|
My feelings are still mixed – I always hoped that Julia Gillard would become PM one day, but I don't really like the way it was done.
I'd be happier if there'd been a challenge and a ballot – obviously Rudd was persuaded that he had no chance at all, and at first I thought it was good that he just stepped down, but on reflection, no ballot means no real legitimacy for Gillard. And an uncomfortable feeling that this is the closest thing we've experienced to a coup d'etat. The only things missing are the military and tanks.
It would have been far better if the political heavyweights – Gillard, Swan, Faulkner, Tanner – had gone to see Rudd weeks ago and demanded change for the good of the party. If he hadn't listened (and he probably wouldn't have), then fair enough.
I'm also worried by the involvement of the NSW Right and the unions. This should have come from the party room – I know that Sussex St. have always had a finger in the Federal pie (they kept Beazley in power for years past his use-by date), but this was their most blatant interference. And given the total stuffup that is NSW Labor, the thought of their reemergence is something we should all worry about.
Given the Government's record, there were two major negatives – the shelving of the ETS and the media campaign mounted against him by the mining industry and Rupert Murdoch. It does really seem that there was a very personal element involved – Rudd had not bothered to make friends of his colleagues and often treated them with contempt. Big mistake on his part, but it's not really a valid reason for unseating an otherwise successful PM in his first term.
How do you feel? Will Gillard always be tainted by this, as Malcolm Fraser was with the dismissal of Whitlam, however successful she might be?
|