Grendel wrote on Jul 8
th, 2013 at 7:04pm:
MOTR wrote on Jul 8
th, 2013 at 6:57pm:
A letter from Kevin.
I have just made an announcement that will change the way Labor leaders are elected.
On July 22 there will be a special caucus meeting where I will propose:
The Leader of the Australian Labor Party is elected by a 50/50 split vote by Labor branch members and the Federal Labor caucus;
There are three triggers to change the leader: a leader’s resignation, a federal election loss or a 75 per cent vote of no confidence by the Federal Labor caucus; and
The Federal Labor caucus will decide the members of the Ministry or Shadow Ministry, not the Leader.
These changes are necessary to ensure stability in Labor’s leadership and promote unity.
We’re on the verge of a historic change for our Party – click here to join today.
I hope you support me in these changes to make Labor a more open, democratic Party.
Thanks,
With kevin, as we all know...
it's all about Kevin.he's just trying to shore up his position into the future.
Yes, it also occurred to me that Rudd is making it hard to dislodge him. But then, when you look at it, there are two parts to his proposal.
1. The circumstance when a Leader will vacate.
2. How a new Leader is elected.
As for 1:
Nothing surprising that a resignation or an electoral defeat would be a trigger. Makes sense. A 75% caucus petition support......that's new.
But, really, in effect, any Leader who waited for 75% to sign up knowing that there was say, 60% would be causing damage. For example, Gillard called the spill not (publicly) knowing what the numbers actually were on the alleged Petition to oust her.
2. This is very new, and Rudd will successfully sell it given his position of strength right now. In this regard I say that Rudd is taking advantage of his current powerful position to bring in a change he might have less chance with in other circumstances. He is saying to the ALP......"Well, You and I both know that without me right now, you are phucked. If you want me to run this campaign, you will accept that Caucus no longer has sole control over leadership....after there has been a spill trigger. (See Item 1.) ALP general membership will have equal say."
Rudd is taking ruthless advantage of his current grip on the Party.
But:
What is so wrong with what he proposes? Yes, it shores up his present position, but that comes with the territory of making change.
The LNP claim to be making political gains by pointing out the lack of stability in recent ALP leadership. These proposals address exactly that.
The LNP often refer to 'faceless me' controlling leadership. These proposals also address that by giving general Party membership an equal say with Caucus.
So, yes, Grendel, Rudd benefits......but apart from that, what say ye about the concepts?