Posted on 02/08/2015 2:03:50 PM PST by naturalman1975
JOHN Howard has urged the Liberal Party to give Tony Abbott more time to improve his performance amid signs the Prime Minister will stare down a leadership spill today but risk an ongoing revolt and subsequent challenge.
The former prime minister said that “obviously some things have to change” but that Mr Abbott should be given the chance to fix the problems, in an influential move in the battle over the government’s future.
Malcolm Turnbull will contest the leadership if today’s spill succeeds but Liberal MPs said a majority was unlikely to vote for change today despite frustration with Mr Abbott’s recent decisions and admissions from cabinet ministers that a new direction was needed.
Angry Liberal backbenchers are set to support the motion that the leadership be declared vacant, wounding Mr Abbott and putting him on notice to expect a challenge if he cannot stage a dramatic turnaround in the government’s fortunes.
Mr Abbott infuriated his critics yesterday by bringing forward the leadership vote by 24 hours and sparking claims he was dictating terms to MPs just six days after promising a new style of “collegial and consultative” government.
Julie Bishop was given little chance to consult with the Prime Minister on his decision to hold the vote at 9am today even though her position of deputy is one of those at stake.
Only five backbench MPs have publicly backed the spill motion — Luke Simpkin, Don Randall, Dennis Jensen, Sharman Stone and Arthur Sinodinos — but several others have privately told The Australian they will vote for change.
Almost 20 backbenchers vowed publicly to vote against the spill but key questions hang over the number of ministers and parliamentary secretaries who may desert the Prime Minister in the secret ballot, although they are obliged by convention to back him.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
Crisis? Changing leadership in a parliamentary system happens all the time.
Not in the Australian system, it doesn’t. It’s constitutionally allowed, but it’s historically been rare until very recently for a Prime Minister to face a challenge, especially early in their time as Prime Minister.
I know Australian politics very well - and calling this is a crisis is not an exaggeration.
I don't know a whole lot about the Parliamentary form of government but I'm not *completely* clueless,having watched Prime Minister's Question Time from Britain for some years.This form of government is in place in a number of countries,most of which are former British colonies.IMO the most notable are Britain,Canada and Australia.
In Britain,at least,changes in leadership that aren't the result of an election seem to me to be the exception to the rule.Thatcher went against her will...Blair went voluntarily (at least that's *my* understanding).
I know of no such changes having recently occurred in Canada...although I can't say I follow their politics very closely.And I know that Rudd and Gilliard played a form of musical chairs for a few years and I think I recall the Australia's Governor General having removed one of their PMs from office some years ago.
Of course it may happen more often in countries like the British Virgin Islands and Bermuda...small,relatively unimportant nations.
I suppose it depends on how one defines "all the time".
Unpopularity. I'll post again, an analysis I wrote the other day as to why I believe he's unpopular.
It is mostly undeserved - but there have been some genuine errors. Undeserved - large sections of the media blaming the Abbott government for things that were caused by the previous Labor government. Examples - (1) Labor reopened the detention centre on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea to deal with the influx of asylum seekers their policies had created. They didn't upgrade the facilities to deal with the numbers of people they were sending there. Now there are major problems at the centre, and the media is screaming that the Abbott government hasn't fixed them. (2) Under Labor, Australian intelligence services bugged the phone of the President of Indonesia. Leaving aside the fact that this is really just a normal intelligence operation, the media found this out prior to the last election and deliberately sat on the story to avoid embarassing the Labor government. It only came out after Labor had lost the election, when it could damage the new governments diplomacy with Indonesia - and many people were left with the false impression that the spying had occurred after the election rather than before it. (3) Labor (and the Greens) won't pass the budget through the Senate and because of that, Australia's economic position is deteriorating. We can fix the budget if we can't pass the budget. But rather than blaming Labor and the Greens for blocking the budget, the media would prefer to blame the government. (4) The media is treating promises for funding from 2018 onwards that Labor never intended to deliver as if they were genuine promises, and so are describing Abbott as having cut funding to education and health based on those empty promises, even though the budget for both is actually increasing.
Genuine issues - (1) A spur of the moment statement the night before the election has created a sound bite that can be used to attack the Prime Minister for breaking an election promise. The issue is actually more complicated than that - technically no promise was broken - but the sound bite should never have happened. (2) The Prime Minister is a lousy salesman. He hasn't explained why certain things are necessary (for example, why they need to reform health funding), he's simply tried to push ahead with the changes without explaining them. As he can't get them through the Senate, it means wasting political capital for nothing. (3) On some issues (in particular one relating to freedom of speech/freedom of the press), Abbott has moved to the centre and alienated the conservative base. He probably had to abandon the plan as he would have never got it through the Senate, but some of us would have preferred him to try that fight, even if he lost it, rather than simply give up in the apparent hope of gaining some support from the centre and the left, that he was never likely to get in the current climate. (4) He sometimes acts without consulting his Cabinet as much as he should - he's the leader and he's allowed to act unilaterally, but some things he's done has taken his Cabinet by surprise - even if all he does is tell them "This is what I am going to do, and I won't be argued with," it would have been better than doing it without even telling them. (5) This last one happened at the start of last week, and is partly an illustration of some of the other problems. He announced that Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh had been given a Knighthood of the Order of Australia. Very minor, totally symbolic, but it sent the left wing media into an absolute frenzy of irrational hatred and they've turned it into a huge story - and even many conservative columnists can't understand why he spent political capital on something that mattered so little at a time when people are looking for reasons to attack him.
Finally - his single biggest success - stopping the flow of asylum seekers to Australia - is one a lot of Australians are uncomfortable with, even though they wanted it to happen. It makes it hard to use it as an electoral plus. Nobody wants the asylum seekers here - but at the same time, nobody wants to be seen as cruel or unkind to desperate people. The Australian public want a government to do what this one has done - but they don't want to feel personally responsible for it.
I'll try and lay out (in reverse chronology), Australian history on this. I will put the times a PM has been removed from office by their party in bold.
Tony Abbott (Liberal) - PM since late 2013, has just survived a leadership challenge after less than a year and a half in office. It may not be last one.
Kevin Rudd (Labor) - PM (for the second time) from the middle of 2013. Removed from office by losing a general election.
Julia Gillard (Labor) - PM from 2010. Removed from office by her party in her (technical) second term after three years in office.
Kevin Rudd (Labor) - PM (for the first time) from 2007 until 2010. Removed from office by his party in his first term after nearly three years in office.
John Howard (Liberal) - PM from 1996 until 2007. Removed from office by a general election, after serving four terms.
Paul Keating (Labor) - PM from 1991 until 1996. Removed from office by a general election, after serving nearly two terms.
Bob Hawke (Labor) - PM from 1983 until 1991. Removed from office by his party in his fourth term after 8 years in office.
Malcolm Fraser (Liberal) - PM from 1975 until 1982. Removed from office by a general election during his fourth term after seven years in office.
Gough Whitlam (Labor) - PM from 1972 until 1975. Sacked by the Governor General during his second term, after three years in office.
Sir William McMahon (Liberal) - PM from 1971 until 1972. Removed from office by a general election after just over a year in office.
Sir John Gorton (Liberal) - PM from 1968 until 1971. Resigned from office/removed by party (the vote on his leadership was tied - and he cast the deciding vote to end his own Prime Ministership - so it's hard to classify this one) after three years and one term.
Sir John McEwan (Country Party) - PM for less than one month at the end of 1967/start of 1968 - only ever intended as a short term caretaker until the Liberal Party could select a new Leader.
Harold Holt (Liberal) - PM from 1966-1967. Died in office (technically speaking he vanished without trace while swimming, and was declared dead). PM for nearly two years.
Sir Robert Menzies (Liberal) PM (for the second time) from 1949 until 1966. Resigned from office during his seventh term, after just over fifteen years in office.
Ben Chifley (Labor). PM from 1945 until 1949. Removed from office by a general election after just over one term and four years.
Frank Forde (Labor). Prime Minister for one week in 1945. Only appointed as a caretaker until the Labor Party could elect a new leader, although he did run in that election and lost to Chifley.
John Curtin (Labor). Prime Minister from 1941 until 1945. Died in office after just over one term and four years as Prime Minister.
Arthur Fadden (Country Party). Prime Minister for just over a month in 1941. Resigned from office when he could not guarantee supply. Because of the war situation demanding stability in government, more or less voluntarily handed over control to John Curtin - in peacetime, he would have fought on, but he judged (rightly in my view) that Australia couldn't afford to be wasting time on a constitutionally avoidable election.
Sir Robert Menzies (United Australia Party). Prime Minister (for the first time) from 1939 until 1941. Resigned from office midway through his (technical) second term, to avoid the instability of a leadership challenge in time of war.
Sir Earle Page (Country Party). Prime Minister for three weeks in 1939. Only intended as a temporary caretaker until the United Australia Party could elect a new leader.
Joseph Lyons (United Australia Party). Prime Minister from 1932 until 1939. Died in office in his fourth term after seven years in office.
James Scullin (Labor). Prime Minister from 1929 until 1932. Removed from office by a general election, in his second term after three years in office.
Stanley Bruce, 1st Viscount Bruce of Melbourne (Nationalist). Prime Minister from 1923 until 1929. Removed from office by a general election after two terms and six years.
Billy Hughes (Labor/Nationalist). Prime Minister from 1915 until 1923. Resigned from office after eight years during his third term.
Andrew Fisher (Labor). Prime Minister (for the third time) for most of 1915 (and the end of 1914). Resigned from office after about one year.
Sir Joseph Cook (Commonwealth Liberal). Prime Minister from 1913 until 1914. Removed from office by a general election. Andrew Fisher (Labor). Prime Minister (for the second time) from 1910 until 1913. Removed from office by a general election after one term and three years.
Alfred Deakin (Commonwealth Liberal). Prime Minister (for the third time) from 1909 until 1910. Removed from office by a general election after one year in office.
Andrew Fisher (Labour). Prime Minister (for the first time) from late 1908 until 1909. Removed from office by the Governor General appointing a new government without a general election (two small parties merged to form the Commonwealth Liberal Party, which combined had more seats than Labour).
Alfred Deakin (Protectionist). Prime Minister (for the second time) from 1905 until 1908. Removed from office by Parliament losing confidence. (He had only held government with the support of the Labour Party, which withdrew their support).
Sir George Reid (Free Trade). Prime Minister from 1904 until 1905. Removed from office by Parliament losing confidence (he could only hold office while the Protectionists and Labour party were feuding).
Chris Watson (Labour). Prime Minister for about four months in 1904. Resigned from office, having only taken office because it was refused (initially) by George Reid.
Alfred Deakin (Protectionist). Prime Minister (for the first time) from late 1903 until mid 1904. Resigned from office after less than a year.
Sir Edmund Barton (Protectionist). First Prime Minister of Australia from 1901 until 1903. Resigned from office to become a High Court Judge (which was the job he really wanted - he was a Constitutionalist, who only took the role of Prime Minister at the request of the first Governor General to ensure that government was set up on the principles of the new Constitution - there was initially tension and it needed a firm guiding hand. Once he'd ensured that was in place, he moved on).
I know this is long, but I think it shows that it really is quite unusual in Australia's history for a Prime Minister to be changed by their party. It has happened a few times, especially recently, but historically it is unusual.
You say "long",I'd describe it as very thorough indeed.Someday I hope to know one-tenth as much about my country's history as you clearly know about yours!
As for changes of leadership in national Parliaments I would think that they'd be kept to a minimum...apart from as a result of elections...for fear of alienating voters and creating a sense of instability,which one might expect in some nations but not in Australia.Your post clearly suggests that Oz has avoided that "instability".
I'm sorry to hear things are deteriorating for Abbott. When he was elected I had great hope for him. I absolutely applaud him for his strong stance on asylum seekers; our elected trash could learn a thing or two from him. I hope he can turn things around because what is the alternative? You'll get the old party back and start the equivalent of our progressive party again, correct? Carbon tax, global warming, etc. that would be a shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.