Australia has a new and female Prime Minister

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

The Australian Prime Minister,Kevin Rudd, has been removed by his Party. The new Prime Minsiter is Julia Gillard, the first woman to hold that position.

Unlike the US. We do not vote directly for the national leader. He is elected a member of parliament by his electorate. He is elected party leader by his party leaders. If his party wins government,he is Prime Minister. He may be removed as PM at any time by his party. In this case it was the Labor Party caucus.

Althoug Gillard is a member of the Labor left,it was the support of the right faction ( to which Rudd belonged) which ensured Gillard would win her leadershiip challenge.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/...935500.htm

[KichigaiNeko]

Sickening isn't it???

Can only hope that Abbott and the Nationals can get their collective act together.

Really don't like any of Labour's polilcies...none of them have worked and Gillard has been central in the construction of them

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Sickening isn't it???

Can only hope that Abbott and the Nationals can get their collective act together.

Really don't like any of Labour's polilcies...none of them have worked and Gillard has been central in the construction of them

Sickening? No,its just politcs and utterly predictable. I don't like most of Labor's policies either. I simply consider them sligtly less aweful than those of Liberals.--Especially under that chronically Catholic wanker Abbot, who will alow his personal superstions to colour policy.

Could have been slightly worse; they could have left Tin Tin there. The Labor party may arguably have improved its chances of keeping power.(which is what the spill was about) However,I'm far from convinced the country will be better off in any measureable way*

As far as I'm concerened it's still "a pox on both your houses". I still intend to vote for the Greens. Cynically, I don't belive Gillard can make a silk purse out of a cow's ear.

*A simpple way to get Gillard's measure will be to see what she does about Rudd's mining tax. I think it's a good idea which has been introduced in ham fisted way. I think Julia will be smarter, more devious and able to get her way without alienating her support base,which was Rudd's fatal error.

[KichigaiNeko]

Sickening isn't it???

Can only hope that Abbott and the Nationals can get their collective act together.

Really don't like any of Labour's policies...none of them have worked and Gillard has been central in the construction of them

Sickening? No,its just politcs and utterly predictable. I don't like most of Labor's policies either. I simply consider them sligtly less aweful than those of Liberals.--Especially under that chronically Catholic wanker Abbot, who will alow his personal superstions to colour policy.

Could have been slightly worse; they could have left Tin Tin there. The Labor party may arguably have improved its chances of keeping power.(which is what the spill was about) However,I'm far from convinced the country will be better off in any measureable way*

As far as I'm concerened it's still "a pox on both your houses". I still intend to vote for the Greens. Cynically, I don't belive Gillard can make a silk purse out of a cow's ear.

*A simpple way to get Gillard's measure will be to see what she does about Rudd's mining tax. I think it's a good idea which has been introduced in ham fisted way. I think Julia will be smarter, more devious and able to get her way without alienating her support base,which was Rudd's fatal error.

Agree with you there padraic....they are both as bad as one another....Labour had a chance but seems to have suffered the blindness of the former Liberal Administration....when are BOTH Parties going to recognise that people are sick of waiting for tomorrow??

Forgive my lack of political savvy but I thought a vote for the Greens was a vote for Labour??? Am searching their site now.

It makes for scary reading....sounds more like Labour policies than anything original. (Still reading and digesting it)

I still want to see the books....alot of money has gone missing and the Billions$$$ labour want to extort from the mining tax has not been clearly demonstrated yet.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Forgive my lack of political savvy but I thought a vote for the Greens was a vote for Labour???

That depends on how many primary votes they get. I'm hoping enough people are sufficiently pissed off with both parties for the Greens to gain a few more seats. Ideally,enough for a coalition with Labor.

[KichigaiNeko]

Forgive my lack of political savvy but I thought a vote for the Greens was a vote for Labour???

That depends on how many primary votes they get. I'm hoping enough people are sufficiently pissed off with both parties for the Greens to gain a few more seats. Ideally,enough for a coalition with Labor.

There is no such thing as a "coalition' with Labour...as far as I understand it...it is a case of "tow the party line or you will be politically assassinated" the current result is proof positive of that understanding.

As I have stated...a vote for the Greens is a vote for the Labour party. All kudos to Ms Gillard but I do think that the method played out in front of the Australian people is a wake up call to the same Australian people as the the actual mechanisms that drive our Government and political landscape. IMHO

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

There is no such thing as a "coalition' with Labour..

True enough,so far. But, I have no doubt Gillard would form one should there be a hung parliament.


For this voter it comes down to pragmatics. I consider voting a privilege and always vote in a way to maximise my self interest. However,to be blunt,it is my honest opinion that the party one's choice is virtually irrellevant in a relatively free society such as Australia. I just like to pretend it matters.



PS the official spelling is "Labor Party", since 1912.

The ALP was originally called "the Australian Labour Party" (name adopted in 1908), but was frequently referred to as both "Labour" and "Labor". The "Labor" was adopted from 1912 onwards due to the influence of the American labor movement. (This is from the ALP website.)

[KichigaiNeko]

PS the official spelling is "Labor Party", since 1912.

The ALP was originally called "the Australian Labour Party" (name adopted in 1908), but was frequently referred to as both "Labour" and "Labor". The "Labor" was adopted from 1912 onwards due to the influence of the American labor movement. (This is from the ALP website.)

Whoops...sorry Pad if I offend....Labor it is...(Damn you spell check!! )

It does rankle with this voter (who was ready to swing to "Labor") that some group of invisible (to me) Unionists can dictate to me who my First Minister is or is not.... Yeah voting is a privilege and I take my vote seriously.

[ib.me.ub]

There is no such thing as a "coalition' with Labour...as far as I understand it...it is a case of "tow the party line or you will be politically assassinated" the current result is proof positive of that understanding.

So what about the Greens / Labor coalition in Tasmania. It seems to be workong well so far! The best chance we have for real change is a Green / Labor coalition!

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Whoops...sorry Pad if I offend....Labor it is...(Damn you spell check!! Angry )

No, ofcourse I'm not offended, just being my usual pedantic-old-fart self.

---

The best chance we have for real change is a Green / Labor coalition!

I admire your optimism. However, it is my observation that people will only tolerate a reform government for shotrt periods and most astute politicians are aware of that. Consequently, politicallly made changes at an institutional level are rare.

Liberals tried it with work choices and it cost them government. Labor is trying it with the management of the Murray Darling system,so far with spectacular lack of success.

Australia is one of those countries which always gets the government it deserves and always will as long elections are decided by the greedy bourgeoisie and the stupid working class tories. Same for the US and UK.