The Dog’s Bollocks

Truth is like a dog’s bollocks – pretty obvious if you care to look.

The Poisoned Chalice

Declaring his opposition leadership aspirations Tony Abbott declared “It’s going to be very important to hold the Government accountable. I think it’s very important that we’re fair dinkum with the Australian people. I think in the months and years ahead, people are going to want substance, not spin from their political leaders.”

Oh Dear! Apart from leadership trials and tribulations, the challenge of any long-term government political party assuming the mantle of opposition is a lack of credibility as espousing attitudes and beliefs which they did not manifest in government.

During the first term of the Bracks government, for example, the liberal opposition began calling for more teachers after having dispatched around 8,000 to early retirement while in government. It just doesn’t wash. We have the unedifying spectacle of Liberal leadership aspirants promising to ditch policies which they were warning were so critical to the future of Australia until three days ago.

Despite warning that the sky would fall in, it now seems that peak business bodies are actually more than supportive of their new union masters, and have secretly been less than impressed with many aspects of Howard and Costello’s microeconomic policies for quite some time. Heather Riddout was praising the depth of economic talent in Rudd’s cabinet. You gotta laugh.

Turnbull should have kept his powder dry and stood aside. Leading the opposition is a poisoned chalice. Much better to have a transitional leader to oversee the inevitable blood letting and set about renewing the party structure from the ground up. History shows us that born-to-rule parties removed from government invariably go through the following stages:

First Term

Government in Exile. The people have made a grave mistake. Just wait until they realise how stupid they were – they’ll be begging to have us back. Lose election. Junior Woodchuck Chris Pyne is promising Labor a hard fight to ‘take the Rudd government out’ in 2011.

Second Term

We need a new leader. Continue fighting the last war. Lose election.

Third Term

Maybe we need some new policies. Further leadership destabilisation. Lose election.

Fourth Term

We need a new leader and new policies, especially now that the government is perceived as tired and out of touch. Maybe win election. Unless of course the incumbent government has had a successful leadership and policy renewal while in office. Lose election.

But if there is one thing that history teaches us it is that we never learn from history.

Filed under: Federal Election 2007, Politics

One Response

  1. […] for the Liberals, and the health of our democracy, they are determined to stick by my post-election strategy from 12 months ago. There is no evidence to suggest that the Liberals will return to Federal power […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

The Dog’s Bollocks

What they say

The Dog's Bollocks: "Bollocks" is one of my favourite words, and this is now one of my favourite blogs and I've only been reading it for five minutes. – John Surname

This is the person who tried to analyse Hayek. This is actually a person who needs a shrink. – JC

Shut up slim. You’re an idiot.
Just you stay honest and keep that thinking cap on. – GMB

Insightful perspectives on politics and discussion of matters epistemological? I’m sold! - Bruce

Add to Technorati Favorites

Flickr Photos

%d bloggers like this: