February 27, 2011

They knifed Rudd, why again?

Rudd didn't listen to anyone.  Ignored cabinet.  Didn't play well with the other kiddies.

He whipped out a new mining tax and reneged on his promise to address what he declared to be the greatest moral test of our generation by pulling the plug on implementation of an emissions trading scheme.

The government had lost its way.

Bravely, Julia Gillard threw herself on the ticking bomb, for the sake of the country.

PM Gillard, even during the 2010 election campaign ignored her cabinet.  She went galloping off  in public announcing things that cabinet were pretty darned sure they had not agreed to do (like the off shore refugee processing option).  Now that she's ostensibly heading a minority government (Bob Brown is the leader:  all kicking, no accountability and no responsibility), Gillard is still at it, still ignoring her cabinet.  Supposedly she didn't bother to let caucus know about her new beaut carbon tax, the tax she promised the electorate only six months ago that she would not introduce. 

She was one of the kitchen cabinet who convinced Rudd to renege on the ETS, and one of the kitchen cabinet who got all skittish over the mining tax.

So, now we have a PM who doesn't consult her cabinet, and when she does, she leaves the room and does the opposite of what they believe was agreed.  She helped kill Rudd's commitment to an ETS, and is now bringing in a carbon tax that none of us voted for.  She kept the mining tax, but only after watering it down so as to make it almost pointless and at an amount of up to $100B loss to the ATO coffers over the next ten years - a sum that would pay for an awful lot of disaster repairs and rebuilding.   For this, the mining industry are very fond of her.

Now, why the fuck did Gillard and her henchmen get rid of Rudd?  Can someone explain it to me, because nearly a year later, and I'm more flummoxed than ever.

Had Rudd remained, right now, the ALP would be a majority government in power; Bob Brown would not be pulling the strings; and Abbott would have to pony up with the occasional policy position instead of singing "no, no, no, not going to rehab" every five minutes.  (Actually, Abbott would not be leading the Libs, some other bunny would be, as the Libs would not have done as well at the election if Abbott had been up against Rudd).  I can't help but believe we would all have been better off under this alternate scenario, even if Rudd was and is a bit of a prat, and was and is a bit of a prick.  Gillard and her caucus are something far worse, by which I mean:  far less.

No comments:

Post a Comment