Election debate last night and this acts as a prompt for me to add some comments and put 'out there' into the ether.
Some thoughts in no particular order.
Julia Gillard started the debate by calling Australia "The best country on Earth". This is the kind of jingoistic nonsense that demands that anything that comes after it be ignored.
"A sustainable Australia, not a Big Australia".
Here the suggestion - so far as I have been aware, quite false - that KRudd had ever suggested an Unsustainable Australia. No he never did. His numbers quoted for 2050 were estimates never
targets.
This is deliberately misleading and casts shadow on the previous government, of which she was an integral part.
No wonder the electorate is confused.
The assertion that the Rudd Government had "lost its way" as an excuse for change is remarkable. It begs the question, how is it possible that overturning a sitting Prime Minister, one who had
led the party out of the wilderness less than one full term ago, could be the most desirable solution instead of the far less destabling, and more respectful one of showing some influence
and personal leadership within the cabinet to get the government back on track.
Here is the nub of the dissatisfaction that many Labor voters must be feeling. By what authority does one set themselves up as having better leadership skills, with entirely no evidence that this is the case?
If the leadership skills are so very impressive - then the spill should have not needed to be called in this way.
But what we have now is a government that is about to face the electorate in a way that maligns their own work in the previous term. Instead of standing proud of the accomplishments achieved,
this term has been shunned and hidden like an embarrassing uncle. Let's not talk about it, and hope that nobody brings it up.
This is not leadership, if this demonstrates anything, it is a lack of leadership. We went to the last election and returned from voting to find a new government and a new ethic to
embrace. We found a government with ideas and vision and intentions that we well understood and supported. We were happy to once more not be ashamed of our government's actions and could feel
pride at being Australian. We had a future to look forward to, notwithstanding the global financial wreck that was unfolding and an end to the Howard regime's drive toward creating a
peasant class in Australia.
Since the beginning of 2010 we have seen the erosion of the standing of the Rudd government and a slide in the polls. A slide from a historical high for Rudd's personal standing and an
unsustainable level of support. This approval could never stay at these levels. And yet, as soon as he is polling in what would be 'the normal range', and in an extreme case of hubris he is
taken out.
He didn't go alone.
Along with KRudd went the legitimacy of everything that we voted for in 2007 when we elected the
Labor government to implement their policies.
Along with Rudd went a purpose that we admired and in its place we have what?
We have the most in cynical attempt to appeal to the latest poll, on whatever looks to be the
issue of the day. Never mind the issues are superficial and pushed by the basest of motives. So we watched this slide in the polls and as we were reminded that KRudd's standing was being
eroded, and grumblings that programs were being poorly handled or moved forward to a future time, and yet another report. At the same time we saw the Opposition making statements of dubious
fact, but high emotive range that the government was "wasting money" or such like. The government ministers by and large were content to allow these allegations to stand and when they did refute
them, did so with little energy or seeming interest.
The notion that Rudd was insisting on running the government single handedly, seems at odds with the lack of energy displayed by the ministers and backbenchers since the year began, to take an
active role in supporting the government aims or sing the (deserved) praise, in an energetic and engaging way, of actions taken .
Perhaps Rudd was never privileged to have the support from the part that he deserved, even before
the spill.
Communication has been a poor servant of the Rudd administration. One wonders why that is. Blaming Rudd alone, seems to be a handy device, but neglects to answer the question - where were
the rest of the party? Mouthing the party line, if it was commanded by Rudd, should have been addressed at the outset. If not commanded by Rudd, then responsibility falls to each individual
in the party who failed to impress with their response. Or were they just lamely sitting there as 'passengers' with no intention to do their part in driving the ongoing success of the government?
We will probably never know the truth of what happened leading up to the spill.
Back in the now, we have an election campaign that inspires nothing and promises a bland and pallid future of pollie-speak and spineless policies to appeal to the emotional triggers of a
few.
And so to the Opposition and the slimmest prospect of an Abbott led government is even less appealing.
"Workchoices is dead" and so it is, but still it remains that the intentions of the Liberal party are always going to be at odds with the worker, even as it pretends to support "family values"
and congratulates itself on what it continues to harpingly refer to it's experience as "good financial managers". That this goes with little repudiation by those in the position to do so is
inexplicable.
Cries meant to frighten voters on "the great big new tax" are from the same mouths neglect to mention that they pin their financial credentials on the happy circumstance of a "the great big
boom in mining" that gave them, together with selling off assets, their much lauded surplus. A mining boom it might be said,which would have given the country a much bigger shot in the Federal
funding, had we already had that "great big tax on mining".
As we go to the election, we are promised the dubious gift of a cut in services ... the same services needed by the families the Opposition seems to want to court.
The Deficit Bogeyman is brought out like was once the fashion, of threatening a child that they "will be put in a bag by a stranger" if they are not careful. And about as likely. The willfully
deceitful mutterings of the Opposition throughout this difficult financial time of the global financial crisis is readily believed by anyone who has no connection with anyone or understands
what has happened in countries overseas, and the real distress that many, with which many families and individuals are still living. To pretend that this is not the case and to make light of the financial
crisis is a service to nobody.
So to an election that will be held in a matter of weeks.
Who to vote for?
No flowers for the voters in this election.
I'm Sorry.
Posted via email from lindyasimus's posterous
