End of a Labor tragedy

[Matilda]

Kevin Rudd's tearful farewell ends a Labor tragedy of Shakespearean proportions and the political career of one of that party's most brilliant yet flawed leaders.

(snip)

We will never know what would have happened if Labor had given him the chance to improve the chaotic and dysfunctional leadership style that ended his first reign as prime minister. Having led Labor back to power and defeated John Howard, he deserved a second chance.

And we will never know whether Julia Gillard would have been a more successful leader had he and his forces accepted that brutal decision of his colleagues on June 24, 2010. Maybe his eventual return would have been more successful had this been the case.

He leaves an enigma, his compassion, courage and empathy lauded by many; his capacity for bitterness, insensitivity and bastardry seen as defining qualities by others. His work ethic, intelligence and vision are recognised by friend and foe.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/end-of-a-labor-tragedy-20131113-2xh40.html


My feelings exactly.

I'll bet Rudd will get an overseas posting, courtesy of his friend Julie Bishop.

And I hope Labor never, ever repeats this self-defeating exercise.

[anakie]

1. I'll bet Rudd will get an overseas posting

I bet he won't. Boofhead has already said as much. The LNP showed their true colours when they sacked Bracks. There will be no ALP people appointed anywhere, unlike Kevvie when he took over.

I shed no tears over his departure. He should not have been rolled in the first place and should have been allowed to lead the ALP to the 2010 election. However that was not the case and he set about showing what a petty vindictive and egotistical person he is. Politics is a tough game and sometimes things don't go the way one would like. He should have accepted the party's decision and either left politics then or become a genuine team player. But it was all about Kev and his ego. I won't forgive him for his role in undermining the ALP during the 2010 election campaign nor for his constant white anting of the Labor Government under Gillard.

I hold him responsible (along with Murdoch and the MSM) for Tony Abbott becoming PM.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

2. The problem for Labor is it never really adjusted to government

All the issues that had characterized the party in opposition -factional politicking, personal rivalries, political power plays, past political grudges and so on -were carried into government. Too often in both the Rudd and Gillard governments, they took precedence over the bigger picture

Bob Debus (Home Affairs Minister during the Rudd government and MP for Macquarie 2007-2010, previously state cabinet minister and MLA for the Blue Mountains 1981-1988, 1995-2007) is quoted in Maxine McKew's book as saying something to the effect that he was amazed at the contrast between the incoming Carr Labor government in 1995 and the nature of the first term of the Rudd-Gillard government from 2007-2010. He said (and I'm paraphrasing) that, in the Carr government, ministers were prepared to put aside their political differences and work constructively in the interests of delivering for the state whereas he found, too often, in the Rudd Labor government that the ministers and MPs involved were still too hung up on grudges nursed during their time in opposition to the extent that some of the various players in the government were not even on speaking terms

There were times when this was put aside (Rudd, Gillard, Tanner and Swan's work on the gang of four which guided the country through the GFC was one prime example of this) but it tended to be the exception rather than the rule. And of course the problem intensified under Gillard because of the internal ructions caused by the leadership spill

I think probably both sides deserve an equal amount of blame for how things unfolded in such a way that Tony Abbott is now Prime Minister. Rudd and his team of accolytes should not have undermined and white-anted Gillard during her term in office. But I think, sadly, it was the natural flow-on effect stemming from the way that Gillard and her accolytes had white-anted and undermined Rudd during his final months in office. Two wrongs certainly don't make a right but, once the genie of disloyalty is unleashed, it is very hard to put back in the bottle.. Both of them can rightfully be accused of promoting their ego and personal feelings and political ambitions above the interests of good government and the Labor Party ultimately paid the price

It's a shame because together they at one time were, and could have continued to have been, a formidable team. Each seemed to serve as a counterbalance to the other's weaknesses. Rudd was good at courting the public and was a effective communicator but was weak in policy implementation and behind the scenes, especially when it came to dealing with the party and the unions. Gillard was great behind the scenes as a negotiator and in getting legislation through and also had a strong connection with the parties and the unions but was a poor communicator and was prone to making short-term political misjudgments that backfired on her.

It's a wasted opportunity and it's allowed Abbott, whom in almost any other circumstance would be hideously unelectable to win by default -and of course with more than a little help from Uncle Rupert. Let's hope they learn from the past and don't repeat the same stupid mistakes again

[Matilda]

3. There's nothing as destructive in Australian politics as the Labor factions.

The Libs have their "wets" and "drys", but they're not as destructive as the Labor factions in full flight. (And Howard got rid of most of the moderates in the party, and they haven't yet come back. The Abbott leadership may prove to be a catalyst in this respect.)

While there's no doubt that Rudd was poor at carrying out policy and tended to blame everybody but himself for his failures, I believe the major reason behind his removal was the desire of the Right to reassert its authority over the party. No matter how disastrous its policies, no matter how crooked many of its proponents are (look at NSW), they still believe they have a right to rule. They couldn't abide Rudd snubbing them, and Gillard, sadly for her and the party, was willing to chuck her supposed Left sympathies to throw her lot in with the Right for power.

The pity is that together they could have been a great team, with Rudd as the populist leader and the initiator of good policies, and Gillard as the person with the administrative skills to carry out those policies. It's a shame that the egos of both wouldn't allow them to make a realistic assessment of the situation.