# Change in Australia



## Edward Campbell (26 Jun 2013)

A long standing, internal Labour Party "civil war" has produced new results. Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who was unseated by Julia Gillard in 2010 in a "palace coup," has defeated Ms Gillard in a leadership contest and will become Australia's prime minister. He has promised a general election on 24 Aug 13.

It is not clear what, if anything, this will mean to Australia's foreign and defence policies.


----------



## dimsum (26 Jun 2013)

Considering that the Labour Party is in the ditch right now and has been for a while, the Liberal (their version of Conservative) Party is sitting pretty for the election.  The really strange part was that Kevin Rudd promised he wouldn't challenge Julia Gillard when he was unseated, and slowly toned it down until yesterday he came out and said he was going to challenge her.  This all came about in the last 48 hours and caught a lot by surprise.  

As for foreign and defence policies, I'd be surprised if things change; if anything I'd expect more emphasis on Defence if the Liberal Party wins.


----------



## RDBZ (5 Jul 2013)

Labor's 2009 Defence White paper was released under Kevin Rudd.  A fairly pro defence document that didn't try very hard to hide unease about China's potential ambitions.

http://www.defence.gov.au/defencemagazine/editions/2009_wp/defmag_wp.pdf


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Aug 2013)

And Prime Minister Rudd has visited the GG and she has dropped the writs for a 157 Sep 13 general election. The media suggests that it will be a hard campaign but the Conservatives, under Tony Abbott, are likely to win because, fairly or not, Australians will blame Labour for the hit resource based economies are taking (Canada, too) are taking due to the slowdown in China.

My guess is that asylum seekers will be a non-issue because Abbott will promise to be at least as tough as Rudd.


Edit to correct date


----------



## Underway (4 Aug 2013)

Rudd is a sneaky dirty git by even political standards.  Liberals (the conservatives) will win this one unless they develop a severe case of foot in mouth disease.  Conversely I predict a larger number of greens voted in as many of the Labour voters who are left decide to jump ship as they can't stay home and not vote.  However the campaign as always will define the result.


----------



## dimsum (4 Aug 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> And Prime Minister Rudd has visited the GG and she has dropped the writs for a *15 Sep 13* general election.



The Aussie media and my co-workers are saying it's 07 Sep.  Surprised that the GG would say otherwise?

And regarding the asylum seekers, considering the Coalition's call for Operation Sovereign Borders http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/07/25/operation-sovereign-borders  which proposes a 3-star-led military JTF, I too doubt that there will essentially be any difference between the parties.


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Aug 2013)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> The Aussie media and my co-workers are saying it's 07 Sep.  Surprised that the GG would say otherwise?
> 
> And regarding the asylum seekers, considering the Coalition's call for Operation Sovereign Borders http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/07/25/operation-sovereign-borders  which proposes a 3-star-led military JTF, I too doubt that there will essentially be any difference between the parties.




And the Aussie media and your co-workers and the source I cited (CBC News) would all be right and I was wrong  :-[ ~ not for the first (or last) time, either: the date is 7 Sep. I dunno why I typed 15.  :dunno:


----------



## PPCLI Guy (4 Aug 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> the Conservatives, under Tony Abbott, are likely to win because, fairly or not, Australians will blame Labour for the hit resource based economies are taking (Canada, too) are taking due to the slowdown in China.



It is substantially worse for them because they are essentially a branch plant of China, to a greater degree than we are to the US.


----------



## dimsum (4 Aug 2013)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> It is substantially worse for them because they are essentially a branch plant of China, to a greater degree than we are to the US.



Yep.  Their mining sector (gross generalization but what has been driving their economy as of late) is almost dedicated to Chinese interests.  The last few months haven't been pretty.  Not catastrophic, but definitely not the continuing boom they were expecting.


----------



## RDBZ (5 Aug 2013)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> It is substantially worse for them because they are essentially a branch plant of China, to a greater degree than we are to the US.



The mining boom wasn't seen as a "good thing" by all though, not by a long way.  It was the major factor causing a vastly overvalued Australian dollar that hit other sectors like manufacturing, tourism and services pretty hard.  With the AUD now sliding back to more "normal" and sustianable levels, those sectors will be able to compete much more effectively against imports at home, and against other competitors in international markets.  There are actually a lot manufacturers exporting from Aus, including some international names like Toyota and GM.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Sep 2013)

We will soon know which party Australians have picked, but, in the interim, Prof Hugh White offers a look at the foreign policy tug-of-war in which Australians must compete in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _Foreign Affairs_:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139902/hugh-white/australias-choice?cid=nlc-this_week_on_foreign_affairs-090513-australias_choice_4-090513&sp_mid=42509875&sp_rid=Y29sb25lbHRlZGNhbXBiZWxsQGdtYWlsLmNvbQS2


> Australia's Choice
> *Will the Land Down Under Pick the United States or China?*
> 
> By Hugh White
> ...




