Lenore Taylor
September 3, 2011
Prime Minister Julia Gillard ... is far more unpopular than Rudd was at the time he rolled. Photo: Ben Rushton
The masters of spin are all spun out as Julia Gillard runs out of options, writes Lenore Taylor.
Just over a year ago, Kevin Rudd's leadership hit a tipping point, his support base inside the party was swamped by the momentum of backroom leadership destabilisation and Australia woke one morning to hear it was about to get a new prime minister.
Labor is now facing the possibility Julia Gillard's leadership could suffer the same fate, this time undermined more by despair at the government's own weakness, bad luck and mistakes.
The dissenters know that the deals with the cross-bench independents mean the prime ministership is now not only in the hands of the caucus and so-called ''faceless men''. And the small band who see the best chance of survival in the resurrection of Kevin Rudd know that actively pushing the former leader could hinder his chances.
Another strike ... Julia Gillard and Immigration Minister Chris Bowen front the media to discuss the High Court ruling on the asylum seekeer swap deal on Thursday. Photo: Paul Harris
''She must be given every opportunity,'' they say.
Their wait-and-see strategy is to allow the carbon tax and the mining tax to pass the parliament and then assess what is possible if the party's political situation is still as dire early next year.
Many of the powerbrokers who would need to support any change were behind last year's coup in favour of Gillard and have a lot riding on its success. She remains much more popular in the party. But, as Kevin Rudd discovered, these things can take on a life of their own, and this week's shock High Court decision on the Malaysian asylum seekers deal shows how quickly a weakened leader can face destabilisation.
The former leader, still recuperating at his Canberra home from heart surgery, has been keeping out of it.
Party sources insist there is no organised or even disorganised challenge and they cite many rational reasons against another leadership change.
But every time a prime minister has to publicly declare ''I'm not going anywhere'', as Julia Gillard did on Friday in response to reports she had been asked to stand down, it underlines that their position is weak.
Labor was at first so shell-shocked by the High Court disaster, so stunned by the king-hit to its already pummelled credibility, they couldn't even spin it. The masters of spin were spun out.
Senior figures who have for weeks been stoically reciting that they were ''working through the issues'' and ''rebuilding the electorate's trust through delivery'' and ''seeing through the tough times'' couldn't find a slogan
to explain away the debris of their policy or the state of the government. Most of what they did say can't be printed, but the recurring theme was disbelief that everything they touched turned to ''***''.
Having persevered through the political misery of carbon pricing, the unedifying rout of the mining tax, the humiliation of the Timor ''solution'' and the revival of the sordid Craig Thomson allegations, they just couldn't pretend any more that they had any confidence things could turn out all right.
The switch to Gillard had seemed like the best way to fix the ''paralysis'' in the Rudd Government's decision-making and the breach of faith caused by the deferral of the emissions trading scheme. But the way Julia Gillard took the job, the way she formed government after the inconclusive election result, and Tony Abbott's relentless attack just dragged her authority and the legitimacy of the government further into question.
The new Prime Minister proclaimed her first job was resolving three outstanding issues - asylum, carbon pricing and the mining tax - but more than a year later the two taxes are waiting to pass the parliament and, after this week's decision, asylum policy is in a much bigger mess than when she inherited it.
All her colleagues acknowledge Julia Gillard's incredible toughness and resolve, but they also concede that the poisonous politics of the issues she inherited have almost completely obscured all the things the government has done on health and hospitals and disability reform and skills and training.
The agenda she wanted to make her own - steering the economy through the mining boom so the whole country benefited - has started and is the right agenda for the times, but is being overshadowed by all the government's other difficulties.
As well, almost everything that could go wrong has: the summer of natural disasters, the wider international economic uncertainty and now the High Court's new interpretation of the requirements of asylum law.
The first reaction of many in the party was to hit out at the ministry, including the Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, and his predecessor, Chris Evans. But, in a political situation this febrile, a reshuffle would be dangerous.
The second reaction was anger at the High Court, to which the Prime Minister gave vent when she accused the Chief Justice of inconsistency as she explained why the government had been so sure that its Malaysia solution would be lawful, succeeding only in fanning the sense of national crisis.
Finally, they turned to the usual fall-back position of politicians in dire trouble - a leadership change - before dismissing it as an immediate option, for several reasons.
There was the ''it wouldn't work anyway'' argument - sometimes referred to as the ''NSW disease'' argument - which maintains that since Labor's crisis of authority and legitimacy started when it rolled its last leader, it can't be fixed by rolling its current one, that the sudden assassination of Kevin Rudd is a big part of Labor's current problems and that another challenge would make federal Labor look as desperate as NSW Labor during its protracted death roll.
There was the ''better to die on your feet'' argument - that Labor has worn the pain of getting a deal on the carbon tax and the mining tax and should pass them, not start flirting with changes that could upset an unstable parliament and mean they didn't get through.
The ''die on your feet'' proponents from the left also argue the party must now reject all offshore asylum processing options and do what it should have done all along, process all would-be-refugees on our shores.
There was the ''who the hell would we turn to'' argument, since Kevin Rudd still gets a visceral negative reaction from many in the party. Other options, such as Simon Crean or Stephen Smith, are not viewed with enthusiasm, and contenders such as Greg Combet and Bill Shorten are seen as unprepared. But still there are people talking about possible pairings - Kevin Rudd and Stephen Smith, Bill Shorten and Mark Butler, even though Shorten has publicly declared his support for the PM. People suggesting the leader should stand down. The talk has begun.
Invariably there is also the ''but we couldn't do it anyway'' argument, based on the fact that the agreement to form government was between the three crossbench independents and Julia Gillard herself. But as the Herald reports today, this is not necessarily the position of the independents. (See story, right.) By week's end Julia Gillard was working to stop her leadership veering close to the place Kevin Rudd's was just over a year ago. With 61 per cent dissatisfied with her performance, she is far more unpopular with the public than her predecessor was at the time he was rolled, and polls suggest he remains the voters' preferred option. With a primary vote of 28 per cent the party is in a far worse position.
Senior sources insist, publicly and privately, no numbers are being counted, no factions are meeting, no unions are reassessing their support. But they were saying the same thing last June and Kevin Rudd was gone the next day. And they know that every day they are talking about leadership is another day Labor isn't digging itself out of its political mire.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/how-long-can-it-last-20110902-1jq7c.html
![]()
![]()
联系人：
联系方式： |
|
收藏