and Morrison's Fatal Mistake?”. At around 1,650 words in a 'centre-right blog' it is probably too much for certain elements, but for serious conservatives worried about where the country is going, it is a useful read showing why a Morrison government will be little different from the the last one.

Armchair Critic said - "The best pick of a bad lot for Liberal Party leader and Prime Minister would have been Peter Dutton."

Answer- This sounds very reasonable to me.

Just shows they should never have allowed the regressives to destroy the party. Giving Turnbull/Bishop power was a major mistake. Their tantrums and sniping have gone a long way towards destroying the party. Turnbull is acting like Rudd on steriods while Bishop is showing what self intetrest really looks like. Might need Tony to fix things again. Slow learners.

Yes, Abbott has stuck around and sniped and wrecked and
plotted and schemed and Peter Dutton was poised to exact
Abbott's revenge and pave the former PM's way for a return
to the front bench. That didn't work out too well.

But to be fair to Dutton. He might be bland and
unlikeable and while his nickname of "the potato" is a
comment as much on his appearance as his personality
he'd hardly be the first Australian Member of Parliament
to lack "pizazz." After all - we have Eric Abetz, Kevin
Andrews, Tony Abbott - take your pick.

How about Barnaby Joyce as PM? He's thoroughly an
Australian (born in New Zealand?) but he knows how to
swing a whip, go after the sheilas, make the most of all
the perks and he really loves his beer. A top bloke.
An Aussie you can trust. Smart as a whip as well.
But hang on a moment can a National really be a PM?
It's just occurred to me - that the Libs would never allow
it. But hey, at the rate that they're selling off our
country - you never can tell who'll we get as a future PM.

Read the post in Catallxy Files and be prepared for a grim future.

ttbn Ever heard about providing a link. Makes things easier.