The key is, I think, "Canberra is simply doing what smaller powers usually do when they are caught between rival giants: they try to tell both what they want to hear."

Prof White suggests that neither Washington nor Beijing misunderstands Canberra's signals, but he hints, and I agree, that Washington's understanding of its own policies towards China and he whole Pacific region is confused: "... the United States’ whole approach to China is indeed based on a lingering hope that Beijing fundamentally accepts U.S. primacy ... [but] ... this hope is false. China is challenging the U.S.-led order in Asia; it seeks to replace it with “a new model of great-power relations.”"

But Australia is not the only country caught between a confused America and a rising, (mostly) focused China ~ so is Canada, although geography makes our choice simpler, if not always easier.


----------



## dimsum (6 Sep 2013)

Coincidentally (or not), the Aus Aerospace Defence Charity Ball happens to be on the same night (tomorrow night here) as the Election.  I have a feeling that about 10pm or so, when the festivities are in full swing, the announcement will be made and either a) the folks cheer and champagne is brought out, or b) they commiserate in their free drinks.

I'm thinking A.  I'll be one of 2 RCAF folks who have zero dog in the fight, but will be drinking with the rest of them  :nod:


----------



## Haletown (6 Sep 2013)

I worked in Oz some years back and quite enjoyed the wicked sense of humor and their passion for  politics.

So with one day before they vote, a last message from PM Rudd to the voters in his riding

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OkZreWqbfT8

and from his opponent . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2rTJc36mlU&feature=player_embedded


Can't quite see PM Harper doing a Rudd,   but maybe Trudeau or Mulcair could pull off Les Miserables.   ;D


----------



## Rifleman62 (6 Sep 2013)

Polls close at 6:00 p.m. on a Saturday. That's kind of interesting, time and day.


----------



## dimsum (6 Sep 2013)

Haletown said:
			
		

> I worked in Oz some years back and quite enjoyed the wicked sense of humor and their passion for  politics.
> 
> So with one day before they vote, a last message from PM Rudd to the voters in his riding
> 
> ...



There is talk that Rudd may actually lose his seat in Griffith.  Should be interesting to see.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2013)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/

 Labour 49 ~ Predicted 60
                            Needed to win: 76
Coalition 69     ~    Predicted 87


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> http://www.abc.net.au/news/
> 
> Labour 49 ~ Predicted 60
> Needed to win: 76
> Coalition 69     ~    Predicted 87




And, just after 2100 Hrs (Sydney time) ABC is reporting that the Liberals (Conservatives in Canadian parlance) have won a majority. The question now is: how big a majority? ABC _predicts_:

Liberals: 89   (Conservatives in Canada)
Labour:  57   (NDP + some Liberals in Canada)
Greens:   1
Others:   3


Edit: to correct my description of Labour


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2013)

Updated results and predictions from ABC with 74% of the vote counted:



			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> http://www.abc.net.au/news/
> 
> Labour 49    53 ~ Predicted 60 56
> Needed to win: 76
> Coalition 69 88 ~ Predicted 87 90


----------



## Haletown (7 Sep 2013)

ER . .   I think the Australian Labour Party would be a bit miffed  being equated to the Liberal Party of Canada.

The ALP is owned and operated by organized labour and are much closer, but even more hard core than our NDP.


Agreed the Liberals are close kin to our Conservatives and Abbot is as personality challenged as PM Harper.  Both are peas in a pod when it comes to political philosophy.

Grand day for Australia.  No longer held hostage to the mimilast Green Party support in a minority government situation.


----------



## a_majoor (7 Sep 2013)

And more coverage of the Australian elections:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/09/07/australia-election-labor-abbott/2779205/



> *Conservatives win in Australian election*
> Associated Press 7:55 a.m. EDT September 7, 2013
> 
> Australia's conservative opposition has swept to power in a national election
> ...


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2013)

Haletown said:
			
		

> ER . .   I think the Australian Labour Party would be a bit miffed  being equated to the Liberal Party of Canada.
> 
> The ALP is owned and operated by organized labour and are much closer, but even more hard core than our NDP.
> 
> ...




Yes, good point. Labour, even "modern" Labour is, indeed, an amalgam of our NDP and the left wing of our Liberals.


----------



## mad dog 2020 (7 Sep 2013)

CREATING A GREEN ARMY

INTRODUCTION

The Howard Government implemented the Green Corps programme in 1996 to employ young people in environmental projects to preserve and restore our natural and cultural environment.
The Green Corps provided young people with improved career and employment prospects through accredited training, on-the-project training and personal development while participating in environmental and heritage projects.
Over the life of the Green Corps programme under the Howard Government, participants delivered the following outcomes:
propagated and planted over 14 million trees;
erected more than 8,000 kilometres of fencing;
cleared over 50,000 hectares of weeds;
constructed or maintained more than 5,000 kilometres of walking track or boardwalks.
Specific projects funded under the former Coalition Government’s Green Corps programme included:
the Peel Waterways Foreshore Protection and Rehabilitation Project, which focussed on improving the waterway health of the Peel-Yalgorup Wetlands system; and
he Jarrahdale Heritage Park project, which focussed on implementing revegetation works to the Gooralong Brooke Foreshore.
Under the Rudd-Gillard Government, the successful Green Corps programme was replaced with the National Green Jobs Corps, which effectively re-classified unemployed people who continued to receive an income support payment, and was then abolished altogether.
A cleaner environment is an essential part of restoring hope, reward and opportunity for all Australians because we should leave our country in better shape than we found it.
The Coalition will create a standing ‘Green Army’ that will gradually build to a 15,000 strong environmental workforce. We will create and properly resource the Green Army, as a larger and more lasting version of the former Green Corps. It will be Australia’s largest-ever environmental deployment.
It will mark the first time that Australia has approached environmental remediation with the same seriousness and level of organisation that we have long brought to bushfire preparedness and other local and regional priorities.
Australia’s unique landscape instils in us a deep appreciation of the fragility of the natural environment and the requirement to protect it.
The Green Army complements our ‘Direct Action’ approach to climate change.
Direct Action provides Australians with the opportunity for individuals, communities, organisations and companies to help address our environmental challenges.
Our Direct Action policy will ensure reductions in carbon emissions take place within Australia without slugging families, businesses and the economy with a great big carbon tax.
Our policies will make a real difference to improving the environment in our own backyard and addressing climate change.
Our vision for Australia is a country where, individually and collectively, we can more often be our best selves.
Australians are generous, decent, optimistic and committed people who want to do the right thing by those around them.
THE PLAN

The Coalition’s Green Army will build to 15,000 young people, the largest standing environmental workforce in Australia’s history. The objective of the Green Army is to combat land degradation, clean up our waterways, provide real and practical solutions to cleaning up riverbanks and creek beds, re-vegetate sand dunes, re-vegetate mangrove habitat and a host of other environmental conservation projects.
The Coalition believes in encouraging hands-on, practical, grassroots environmental action as a means of fixing environmental problems, as well as tapping into the knowledge of local communities, encouraging them to identify and fix their own local problems.
This approach fosters teamwork, local ownership and community spirit.
The Green Army will provide funding to work with, and complement the work undertaken by, local land care groups, bush care groups, foreshore communities, Natural Resource Management (NRM) Groups, local catchment authorities and councils in their work remediating the local environment.
Importantly, the scheme will provide on the job training for young people.
Participants will receive a training allowance, as well as gaining valuable work skills and potential qualifications in different areas of environmental remediation.
Each project will be unique in its focus, with training tailored to specific local environmental priorities including:
propagation and planting of native seedlings;
weed control;
re-vegetation and regeneration of local parks;
habitat protection and restoration;
improving water quality by cleaning up waterways;
re-vegetation of sand dunes and mangroves;
creek bank regeneration;
foreshore and beach restoration;
construction of boardwalks and walking tracks to protect local wildlife; and
cultural heritage restoration.
There are a range of potential projects that have already been submitted for consideration to the Coalition including:
Weed eradication
Undertaking weed eradication and fuel reduction activities in natural bushland reserves to improve native vegetation and reduce bushfire risk to homes close to bush areas on the fringe of metropolitan areas.
Coastal
Protecting beaches from further erosion through the construction of sea walls and coastal stabilisation works.
River clearing
Remediation projects along rivers by rehabilitating foreshores, stabilising riverbanks, reducing weed density to improve water flow and improving water quality.
Indigenous focused
Local Indigenous communities working to maintain and protect local significant sites through weed management, cleaning up of local creeks,re- vegetation and regeneration of local parks.
Rural projects
Restoration plans to link up old walking tracks through weed eradication, vegetation management, bush regeneration, protecting cultural sites and historic places, through activities including erosion control, fencing and revegetation works.
The work a person undertakes as part of a Green Army programme would normally be counted toward the requirements of a training course such as a Certificate 1 or 2 in land management, park management, landscaping or horticulture.
Green Army projects will run for up to 26 weeks (full-time). Projects will deploy nine participants led by a supervisor who will be responsible for the day-to-day administration of the project.
Funding will be provided to each Green Army team for materials and equipment to allow participants to carry out their work.
The scheme is an opt-in programme initially for 17-24 year olds.
Participants can apply as school leavers and gap year students and the unemployed can also opt to join the Green Army as an alternative to Work for the Dole programmes.
Upon completion, there will be opportunities for participants to undertake further education and training or potential employment with councils, state and national parks, as well as undertake careers in the thousands of environmental businesses across Australia.
The Green Army programme will be managed by the Environment Department.
To streamline application processes for both potential projects and Green Army applicants, the Department will conduct project assessments once every six months.
Projects will be assessed on a merit basis against their environmental benefits, their contribution to the local community and their potential to enhance skills training for participants.
Participants will be assessed on a merit basis against their employment status, location relative to approved projects, commitment to skills training, and contribution to the community.
This workforce will be capable of supplying the skilled, motivated and sustained attention that large-scale environmental remediation needs.
The Green Army will be available on an ongoing basis (over and above the existing efforts of councils, farmers, volunteers and national parks personnel) to tackle the environmental tasks that most urgently need willing hands to do the job.
There are hundreds of organisations and local environmental groups across Australia that are already doing some of this work, mostly on a volunteer basis, and they deserve our recognition for making this country a better, cleaner and safer place. These groups, plus local councils, could submit conservation projects that require a significant labour force.
The Green Army will renew the type of work done through the Natural Heritage Trust under the former Coalition Government. Between 1997 and 2007, $5.1 billion was invested to help more than 800,000 volunteers to support threatened species in over 1.4 million hectares of habitat; reduce pests and weeds across over 15 million hectares and help protect eight million hectares of wetlands.
Our Green Army will deliver tangible benefits for the environment, skills development for thousands of young Australians, and will strengthen local community involvement.
THE CHOICE

The Coalition’s Green Army will be Australia’s biggest deployment of personnel for environmental restoration.
It will be the first time that we have approached environmental remediation with the same seriousness and level of organisation that we have brought to bushfire preparedness or other local and regional priorities.
The Coalition previously rolled out the successful Green Corps programme that saw over 17,000 young Australians participate in over 1,700 projects – projects that provided real benefits for the environment, tangible skills training for participants and strengthened local communities.
The Labor Government, by contrast, stripped the former Green Corps programme and transformed it into a programme where young long-term unemployed Australians were re- classified and continued to receive an income support payment, but with very little done to help the environment.
Labor’s programme did little to motivate the long-term unemployed to move into employment. The programme was not designed to assist those specifically interested in conservation of our natural environment to participate.
Labor’s approach to the environment is to hit families, businesses and the economy with a great big new tax that not only increases the cost of living, but according to the Government’s own forecasting, will actually see an increase in Australia’s carbon emissions by 2020.
The Coalition’s Green Army programme will encourage hands-on, practical, grassroots environmental action as a means of fixing environmental problems, as well as tapping into the knowledge of local communities, encouraging them to identify and fix their own local problems.
COST

The Coalition’s Green Army will begin with 250 projects in 2014-15, building up to 1,500 projects in 2018-19.
By 2018-19, it is estimated that there will be a standing force of 15,000 people who will be taking part in the Green Army each year.
The Coalition’s Green Army will cost up to $50 million in the first year starting on 1 July 2014 and $300 million over the forward estimates period (with total costs capped at a maximum of $300 million).
It is expected that this will provide for over 1,500 Green Army projects over the forward estimates period.


----------



## The Bread Guy (8 Sep 2013)

mad dog 2020 said:
			
		

> CREATING A GREEN ARMY ....



1)  How about sharing a link for this?
http://www.liberal.org.au/creating-green-army

2)  Moving this to the appropriate thread.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## RDBZ (9 Sep 2013)

Haletown said:
			
		

> ER . .   I think the Australian Labour Party would be a bit miffed  being equated to the Liberal Party of Canada.
> 
> The ALP is owned and operated by organized labour and are much closer, but even more hard core than our NDP.
> 
> ...



I agree with your sentiments regarding the Greens. It was an alliance that doomed Labor right form the start.  

But the days of the Australian Labor Party being "hard core" are long gone.  When only 13% of the work force are members of a union, you can't sustain a polticlal party on "hard core" poltics.  The National Broadband Network is far from "hard core", similarly a broad range of programs targeted at industry, and industry competitiveness.  Historically, it was Labor in the 1980s who reversed Australia's till then drift towards a protectionsit economic stance, and started shifting responsibility for funding issues like teriary education and retirement firmly back onto the individual.  It was also Labor that started to dismantel the conditions of employment of federal employees.

The carbon tax; yes that was "hard core" in some respects, but it was very much a reluctant product of their doomed alliance with the Greens.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Sep 2013)

Interesting, maybe: two days after the polls closed it appears, from ABC's "live results," that 22+% of the vote is still not counted or, at least, is not reported, and that 16 of 150 seats are, therefore, still in doubt.

Can anyone explain, please?


----------



## RDBZ (9 Sep 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Interesting, maybe: two days after the polls closed it appears, from ABC's "live results," that 22+% of the vote is still not counted or, at least, is not reported, and that 16 of 150 seats are, therefore, still in doubt.
> 
> Can anyone explain, please?



I suspect its simply due to Australia's use of preferential ballots rather than a simple "first past the post" system.  In short, it complicates counting when no candidate obtains more than 50% of the vote on first preferences.  Its also the reason why it takes so long for the outcomes of the Senate ballot to be determined, as its essentially a proportional representation system.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Sep 2013)

Thanks, for that ... is it still, as I assume guess, a manual counting system?


ff topic:
(Some Canadian jurisdictions, Ottawa being one, use various sorts of _electronic voting_. Here in Ottawa, in the most recent municipal elections, we used the "mark sense" system which uses a paper ballot and electronic counting. It speeds up the counting and reporting processes and still allows for physical recounts. The technology would, I am fairly certain, be easily adapted to preferential ballot systems.)


----------



## Lightguns (9 Sep 2013)

RDBZ said:
			
		

> I outcomes of the Senate ballot to be determined, as its essentially a proportional representation system.



Such dirty words....senate and proportional representation system in the da same sentence.  Ya trying to start a yawn in Canada?


----------



## RDBZ (9 Sep 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Thanks, for that ... is it still, as I assume guess, a manual counting system?
> 
> 
> ff topic:
> (Some Canadian jurisdictions, Ottawa being one, use various sorts of _electronic voting_. Here in Ottawa, in the most recent municipal elections, we used the "mark sense" system which uses a paper ballot and electronic counting. It speeds up the counting and reporting processes and still allows for physical recounts. The technology would, I am fairly certain, be easily adapted to preferential ballot systems.)



Yes , they are manual systems.  The ACT trialled the use of electronic systems in Territory elections, but I'm not sure how extensive that was nor the results.  Another significant factor in causing delays is the almost automatic application of recounts when margins are small.


----------



## RDBZ (9 Sep 2013)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Such dirty words....senate and proportional representation system in the da same sentence.  Ya trying to start a yawn in Canada?



In terms of power and its role in the political system, the Australian Senate is much more comparable to the US Senate than it is to the UK or Canadian equivalents.  In fact, on balance it has _more _power than its US equivalent.   The only time an Australian government has been sacked by the Governor General, and new elections called both houses,  was due to an obstructionist Senate and the fiscal gridlock it caused.


----------



## Edward Campbell (10 Sep 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> We will soon know which party Australians have picked, but, in the interim, Prof Hugh White offers a look at the foreign policy tug-of-war in which Australians must compete in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _Foreign Affairs_:
> 
> http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139902/hugh-white/australias-choice?cid=nlc-this_week_on_foreign_affairs-090513-australias_choice_4-090513&sp_mid=42509875&sp_rid=Y29sb25lbHRlZGNhbXBiZWxsQGdtYWlsLmNvbQS2
> 
> ...




And here is more from Hugh White, reproduced again under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _Foreign Affairs_:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139914/hugh-white/will-abbott-choose-china


> Will Abbott Choose China?
> *Australia Out to Sea*
> 
> High White
> ...




