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.

Philip S,

Are you not capable of looking anything up for yourself? Three BLOODY TIMES I've commented on this links crap. You haven't taken any notice, obviously, so you are unlikely to be able to make use of links. Do you demand links when you read something in a newspaper? Do you whine about links to the contributors from outside OLO? What about books? Do you comb through all references and foot notes? Of course you don't.

This is a place for opinions, not writing theses. Read the post in Catallaxy Files – or not, I don't care what you do; I'm not wasting another second on you.

Given the really bad Prime Ministers we have had since John Howard, I am reminded of the joke (or it could have been true) during the time of a really bad PM, Gough Whitlam.

A Brit was asked who he though was the greater Prime Minister, Harold Wilson (UK) or Gough Whitlam. The reply was:

“Any fool can bugger up Britain but it takes real genius to bugger up Australia.”

The point is, of course, that Britain was on the way out already when Wilson made it worse. But Australia had everything going for it: cheap electricity for manufacturing, abundant natural resources, etc. – no end to possibilities. But, arch-socialist and Fabian, Whitlam, self-proclaimed genius, put a stop to that nonsense; and, apart from a brief respite in the Howard years, we have been run by geniuses ever since.

"How fortunate for governments that the people
they administer don't think."

(Adolf Hitler).

In answer to Foxy above through the chair-

You don't want thought you want agreement...

"Some single mind must be master, else there will
be no agreement in anything."

(Abraham Lincoln).

CM,

Good comment. I haven't bothered reading that woman's blather for some time; I know she is still blathering only when someone responds to the know-all for whatever reason. What you say about her is spot on. She has nothing of any merit to offer except left-wing bigotry she reads on Google. She is simply not worth trying to deal with. What ever you say, she will come back like a cracked record with the same old same old. It must be very stressful for people like her who have to be 'right' all the time - to the extent of going on, and on,and on, when most of us just think "whatever", and move on; the sort of people who can't say 'bollocks' to themselves, and not feel the need to make a big deal out of what are, after all, just opinions. It's OK to disagree, but it's naive to think continual yapping and nagging is going to make others come around to your way of thinking. There are a couple of others around like Mother Russia, but she gets the gong for bring the most obnoxious.

This week's Spectator editorial posits that the demise of Turnbull was less a coup than it was pure political suicide, committed by Turnbull when he tried to negotiate the NEG that needed the approval of Labor states. He lost the leadership once before by saying that he wouldn't lead a party who didn't believe the rubbish about climate change and a tax on carbon dioxide. The fool tried it again, and really paid for it this time. He destroyed his own policy. He destroyed his own prime ministership. He destroyed the Liberal party.

To ttbn- Thanks for the feedback.

Even the nicest people have their limits.

My father used to tell me - "Should you ever find yourself
the victim of other people's bitterness, smallness or
insecurities ...
Remember -
things could be worse
You could be them."

It is hard to disagree with Jo Nova's comment (her blog 14/9/18) that Scott Morrison is a “ mini-Turnbull”.

She says that Morrison has assured key crossbenchers that he will retain the RET. That, plus continuing to bow to Paris, clearly shows that there will be no changes to the suicidal climate/energy policy, and the consequent damage to our economy.

ttbn Quote - "This is a place for opinions, not writing theses. Read the post in Catallaxy Files – or not, I don't care what you do; I'm not wasting another second on you."

WOW calm down high blood pressure is not good for you.

Just out of interest what happens when people use a search engine to find something you assume everyone knows and come up with different results to what you came up with.

Considering your quote "I'm not wasting another second on you."

I do not expect a reply, which suites me fine, just grow up.

ttbn Quote "I haven't bothered reading that woman's blather for some time; I know she is still blathering only when someone responds to the know-all for whatever reason. What you say about her is spot on. She has nothing of any merit to offer except left-wing bigotry she reads on Google. She is simply not worth trying to deal with. What ever you say, she will come back like a cracked record with the same old same old"

A blatant lie on your side here because if you do not read what she says you would not be able to say "I haven't bothered reading that woman's blather for some time; I know she is still blathering only when someone responds to the know-all for whatever reason. What you say about her is spot on. She has nothing of any merit to offer except left-wing bigotry she reads on Google. She is simply not worth trying to deal with. What ever you say, she will come back like a cracked record with the same old same old"

As for this rubbish "I know she is still blathering only when someone responds to the know-all for whatever reason." you would at best only get a very small part of the context of her original comment, the part someone commented about not the full comment.

If you are going to lie please be more convincing or come up with a better argument.

I assume you were dropped on your head as a baby, Philip S.

To so soon speculate on the new Govt is proof why things don't add up anymore in Australia.
How can ANY Govt govern effectively with people asking such questions before the new crowd has even had their first taxpayer funded lunch ?
The constituents expectations are as unbelievably unrealistic as the unbelievablly unrealistic alternative Govt waiting in the shadows whilst feeding off the taxpayers.

ttbn Quote "I assume you were dropped on your head as a baby, Philip S."

If that is all you could come up with after this quote from you "I don't care what you do; I'm not wasting another second on you." looks like an epic fail from your side.

ttbn- I accept your position on the links. You view the forum as opinion as you've said. My position is "my argument is stronger if I give links"- but I don't expect everyone to conform to my "personal standards". I agree that you don't need to give supporting evidence for a personal opinion- especially in a democracy- the forum isn't an academic journal. You aren't claiming that what you say is anything more than your opinion of the commonly available news. If someone is not able to Google the information that you quote- they are free to discount the information accordingly. It could be considered offensive to be demanded to format your comments in a form not of your own. Everyone has a right in a democracy to comment on issues independent of their formatting.

Thanks for your strong support of free speech.

//Thanks for your strong support of free speech.//

Oh for heaven's sake, Yappy Chihuahua, stop being so coy and just come out and say what we all you know you're really thinking:

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

Individual said- "How can ANY Govt govern effectively with people asking such questions before the new crowd has even had their first taxpayer funded lunch ?"

Answer- Looks like interesting times. The problems are caused by a failure to address the underlying issues in Australia and the world. The issue is there are too many vested interests in positions of power. The bureaucracy, the business community, the unions, the NGO community (often government sponsored) all need a broom. We need home grown organizations more representative of Australian history in the last 40 years. If a politician can act on these issues then they will go far and no one else will be able to touch them. At least Dutton seems to be willing to do what is required- but I would like to see a high proportion of independent anti-immigration senators in order to balance the power of the government- to ensure that the government isn't hijacked by other interests. Also the Labor State Governments need a broom- their Diversity policies are instrumental in the destruction of Traditional Australia. The UN also needs to be massively reformed as they are anti-democratic.

If a politician can act on these issues then they will go far and no one else will be able to touch them.
Canem Malum,
My sentiments exactly. What explanation could there be for this not happening ? I have stated many times that, don't these politicians know that they don't actually win elections, it's the encumbents who lose them.
Politicians have every answer under the sun whilst in opposition but as soon as they make it into Govt all their drummed up out of thin air policies evaporate before the last ballot bx is removed.
Why not make tough decisions right up front so they can use the rest of their likely only term to put things straight onto the road of recovery ? If these are good policies then they'll get voted in again or at the least the other faction will only get one term because dismantling a good policy is a no-no in any language.
Many of these desperately needed reforms are quite basic & politically low-risk so why keep on stalling ?
Come on Morrison Govt do it ?

CM,

Yes. If a poster says something I don't believe, I'm able to do my own research, or, I disagree directly or silently, and leave it at that. As I have said, nobody has obviously changed his mind because of what I said, and neither have I changed my mind. I don't post something I don't mean; I would have thought the same applied to others - otherwise, why would they say it in the first place?

People who are keen to display their findings by putting up references are only going to 'find’ references that support them. Fair enough, if they are that desperate to be 'right’. However, for every supporting reference they find, there will be one that says the opposite. There are huge gaps and variances in information and opinion. Even professionals who deal in the same areas and disciplines don't always agree. But some laypersons, posting anonymously and without any special knowledge, seem to think what they 'know’ or believe came down from the Mount with Moses

CM,

Just another one on references. You will note that Philip S, very keen on references to the point of obsession, is still chuntering away about me instead of getting on with his own life: I wonder if he has looked at the reference I gave him. After his petulant demand, I gave him my source; I said, "Read Catallxy Files". My guess is that he never did do that. He certainly has not taken the opportunity to advise me if I was right or wrong, based on my source, which, of course, suggests what I have always suspected - that calls for references come from people too lazy or ignorant to do anything for themselves, and they are just hoping to shut down people they disagree with. It's piss and wind bluff by people who think that other people are as bereft of confidence and self-esteem as they themselves are.

ttbn What a load of dribble Quote "People who are keen to display their findings by putting up references are only going to 'find’ references that support them. Fair enough, if they are that desperate to be 'right’. However, for every supporting reference they find, there will be one that says the opposite."

I would like you to point out just a few posted threads where the originator started a thread about any subject and proceeded to give the for and against arguments that related to the subject of the thread.

It would be like posting a whole debate for and against.

That includes any where you have done that.

Findings will be ZERO.

One other minor point quote "I'm not wasting another second on you"
It would appear you are keeping you word and not wasting another second you have passed that point by a long way, bit obsessive if you ask me.

Foxy,

From what I last recall Tamworth (where Barnaby was born) is still in Australia.

That business as usual is continuing is hardly shocking as there is still a comparatively competent liberal government in charge.

I was never a great fan of Turnbull especially since he tried to legislate Labor's version 1 of the carbon tax. And while I was generally in favour of the NEG, when MT tried to use it to bring in a version of a carbon tax by stealth by legislating targets, I thought it was a bridge too far and apparently so did his party. I still think a version of it needs to be legislated without the mandatory targets which will let states do their own thing without screwing up the power supply.

I was also not a great fan of Dutton, but compared to offerings from other parties such as the corrupt Shorten, the lard arse Albo, the Pinhead Plibersek, the Whinging Wong, only a moron would vote Labor.