Leaders and Leadership

Given my leftie, pinko socialist leanings it is surprising to some that my daily postion of print-news comes from the News Limited Stable - The Australian; well anything has got to be better than the West Australian, as it was before Kerry Stokes orchestrated his coup d'etat at the WA Newspapers Board.

However, it still offers some substantial critique of the leadership problems facing the current Federal Opposition. As an outsider of a different pursuasion I have to concede the view that Malcolm Turnbull was probably the natural and perhaps only viable choice for leader in the current circumstance.

But the thing that intrigues me is the contrast in party discipline during the period of John Howard's leadership and the current situation. I don't think it was just that they were in power then, because disunity is just as deadly in opposition as it is in government, but it is interesting that during the Howard years the dissenters were very tightly gagged. Not so, today. There are dissenters all over the place, especially with regard to the ETS and the CPRS.

So Malcolm is really in the Middle here. He wants to have a say in negotiating some of the dtails of the ETS and thus feel a bit relevant in the political process, even though he is unlikely to be given such a chance by the Government (at least he could say he tried). Many of his collegues however, are so implacably opposed to any form of ETS - I guess they see it as a TAX and of course they oppose anything that might be a TAX just the same as they oppose anything that might be a UNION such as University Student Guilds - that they feel compelled to simply oppose it and regard anyone seeking to negotiate as an enemy of the right.

This dissent will inevitably be deadly for Malcolm's leadership. The question that is begging for an answer is "Who would they really like to replace him with?"