Remember, please, that, back in 2006, 07 and 08 people like me were complaining, at the time, that Stephen Harper's "conservatism also inclines him to be uneasy about modern China. Like many people in the West -- and not just conservatives -- he finds it uncomfortable that China could grow so quickly and become so powerful despite its authoritarian one-party political system. That challenges his deeply held ideas about the ascendency of democratic principles, which had seemed so decisively validated by the collapse of communism elsewhere in the world." I expect Prime Minister Abbott will respond to China, and America, much as Prime Minister Harper has and for precisely the same reasons.


----------



## RDBZ (11 Sep 2013)

Julia Gillard, one of Australia’s most left wing politicians of the post WWII era, welcomed the basing of US marines in the Northern Territory with open arms.   To a degree that was not about how much Australians generally fear an emerging China, but how much Australia values its ties to its culturally and socially close ally across the Pacific.

The rise of China is far more likely to pose deep questions and debate for US allies like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan (of course).  Even New Zealand, a country that walked out of the ANZUS alliance in the 1980s and has since not made any significant efforts to maintain a comprehensive alliance relationship even with Australia, may pose a challenge for the US.


----------



## CougarKing (14 Sep 2013)

We'll see. 

link



> *New Australian Leadership Pledges to Boost Defense Spending*
> 
> MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA — Now that the Australian Liberal-National Party Coalition led by Tony Abbott has won an emphatic victory over the Australian Labor Party, attention will turn to choosing a defense minister and following through on a pledge to return defense spending to 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in the next 10 years.
> 
> ...


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2015)

I was unprepared for this: "Malcolm Turnbull topples Tony Abbott in Liberal leadership ballot. [size=12pt]Malcolm Turnbull has defeated Tony Abbott 54-44 in a Liberal Party leadership ballot and will become the nation's 29th prime minister." I knew Prime Minister Abbott was embroiled in a leadership battle, I didn't see a defeat coming.


----------



## dimsum (14 Sep 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I was unprepared for this: "Malcolm Turnbull topples Tony Abbott in Liberal leadership ballot. [size=12pt]Malcolm Turnbull has defeated Tony Abbott 54-44 in a Liberal Party leadership ballot and will become the nation's 29th prime minister." I knew Prime Minister Abbott was embroiled in a leadership battle, I didn't see a defeat coming.




I don't think anyone was, given that Mr. Turnbull resigned from Cabinet after Question Time, challenged that afternoon/evening and won, all in the space of 5 or so hours.  

There were rumblings about him being asked to challenge the leadership about a year ago, but no one thought anything would actually come about.  A side effect may be that Australia will finally have their referendum on same-sex marriage, as it seemed that its main stumbling block was Mr. Abbott himself.  

Side note:  With this event, Wiki says no Australian PM has lasted his/her full term since John Howard's in 2007.  

Also mods, feel free to merge http://army.ca/forums/threads/120512/post-1389021/topicseen.html#new with this one - forgot there was one going already   :-[


----------



## dimsum (14 Sep 2015)

The Atlantic has a good primer on the last few coups/elections in Australia, and what parallels (if any) there are between US politicians and Mr. Abbott/Mr. Turnbull.  For the record, below are the ones that have happened in the past 5 years:



> 2010, June: PM Kevin Rudd was replaced by Julia Gillard
> 2013, June: PM Gillard was replaced by ex-PM Rudd
> 2013, September: PM-again Rudd was replaced by Tony Abbott
> 2015, September: PM Abbott was replaced by Malcolm Turnbull—whom, it happens, Abbott had unseated as party leader back in 2009.



I, for one, am surprised the country even functioned during the time of The Killing Field, as the ABC documentary of the first 4 coups was titled.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/09/what-just-happened-in-australian-politics/405187/?utm_source=SFFB


----------



## a_majoor (17 Sep 2015)

Interesting look at this from The American Interest. WRM also makes some observations about how economic chance induces political changes with a side reference to Canada. An interesting angle which was partially described in the book "The Big Shift", and related to my hypothesis that changes in demographics, technology and social conditions makes current political and social structures ill suited for the new challenges of today. Politicla parties self destructing has happened in the past (ask the Whigs and Federalists, or the Progressive Conservatives), especially when they no longer have any answers or responses to the issues of the day:

http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/09/14/tory-coup-in-australia/



> *Tory Coup in Australia*
> 
> An internal challenge from the centrist wing of his own party has overthrown the Prime Minister of Australia. The Wall Street Journal reports:
> 
> ...


----------

