Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A leadership challenge? Future strengths and present weaknesses

By Sarah John - posted Monday, 1 July 2013


In the aftermath of the Gillard Coup on 24 June 2010, I wrote a piece here on Online Opinion called "We 'the people': mere powerless observers" in which I implored Australians to demand a greater say in who leads their country. I suggested Australian political parties be encouraged to adopt "leadership conventions", in which, after the resignation of a party leader, party members vote on a slate of candidates who have publicly announced their candidature some weeks in advance of the leadership convention.

Now, almost 3 years ago to the day, I write, again urging almost the same thing. This time though, I wish to emphasize the profound effect leadership conventions could add to stability and long-sighted policy decisions by increasing the difficulty of launching a leadership challenge greater and forcing the challenger to openly declare their candidature and argue their case.

Leadership conventions could take a form similar to the one the Liberal Party of Canada held in April 2013. After former leader Michael Ignatieff's resignation, the party elected 41 year old Justin Trudeau, the son of former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, using preferential voting and an equal allocation of votes to each local branch. Alternatively, each party in Britain and Canada offers a slightly different model for choosing party leaders. In all models, these leadership conventions require the existing leader to resign voluntarily before campaigning begins. In all models, leadership candidates must nominate and campaign openly.

Advertisement

In all models, leadership conventions would serve to make covert challenges on a party's leadership a thing of the past. In all forms, they would empower party leaders to make long-term decisions without fear of a snap caucus rebellion in response to a few opinion polls. In all forms, leadership conventions would reduce the incentives for the media to fixate on rumors about leadership challenges and, perhaps, open up more space for reporting on policy and governance. Perhaps.

Already retrospectives about the "Rudd Resurrection" identify Julia Gillard's sagging opinion poll numbers, her performance, ALP factional wars, the media and her gender as potential causes of her downfall. All these factors may have played a part. But, ultimately, the method for choosing party leaders in Australia made these factors relevant. Leadership challenges are a cinch. They can be called at any time without much fuss. Deposing any leader of the Labor or Liberal parties is-relatively-easy-peasy. All you have to do is privately convince caucus or make a few surreptitious backroom deals.

The temptation, in the aftermath of Kevin Rudd's return, is to focus on the personalities of the players or the lack of popularity of the leader as the cause of the leadership spill. We want to say that "Rudd was too focused on 'spin', that's why Gillard challenged and caucus voted for her." Or perhaps, "Gillard couldn't connect with the people and had a funny voice, that's why she was removed."

Yet, this does not stand up to scrutiny. You might recall that Tony Blair was immensely unpopular in his last four years as Prime Minister due in a large part to the Iraq War. Blair's approval ratings hovered around 30% between 2003 and 2007-lower than Gillard's. Blair also oversaw the Labor Party's loss of 47 seats in the 2005 Election.

And yet, there were no covert coup attempts; no equivalent to our chilly Canberran winter knifings. During his tenure, Blair did not have to dedicate his time and effort fending off leadership challenges from fellow MPs. Instead, he could focus on other things (like governance). Eventually Blair announced he would resign on 10 May 2007 and did so a fortnight later.

We get a similar story if we go to Canada. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister since the Canadian Conservative Party won minority government in 2006, survived a real, deep recession-with all the vagaries that minority government brings, and during this time could focus on politics and policy rather than worrying about an attack from within. Since 2009, his approval ratings have never been above 40%, and are currently around 25 – 30%. Yet speculation about leadership changes is minimal. One recent editorial in the Globe and Mail did raise the question, but it did so in these terms:

Advertisement

"If Stephen Harper is to serve his party well, he has a critical decision to make within a few months. He has to let it be known whether he will lead the Conservatives into another election."

Quite a different tone than we've seen in recent Australian media reports, eh?

Increasingly Australians are tempted to point the finger at the media as the source of leadership instability. The argument is that the media should be better: The media should focus on policies; not on the personalities or destabilizing the leadership with its speculation.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

7 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Sarah John is a graduate student studying electoral reform.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Sarah John
Related Links
Canadian Liberal Party leadership conventions

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 7 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy