Mark Latham to quit?

[Matilda]

He's certainly mishandled the tsunami issue - Howard, as usual, was
quick to cash in (I really shouldn't be so cynical), but Latham
just wasn't in touch on this one. Add the health issue - if he's
really sick, is that going to effectively cripple his leadership?
If he's not, if it's an excuse for his non-appearance on Boxing Day
to make a statement on the tsunami, then it's backfired badly. I
wonder myself if he's ever got over the shock of his defeat at the
election.

A strong Labor leader is the only way to defeat Howard - but who?
Beasley is just a bit shopworn now I think, and no way is Julie
Gillard ready, apart from the fact that the NSW Right would never
accept her. I'm inclined to think Kevin Rudd might get up; he's
always a good speaker, and can think on his feet, even if he does
seem just a tiny bit dull. The only other effective person I can
think of is Stephen Smith, who's very articulate and a good numbers man, but not well-known outside the parliament and Perth yet.

Labor just has to get its act together soon if we're not going to be
faced with yet another Howard term. God, how he must be rubbing
his hands with glee right now.

[Cha]

1. Good Luck with that..all

defeating howard would take should be a vibrant, strong leader from the anti-fascist movement.

[theresistance]

2. There is no Opposition in Australia at the moment...

Aust is basically a One Party State. Mark Latham has only further destroyed the Opposition. Before the invasion of Iraq, Labor under Crean was wishy washy about Iraq and you never really knew their position. As soon as Latham became leader, he wrapped himself in the American flag and did a complete back-flip. He even caved in on the withdrawing Aust troops issue. They couldn't capitalize on the embassy bombing before the election. They are supporting Howard's push to make Aust a Police State. Labor supported Howard's aid package to Indonesia without any thought. Opposition is dead in Aust...

[Matilda]

3. They also rolled over on Free Trade.

The minor amendments they made will make very little difference to
the end result.

It seems that Latham may just be a bully after all - very big on
noise, very small on action.

[theresistance]

4. Yes, and during the election campaign...

Labor made no mention of Iraq. I thought that was incredible...Further about the FTA, if Labor had any concerns about it, they should have totally opposed it! As you say, a few farcical amendments will mean nothing.

[no safe haven]

5. "Howard, as usual, was quick to cash in...

...(I really shouldn't be so cynical.)"
Three words, Matilda: Timor.Gap.Treaty. Join the cynics' brigade. Howard does nothing, "donates" nothing that does not benefit his own agenda. I would not be surprised to see this topic come up again soon.

Kevin Rudd seems like a nice enough guy, but does he have the balls to stand up to HoWard's bullshit? I will always have a soft spot for Kim B, but as you say, his use-by date is long gone.

I'm also really wary of Latham's "illness". Was it pancreatitis again? If so, he was inviting disaster again - he was on the news at a BBQ drinking beer soon after his recuperation. If you want to stay well after pancreatitis, no alcohol - forever. I just wonder if there's something more seriously wrong with him (besides his politics.)

[anakie]

6. 1 billion dollars over 10 years is pretty cheap foreign policy

with a lot of that money supposedly in loans; so I share your cynicism about his motives.

Latham has been pretty ineffective and invisible since the election and his days must be numbered. But who to replace him. I wouldn't mind seeing Gillard but as you point out the NSW right wont accept her and is the great unwashed ready for a female prime minister.

Beasley is well passed his use by date, ineffective in 2 election campaigns and too eager to return to the back bench following Crean's takeover; so they will probably choose him. Rudd is a Queenslander so the Vics and NSW right may oppose him, Smith is unknown, Mcmullin has been around forever. Macklin - tarred with the same brush as Latham and Crean, Garret - far too soon, Nicola Roxon - again is Australia ready for a female PM.

Looking through the list of the shadow cabinet it is pretty unispiring and I fear that the Liberals may be in power for another couple of elections.

[Matilda]

7. I'd like to see Gillard make it, one day, but it's just too early

in her career. It'd be a shame if she ran too early, failed, and
destroyed her chances by running too soon. But as deputy, I don't
see why not. She would certainly be better than Jenny Macklin
(Jenny who?), and it would give her some experience in the front
line without having to carry the whole burden herself. (But I wish
she'd have some voice lessons - I know it's nitpicky, but her voice
is really grating on the ear).

But second to whom? I actually think Smith appears very capable,
confident and assured, speaks well, is a numbers man so knows how
to play the game, but is probably not yet well known enough to the
public. I don't mind Beasley personally, but I just think the
Party has to start looking ahead, not backwards. And Rudd is
a bit over-earnest and dull, but hey, maybe with Gillard by his side,
they could cover all bases - those who want to feel safe, and those
who can see a bit further ahead and are prepared to wait for Gillard
to take the leadership in time.

But you know what I see above all? Another six years of Howard,
dammit.

[canberra]

8. Latham

I've always been a Latham fan, but the election campaign was not good. He shot himself in the foot politically over the forests issue, didn't mention WMDs/Iraq once, couldn't nullify Howard's dishonest interest rates scare campaign, and failed to get across the message about Howard's massive pork barrel election promises. Maybe the bad campaign strategy needs to be laid at the backroom guys but Latham is ultimately responsible.

Then not commenting on the tsunami was pretty unforgivable. Even if he was sick unless he was at death's door there is no excuse for one of his staff not writing a prepared statement on his behalf and showing it to Latham to sign off.

Now the media smells blood in the water I think Labor's only hope is to rally around and elect Beazley unopposed the way the Libs did to Howard in 95 after all their leadership problems.

Rudd is very smart but too boring and doesn't have that appeal to the ordinary voter. Smith strikes me as a bit of a party hack and lacks public recognition. I think if Conroy moves from the Senate he might be a good option, very smart operator and would be a good generational change candidate to go against Howard/Costello.

[Matilda]

9. Every time I think that someone in Labor is just too boring,

I then think of John Howard. How boring can you get! A really grey,
dull and uninspiring little man, who can't even speak properly (yes,
I know he's deaf, but he still drones), and totally lacking in both
imagination and humour. It's such a weird phenomenon - you'd think
it wouldn't take much to be more appealing than Howard, and yet
somehow it's eluding all the Labor leaders.

[no safe haven]

11. I did not know Howard was deaf

I mean, yes, he's deaf to what we were saying about Iraq, about the apology, Medicare, privatisation of Telstra, etc. But actually deaf? I've seen him with an earpiece at times, but I thought it was a prompter from his PR people/scriptwriters (oh, wait a minute, they're in Washington). Humourless and grey - that description fits him to a tee. He is a very unattractive man.

[Matilda]

12. Yes, he's had a hearing impairment since childhood -

may have been born that way, I'm not sure. I give him the benefit
of the doubt and put his appalling speech down to the fact that
he can't really hear properly, although he's not totally deaf and
I'm sure he could do better if he tried.

[no safe haven]

10. Welcome, Canberra

And speaking of a possible move over from the Senate, one of my favourites is John Faulkner. If he went over to the lower house, he'd have my total support. He's not afraid to ask the hard questions and take on the Liberal attack dogs. Plus the man has principles - he calls the Libs on their lies and scams. As it is, I think he's wasting his potential at the moment since he stood down as Labor leader in the Senate.

You're right about blood in the water and Latham. Moves are afoot to dump him today, with pressure from 3 Labor premiers. WA seems to be sweating it with their upcoming elections, not wanting to be tainted with the "Latham brush". The sharks are circling once again.

[Matilda]

13. Yes, I agree about John Faulkner's abilities.

But he just announced that he's giving up leadership of the Party
in the Senate because it's just become too much after so many
years, so I'm sure he wouldn't want the leadership.

[canberra]

14. Thanks for the welcome

True, Faulkner is an excellent Senate attack dog and a tough questioner in committees. But that doesn't necessarily make him leadership material and I think he is way too far to the left to make him electable. Also I believe he was one of the chief campaign strategists and after a pretty poor campaign it's hard to see him being rewarded with a higher office.

We can talk about dream candidates but probably Beazley and Rudd are the only realistic options. Rudd may grow into the role but I just think he lacks that appeal to the ordinary voter, so Beazley is still the only choice that I can see.

[Matilda]

15. I think it probably will be one of those two.

But I hope, I hope it's Julia Gillard for Deputy Leader. Both men
could do with some of her feistiness to add a bit of interest.