I have mentioned before in this space that I have never quite figured out how Australia's political system works. Elections seem to be called at the drop of a hat and a dip in popularity seems to spell instant doom to a public career. The now former Prime Minister (the equivalent to President) got into a bit of public displeasure. He couldn't convince other world leaders that his environmental plan was the best. He was having trouble convincing mining companies that an extra tax on all their profits over 6% was a good idea. And in the game called Australian politics, this failure to produce miracles or achieve election promises overnight spells Doom. Some late night, closed-door meetings by Party heads sees his departure the next morning and the installation of the deputy PM into the top job.
I am not the only one puzzled as to how this happens. I went to an FAQ page set up to explain it to Australians themselves. This is what it said: [Note: MP=Member of Parliament]
But I voted for Kevin07, not Julia Gillard. How is this allowed?
Technically, we vote for 150 MPs across the country, and the prime minister only keeps their job for as long as they keep the support of most of the majority of their MPs. So it's the right of the Labor MPs to dump a leader if they choose.
But is that fair?
In practice, the 2007 campaign was all about Kevin. They even had T-shirts made (which didn't say "Labor07" after all). Sot to dump him is to take a gamble that most voters are happy enough to see him go, and that Julia Gillard is popular enough for voters to not think it's unfair to ride on Kevin07's wave while it suited them, then knife him once it didn't. That's why he said last night: "I was elected by the people of Australia." It's a reminder to nervous MPs that he got them where they are.
The thing is, they're now more interested in who is going to keep them there.
Technically, we vote for 150 MPs across the country, and the prime minister only keeps their job for as long as they keep the support of most of the majority of their MPs. So it's the right of the Labor MPs to dump a leader if they choose.
But is that fair?
In practice, the 2007 campaign was all about Kevin. They even had T-shirts made (which didn't say "Labor07" after all). Sot to dump him is to take a gamble that most voters are happy enough to see him go, and that Julia Gillard is popular enough for voters to not think it's unfair to ride on Kevin07's wave while it suited them, then knife him once it didn't. That's why he said last night: "I was elected by the people of Australia." It's a reminder to nervous MPs that he got them where they are.
The thing is, they're now more interested in who is going to keep them there.
Enter Julia Gillard, Australia's first female Prime Minister. Born in Wales, she moved to the state of South Australia (which explains her wicked back country accent) at age 6 for her health. Obviously a person of great ambition, drive, presumable intelligence and red hair (!), she now finds herself in the top job.
Surprisingly, there is very little reaction by the public to this historic appointment. Beyond a bit of media build up on the first day, there is no real big fuss being made. I don't hear people talking about it. Perhaps Kev's reaction sums it up, "Same party, different face." This must resonate with the Labor Party as the talk is now to call an election. They'll want to do it soon, while good will is still in the air. They'll want to do it at all to legitimize her ascendancy.
The whole thing reminds me of a ping pong game played at too fast a pace. I can't imagine why anyone would want to join this game. Politics seems like a very harsh mistress indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment