Gillard wins!

Just had to report it, sorry: 71-31. Let the white anting begin…

 

Houses and Holes

David Llewellyn-Smith is Chief Strategist at the MB Fund and MB Super. David is the founding publisher and editor of MacroBusiness and was the fouding publisher and global economy editor of The Diplomat, the Asia Pacific’s leading geo-politics and economics portal.

He is also a former gold trader and economic commentator at The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, the ABC and Business Spectator. He is the co-author of The Great Crash of 2008 with Ross Garnaut and was the editor of the second Garnaut Climate Change Review.

Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)

Comments

  1. 31 will be enough to destabilise the government. Before the spill there was only 1 Rudd, now there are 31 confirmed little ruddlets running around Canberra that will be trying to destabilise the government before the next election. Get the pop corn ready expect some fireworks before the next election.

    • 31 isn’t even close to being enough. This is KRudd’s second run and the polls for Gillard are terrible.

      Rudd got hammered.

      • +1.

        Will be interesting to see what happens from here, but if they want to win the next election their best chance now will be to unite behind Gillard. If this happens then I think there’s a good chance of the polls moving the party into a competitive position over the next six months.

        That said, if the leaks and undermining cease, and the party is still polling this badly at the start of 2013, then a Rudd redraft is a chance – but any move to replace Gillard with a new third candidate at any stage during this term will only further fuel perceptions of ‘NSW disease.’

        • Gillard is there because of Gillard disease.

          She’s from the Victorian left, but they moved to suport Rudd.

          Her biggest block was NSW right, but her polling will NEVER warrant that support. She therefore is the ipso-facto ‘anyone but Rudd’ until another candidate comes along. Quite simply this suits Bill Shorten to a tee.

    • > 31 will be enough to destabilise the government.

      So there is some hope for the economy. The government will be too busy with in-fighting to screw more things up.

  2. Rudd should have quit, forced a by-election and stood as an independent. He then could have held the balance of power in parliament.

  3. I’m going to make a wild and crazy prediction:

    After the introduction of the carbon tax in July, the ALP slowly recovers to a competitive position with the Coalition. Not a winning position, just competitive (say 52-48). At the same time, Abbott falls further behind in the preferred PM stakes, and this results in renewed leadership tensions in the Liberal Party.

    Meanwhile, the non-mining economy worsens and job-losses in the mortgage belt electorates of the east-coast cities begin to bite. Abbott’s strong support for the mining sector and his hard-line on zero assistance to industries hurt by the strong dollar further erode his popularity.

    The RBA holds rates throughout 2012 and 2013, explicitly pointing to the mining investment boom as the reason for doing so. Anger in the electorate grows as house prices accelerate to the downside.

    Abbott becomes increasingly boxed-in as the “pro mining” candidate, and his popularity collapses. Turnbull challenges and wins with a promise to create a SWF and support a strengthened MRRT.

    Well, we can but hope…

    • Your devotion to Turnbull is bordering on comical. Do you actually think he is a different personality type to Rudd?

    • You honestly believe that the introduction of the Carbon Tax will help Labor? Maybe in some perverse way, the shifting of wealth away from the corporate sector to the “shepeople” in the form of “compensation” for the good of the climate (blah blah blah) may work. This government may succeed in bribing the electorate enough that it continually relies on the governement for its “fix”. With respect to the Mining Tax, well we dont know what deal Gillard made with the major resource companies yet. I’m sure we will know sooner or later. Its a great idea, but not in the hands of the govt.

      • You honestly believe that the introduction of the Carbon Tax will help Labor?

        Once it comes in people will realise its nowhere near the big deal Abbott has made it out to be. In fact, with the tripling of the tax free threshold, a lot of people might find themselves better off, especially if they use less electricity, petrol etc.

        Regardless, I wouldn’t be surprised if Abbott’s popularity has already peaked. People don’t like him and don’t respect him, and you either have to be liked (Hawke, Rudd) or respected (Howard, Keating) to become Prime Minister in this country.

  4. I love checking this site regularly. (although I am a little confused with my user name as I am pretty sure this would not be my first choice of user name). 31 votes against a pooly run, mismanaged government is not bad considering how badly they are recieved around the Country and the fact that if they don’t support Julia they are screwed!

    • Rudd wasn’t running this race on ‘winning’, much like Turnbull hasn’t run his pro-AGW stance within the coalition on ‘winning’.

      Rudd has made his stance, that 30% of the Labor caucus believes they should follow a populist mandate. His defeat shows that the labor party reproaches popular mandate and will follow factional direction.

      Perhaps so much so they’d rather be in opposition, but secure in their factinal support. Rudd’s now only hope is to martyr himself on the behest of this REAL ground support mandate (read: populist), and that he will always be available should they recalim sway.

      This is the same as Turnbull’s method, he is martyring himself as the pro-climate change alternative, because the perception is that only AGW-denial would keep the coaliation from government.

  5. Well done HnH for not reporting the initial 73-29 result ‘leaked’ to FM radio and picked up by everyone else, including the ABC.

  6. Rudd has proven himself a monstrous turd. It may take three flushes, but there is no crawling out of the S-bend for him. The only issue is how quickly they can get rid of the smell. 12 moths of strawberry air-freshener just might do it.

  7. I make a few predictions:

    1)Rudd takes this as being thrashed, and isn’t heard of again. Gillard, strengthened, rallies briefly and limps to the next election. Or not. Ultimately, though, Gillard is finished.

    2)Rudd quits Parliament. His seat is lost to the LNP. The Government falls. Gillard is finished.

    3) There is no rebound in the polls for Gillard – it simply fails to materialize. Australia falls into recession in 12-14 months time as both our and the Chinese housing bubble bursts. This filters its way through the economy (negative wealth effects, fall in construction). Rudd reminds us of his Keynesianism (really the first home vendors’ boost) as does Wayne Swan – with the election close and the economy in the gutter, the rats on marginal seats come back to Rudd, who is again PM. Gillard looses.

    My hunch is 3.

    • Out of the three options (3) is more likely, so I’ll vote with you . I don’t think the way things are being run now are set to change so more of the same.

      The government is keen to pin all the woes on Kevin, but what else would they say. No failings there, and I’ve been told, by a public servant, that in Canberra that you never fall on your sword even if found out.

  8. Best thing Gillard has in her favor is time.
    Next election is a long way off.
    I agree with most of the Lorax prediction that once the carbon tax is bedded down it will become a non-issue.
    Labor cant afford to play musical chairs with their leadership and the caucus knows it.
    They dont really have any options other than to stay the course and hope for the best politically.

  9. Defeating Kevin Rudd in the ballot is like sinking an oil tanker with a torpedo. Great success! but what to do next with the inevitable spill?

  10. I smell Bill Shorten in this , they forced Kevin to challenge so that they can put the leadership issue to rest, no faceless men etc, Kevin agrees that it is best for the labor party knowing full well he didn’t have the numbers. Anthony Albanese gives the whole thing credibilty by bawling in public and appealing to the true believers. Meanwhile Bill gets Kudo’s for having “fixed things”.

  11. Mr SquiggleMEMBER

    Rudd was only 21 votes short of victory.

    30% of the caucus does not want Gillard.

    I’m in the camp that says this issue isn’t dead yet, not by a long shot.

  12. I guess Julia will need Wayne Swan to blame for her lack of success in the future. He really is a slimy piece of work considering what he did over the mining tax and his backdown once Julia was in place.

  13. I don’t have a lot of time for Mr Rudd after that daft attack on the Hawke-Keating legacy in the Monthly.

    However he is an effective communicator to a large chunk of the population and that counts for something outside the basket weaving circles who don’t really like a large chunk of the population.

    Gillard doesn’t even have that going for her and the company she keeps is pretty odious, exhibit 1 – their various public statements during the week.

    Any chance she had of doing a lazarus in the polls was probably fatally damaged by the manner in which her supporters conducted themselves – factional attack drones. The grubbiness of 2010 must be clear to just about everyone by now.

    Rudd will sit on the backbench kissing babies and walking the malls of Australia until enough members of caucus realize that the promises of their factional leaders ‘that if we all stick with Julia eventually the public will swallow it’ are not panning out.

    At that point Mr Rudd will be back by public and caucus request.

    The only other possibility is that Silent Bill Shorten kisses enough babies to replace Rudd in the public mind as being a ‘clean pair of hands’. He should discourage Mr Kroger from offering glowing endorsements – not entirely a good look.

    • Thanks for the LOL. Try Independents. Greens can’t connect with mainstream Australia, it’s not in their DNA. Did you know they don’t even have a national defence policy?

      • I knew Adam Bandt was wanting Australia to enforce the Libyan no fly zone and Bob brown wants the Navy to protect the whales from the Japs.

    • +10 Greens are the only party with a coherent policy against the housing bubble, outside the politico-housing complex and support for a SWF.

      • Greens are the only party with a coherent policy against the housing bubble

        Jesus H Christ. If you regard a return to the stone age and living in a cave as a policy against the housing bubble then I suppose you could be right.

        • If you regard a return to the stone age and living in a cave as a policy against the housing bubble then I suppose you could be right.

          I’m not familiar with that Greens policy. Could you quote it ?

    • I love how the Greens are an unviable choice because they’re not perfect.

      As if the current two choices are.

      I’ve always voted Greens because a parliamentary debate on policy requires as many points of view as possible in order to arrive closest to a correct conclusion. Not all points of view are correct, but neither are they useless. Therefore we need more members from different parties. If the Democrats were around still perhaps I would look at them, and my local independents have more or less views in line with the coalition or derived solely from the scripture.

  14. John Clarke, Bryan Dawes skit
    [Scene: A car yard. BRYAN is perusing the stock. He is approached by JOHN]

    John: Morning! Looking for a new car?

    Bryan: Nope. New Prime Minister, actually.

    John: You’re the third one this morning. Anything in mind?

    Bryan: You know…… nothing fancy, reliable, economical family model Something to get the country from A to B.

    John: You mean like a Howard?

    Bryan: Yeah…a little Johnny. Nothing flash, does the job. Low maintenance, economical, sensible. Runs for years, no troubles.

    John: So…. you used to have one?

    Bryan: Yeah. About 10 years. Great little model – don’t know why I got rid of him — biggest mistake I’ve ever made.

    John: What happened?

    Bryan: Traded him in for a Kevin 07.

    John: Big mistake.

    Bryan: Lot of people bought it. Good political mileage.

    John: How was the Kevin 07?

    Bryan: Came with a $900 factory rebate – that was good.

    John: Anything else?

    Bryan: Not much. Sounded nice but nothing under the bonnet. It was a lemon.

    John: Didn’t stick around for long did it?
    Bryan: Nah – had a factory recall. Shipped overseas and was never seen again.

    John: What was the problem?

    Bryan: Lots. But the final straw was the navigation system. Plug it in and it automatically loses its own way.

    John: Whatcha got now?

    Bryan: It’s a Gillard-Brown.

    John: The hybrid?

    Bryan: Yeah. The Eco-drive system – not a good idea. An engine that can’t deliver hooked up to a transmission stuck in permanent reverse.

    John: Green paintwork with a red interior. And steering that always lurches to the left for no apparent reason – that’s the one?

    Bryan: The Fustercluck model.

    John: The only one they made, Bryan. Not the vehicle of choice for the road to recovery – but did they finish up fixing the navigation system?

    Bryan: Made it worse. Turn it on and it does a press release, heads off in all directions and goes nowhere.
    John: So that’s why you’re here?

    Bryan: That’s right. I’m stuck with a car that’s wasteful, expensive, ineffective and past its use by date. I don’t suppose you’ve heard of the “Cash for Clunkers” scheme?
    John: Join the queue brother.

  15. Greens got the vote of about 1 in 7 Australians at the last election. More than the Nationals.

    From this point on they are Labor’s de facto coaltion partner. Get used to it.

  16. Sensational narrative. Thank you.

    Whilst I fully respect the Norwegian SWF model, I still have reservations about an Aussie SWF.
    I think our vast country needs some visionary infrastructure investment, now and not tomorrow.

    FUTURE FUNDS OR FUTURE EATERS? THE CASE AGAINST A SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND FOR AUSTRALIA
    A new report by the Centre for Independent Studies says the Future Fund, Australia’s de facto sovereign wealth fund, far from being a fiscally responsible way to rebalance intergenerational equity, is economically flawed.

    Full report here:
    http://www.cis.org.au/publications/policy-monographs/article/3969-future-funds-or-future-eaters-the-case-against-a-sovereign-wealth-fund-for-australia

    • old news (been butting heads with Mr Holes about this since about May last year) and based on the executive summary this looks pissweak …not one mention of the CAD. We run a large current account deficit, ergo we aren’t accumulating sovereign wealth but sovereign debt.

  17. “the Greens don’t even have a Defense policy”

    So what.
    The Opposition doesn’t have an economic policy.