Can Gillard stay mute on the night she rolled Rudd?

BMJ says:

02:31pm | 15/07/10

Knowing the details of the night Rudd got rolled won’t change my life one bit. I want to to know what the Government is doing about education, health and creating jobs.

It’s one for the political tragics out there and for the infotainment junkies.

Fog Badger says:

02:32pm | 15/07/10

No.

I think the nation has a right to know the underpinnings of this extraordinary politcal coup.

Sheeple says:

02:34pm | 15/07/10

I think knowing how she ascended would help us to judge what sort of character she has, given as how she came out and said she was “absolutely loyal” to Kevin Rudd right up until the leadership spill.  Is she just a powerhungry woman or did she show true loyalty until she was absolutely forced to by the factions?

Pete says:

02:35pm | 15/07/10

One for the tragics. KRudd had 0 chance of recovering any form of major credibility with the electorate before a vote. You know it, I know it, Julia knew it, Tony knew it. Only Kev didn’t know it.

MarK says:

02:35pm | 15/07/10

/popcorn

This should be a doosie. It has taken Rudd what…3 weeks? and the knives are out. He still might lose them the election hahahaha.

Never scorn a narcissist.

Smell it. Go on smell it. Desperation…....

Shortest honeymoon ever. Answer the question Jules.

Greg says:

02:41pm | 15/07/10

Oh Geez Leo what a long bow you draw here. Time to get a grip. Rudd was desperate, pleaded for 3 months probabtion, Julia said no.

You write like you’ve only just started following politics in the last week.

Peter says:

02:42pm | 15/07/10

Since when does a party leader in Australia not get the top job through back stabbing, conniving, treachery and outright lying?

Our party system just says if your the biggest snake in our ranks, you’ll get the job.

We need to change our system of government. Our current system is not efficient and not in our best interests…

Professor Ceril Hardpipes says:

02:52pm | 15/07/10

Yeah, knowing what happened isn’t relevant. It doesn’t matter much what the public think about the stewardship of their country - those that are elected in our trust can do as they wish. I am sure we are all happy with this type of transparent governance.

Nigel Catchlove says:

02:53pm | 15/07/10

It’s interesting to see that Julia is happy to base the next election on the issue of trust.  Well Julia, I hereby promise to trust you no more and no less than Kevin Rudd should have trusted you. 

If all Australian’s did the same you wouldn’t get a single vote.

Joan says:

03:05pm | 15/07/10

Good to see Laurie Oakes wipe Gillard`s smile off her face- she has been laughing and dancing on Rudd`s grave since the coup.

Bob says:

03:11pm | 15/07/10

Your comment:
In what sense can what the Prime Minister said to her predecessor when she was negotiating with him over which of the two of them would be Prime Minister be irrelevant? Yeah, it’s conceivably irrelevant to a cooking class or footy practice, in some contexts, but it is about as relevant as a conversation can be to a discussion of politics in a democracy.
You must be an ALP insider to publicly assert that this is irrelevant in the face of what this article is about. This type of spin is exactly of a kind with denying that there was any mention of a specifc geographic location for a regional processing centre in a nationally broadcast address, asserting that there was no deal done with asylum seekers who disembarked from the Oceanic Viking onto Indonesian soil, or claiming that the change from the RSPT to the MRRT only cost revenue $1.3 billion.

It beggars belief that you and the political party you seek to apologise for, can go on deluding yourselves that ordinary people are not capable of seeing through such brazen disregard for basic honesty in communication.

Oz says:

03:30pm | 15/07/10

Personal Integrity and honesty DO matter in our Prime Minister. 

We all know that people have to make tough calls in politics and that occasionally an element of betrayal is involved when their is a power shift, but there are limits.

I think Gillards pretence that she’s keeping silent out of respect sounds particularly hollow…. neither Rudd nor Faulkner sound like they’ve done anything dishonorable. 

I genuinely don’t think Gillard or the Union factions want the Australian public to focus on the level of deception that was involved in her grab for power and especially if she sold out her own integrity at the behest of her factional leaders.

Australian’s should have every right to ask about the circumstances under which she became Prime Minister.  If she did nothing dishonorable, then she should have nothing to hide.

TigerBob says:

03:34pm | 15/07/10

It just shows how cold and treacherous Gillard and her union backers are. They couldn’t even give Rudd as prime minister the respect and fair go that he deserved. At least a few more opinion polls he asked for was not unreasonable. I didn’t like him or agree with him, but in Australia, we believe in a fair go for all. If the labour union bosses and warlords and Gillard can’t give their most popular prime minister a fair go, then there’s no reason for the Australian people to extend the same courtesy.

jb says:

03:37pm | 15/07/10

Is this really the type of person you want representing us and setting an example for our children, is this the behavior you would like them to adopt?
I will be teaching my son dignity and respect, if anything I will use this as an example of what is not good character and absolutley un Australian.

Pull the other leg. says:

03:41pm | 15/07/10

Julia and the factions deprived us all of our democratic right.. to pass judgement on Kevin Rudd and his govement at a election.  The question asked goes to character and truth.. We are being snowed just like Kevin Rudd was.

Steve Frankes says:

04:22pm | 15/07/10

Just goes to show they lie and backstab each other as quick as they would backstab and lie to the electorate - not a good scenario for the type of people we want to govern. They have to go - its obvious that they dont know what their doing and driving us broke into the bargain.

Mr. Grey says:

04:30pm | 15/07/10

What difference we know her Union bosses control her and put her up to it.

jayadee says:

04:31pm | 15/07/10

Nothing new for politics!  The survival of the fittest.  Somebody leaked to Laurie Oakes - I wonder who?  And as far as the PM confirming what he said - what nonsense.  It may have happened that way, but Kevin was gone and he knew it, and Julia knew it, and the Party knew it.  And as for Liberal and the upstanding, Christian, no-nonsense, truthful, never-go-back-on-his-word, faithful to his Leader!?!?! Tony Abbott - well, I think history speaks for itself.

TigerBob says:

04:50pm | 15/07/10

How can people compare what happens in opposition to the assisination of a first term prime minister. This is the first time in Australian history that this has taken place. Then to add insult to injury, Gillard didn’t even give Rudd a fair go which they had both agreed to. What an un-elected prime minster we have. I want the election now.

With eyes wide open... says:

04:51pm | 15/07/10

It’s happening….they are now using dog ugly photos of “our Jooolia” on other news websites….honey moon over?

Sirro says:

05:03pm | 15/07/10

Its pretty clear to me that any alleged credibility that Gillard or Swan might have had is well and truly gone.

Firstly, Swan releases modeling and statments saying that his new mining tax deal would only reduce the government tax take by 1.5 Billion dollars. A week later he re-jiggs that modelling to suit himself on the underlying budget position and suddenly tells us the true gift to the three big mining companys is actually 7.5 Billion. What a buffoon. Does he seriously think Australians are so stupid that we can’t see through this disgraceful charade?

Now we find that Julia Gillard’s BS about seeking the leadership only because “a good government had lost its way” was complete hogwash.
Rudd was notorious for briefing journo’s prior to taking the leadership. Without doubt he has passed this true story to Jabba.
She is simply the pupper of the unions and the factions. Shorten, Arbib and Howes now run the government. Julia is merely the face of an unelectable bunch of power hungry dirbags engrossed in their own self-interest.

Marcus says:

05:03pm | 15/07/10

“What Gillard is saying here is the confidence that had been agreed on between her and Rudd…”

Well it sure as hell looks like, if there was any ‘agreement’, Rudd hasn’t kept his side of the bargain. Where else would Oakes have got such a detailed account of the meeting?

Phil Maguire says:

05:06pm | 15/07/10

There’s no doubt in my mind that the public’s right to know outweighs Gillard’s right to maintain confidentiality. This is a critical matter involving the removal of a popularly elected Prime Minister. The argument that people vote for the party, not the PM doesn’t wash. A vote for a Labor candidate in 2007 was a vote for K. Rudd as PM. Gillard overthrew the will of the electorate and needs to thoroughly explain the circumstances.

1Gmd says:

05:14pm | 15/07/10

Shorten the BS variety stated the reason why Julia was needed was to get the ‘message’ across.

What message has Julia got across so far but a god-awful mess of each area she touches - the change over - unanimous support? Mining tax - free give away? the timor non solution? we can manage the economy - if we get the figures right?

Jack says:

05:29pm | 15/07/10

I agree totally. If we have to accept that Labor powerbrokers and Union bosses elected a Prime Minister for us, then the people of Australia should not be left in the dark as to it’s circumstances. What is this? A collective dictatorship of the Australian Labor party? We can see right away that Gillards style of governance is the same as Rudds, namely to withold information wherever she sees fit and treat the Australian public with dissent through her ignorance. She even said in her first public address that she will strive to be more transparent and talk to the people. Wheres the transparency Gillard? Wheres the information Australians deserve. Well I can’t wait for an election. The messenger and the message stays the same no matter who they put in front of the Labor party so it’s the Liberals for me from now on.

Lee from WA says:

05:31pm | 15/07/10

We have a right to know the circumstances that led to a democratically elected PM (which isn’t in the Constitution BTW so those who say we don’t elect a PM, you don’t seem to understand the system) being turfed after less than one term.

Pete Falk says:

05:31pm | 15/07/10

Is it O.K. to say that the photo at the head of this article seems like that of a smirking cat that has gotten all of the cream.  Most typical because even as cats cannot be trusted to leave the food on the table alone, so this P.M. seems to be in that category and she needs to prove that she can be trusted - if she can.  At which point since her arrival to the fore in politics has she shown she is trustworthy, capable, honest and not just using ‘glamor’ to fool quite a few voters.

Wallaby says:

05:43pm | 15/07/10

The fact she refused to answer this question implies that it is fact.  When someone refuses to answer, thats exactly what they do not want to say themselves.

Fiona says:

05:51pm | 15/07/10

I’d like to know about what transpired. I vote. I’d like to know exactly who I am voting for and what they’re made of. That includes a leader’s credibility, truthfulness (“I never wanted the job”, “setting up to save this good government going off the rails”, yada yada) and her integrity as leader is all part of the package. I didn’t respect Rudd much, but I thought how he was removed from office was appalling. No wonder she wants to look forward, there’s too much carnage behind her.

iansand says:

06:02pm | 15/07/10

Or what Hawke said to Keating, or what Howard said to Peacock (and back again), or Howard said to Costello, or what the current set of Liberal revolving doors said to each other on the way in and out.

Ho hum.  If journalists spent their time analysing policy, instead of being the crowd at the back of the bike sheds egging schoolyard combatants on, we would have a more intelligent political debate.

Dick J says:

06:13pm | 15/07/10

I am just pleased that Rudd has gone. He was not suitable for the job as PM. The longer he was there the more inept he became . He became loathsome laughing stock.

Gillard will go the same way.

Abbott’s the man for the present.

All this destabilisation in the ALP just emphasises what a stong and able leader Howard was.

kp says:

06:17pm | 15/07/10

I want Tony & Joe to win the next election !!  Nuff said.

ron collins says:

06:23pm | 15/07/10

If the story is untrue she would have said so. She would have killed it. It is as simple as that.

Daniel says:

06:23pm | 15/07/10

It is an interesting question that Oakes asked Gillard but who really cares what has happened on that night. Abbott has nothing positive to say about anything. He is nothing but a political roadblock.

Diamantina Dick says:

06:31pm | 15/07/10

The NSW electorate is to blame for what happened to Rudd. They showed the ALP that it is possible to replace a stale leader who had promised to serve a full term (Carr) with a Drover’s Dog (Iemma) and get elected by claining to be a fresh product. Iemma also went to the electorate with ALP nowhere to be seen on his placards. This has been repeated now several times, each with a honeymoon and benefit of the doubt awarded by the electorate.

Whilst it is true that the party elects the leader, it is somewhat ingenuous to deny there is a problem with the Rudd/Gillard scenario when the Kevin 07 campaign was so ‘presidential’ and Howard targeted so personally.

Perhaps Labor are subconciously advancing a republican agenda and making us more amenable to a system of directly electing a President?

Mark says:

06:37pm | 15/07/10

A promise to stand aside in politics is worthless.

Hawke promised to stand aside for his deputy and reneged

Howard promised to stand aside for his deputy and reneged

Power is like a drug and is rarely given up easily or freely.

Rudd may have made the promise but I doubt like the two men before him whether he would have honoured it.

john williams says:

07:03pm | 15/07/10

Carefully crafted question by Laurie Oakes.
It was obvious that GillRudd was snookered.
Damned if she answered and damned if she did not.
One of those fairly rare occasions where the observer / listener does not need the answer as it was provided in the question.
It was blindingly obvious that the source could only be either Rudd or Faulkner.
GillRudd should expect this to haunt her throughout the election.

This is Australia says:

07:14pm | 15/07/10

Since when does Australia have a US-style elected prime minster? The Australian prime minister is elected by the party and not by the people. The fact that Labor chose to elect her makes it totally legitimate. If you don’t like the rules, then change the constitution.

Al says:

07:21pm | 15/07/10

This goes to the heart of credibiity. An elected PM was removed and we need to know the full and true circumstances. Spin is no longer an option.

Joe says:

07:34pm | 15/07/10

I agree with Abbott. Labor pretend to be Liberals before the election, but are big spending Labor after the election.

Remember Rudd and Gillard have been on the nations biggest spending binge.

Grant says:

07:53pm | 15/07/10

I wish all LABOR govenments could be made irrelevant for a 100 years, they are truly hopeless and are merely self serving in there quest to attian and retain power at all costs.

Tony Davidson says:

08:07pm | 15/07/10

So what! A politician has refused to give an answer to a question. What’s he on about? (Laurie O), He’s been around long enough to know you can’t (won’t) get a straight answer. Kevin had to go. What a non event he turned out to be!
As my old Grannie used to say; “All that meat & no potatoes”.

Jack Smith says:

08:16pm | 15/07/10

This stiff upper lip of Gillards probably won’ t last!!
In fact, there may be a Royal Commission on this matter to determine this matter and Gillard could never remain silent under oath!!!

Ripa says:

08:25pm | 15/07/10

What was said between Rudd And Gillard on the night is of vital importance, we voted for Rudd, what happened to him and how he was ousted is shameful,  disgusting, disgraceful, and totally disrespectful to the Australian people.
Rudd as our elected leader should have been the one to choose on his own to step down or to go to the next election. Gillard is no PM she is a TEMP.
Bring Rudd back, let Rudd and Abbott have it out.

DD Ball says:

08:34pm | 15/07/10

It matters not what was said. Knowing ALP politics as I do, as a watcher of the ABC and occasional reader of the SMH, I know much about the ALP that doesn’t improve my decision making. However, one question asked seems to have gone by unremarked, and it gives a great hint about what Gillard plans and her thinking. She promised that she would reveal the BER report once it became available, before the election if it reported then. This suggests an election is sooner rather than later. Or, if it is indeed later, then things are worse than the ALP have admitted.

desmond Cooke says:

08:43pm | 15/07/10

Julia Gillard must answer Laurie Oakes question,until she does she will remain A person of questionable character   Julia   Please Explain.      Des Qld.

David The Doubtful says:

08:58pm | 15/07/10

NO! She must show her bloody hands so the electorate can see what a snake she might be.

Jai Thomas says:

09:15pm | 15/07/10

I don’t know why everyone is pointing to Kevin Rudd being the culprit to have leaked the information to Laurie. Both Faulkner and Julia do have personal lives that they live with other people, it is easily possible that one of the two leaked it unwittingly.  Personally, I don’t give a crap, I think we deserve conniving, dirty, puppets and corrupt leaders as PM’s cause how else did we sit on our bums and accept what happened to a democratically elected, most popular PM ever, in his first term in office.

Rod Gearing says:

09:18pm | 15/07/10

Geez Laurie, you crack me up every time. One or two simple questions and she goes to jelly. Or prevaricates. Or bullshits. Or Lies. Or denies. Or avoids the question entirely. Why should we voters trust a Prime Minister that has stabbed her (elected) predecessor in the back?  Stabbed her boss in the back? She’ll have no qualms stabbing us in the back either, because we just don’t count in her list of priorities for getting to the top You may just preside over a revolution in your lifetime Julia. Be prepared, be very prepared!.

MOVING BACKWARDS! says:

09:25pm | 15/07/10

Gillard you brought indefensible death to Krudd as PM so be aware that your ruthlessness may backfire on you because you are so lacking in true leadership!
The Australian people want to know what happened how the government was going off track as you so saw it so please EXPLAIN how you formed that self indulgent view! See you took Australia off track when you shafted Rudd.
you should Move OUT because we are ALL moving backwards with you!
well you lack honesty and your word counts for nothing
you have no crediblity left at all!
your golden run will soon end at the next election as Australians will give you the boot out that you so deserve. Well the way you dealt with Krudd was inept, insensitive, callous in the extreme and so profoundly disloyal!
he Krudd deserved far more repect than that, but you Gillard here was so insensitive in your rush to grab power that you totally overlooked the ramifications of what you did!
Not good enough Gillard for anyone that pretends to have some sophistication,  so you so lack compassion for Krudd so out you go Gillard the sooner the better!

Robert Nicholson says:

09:26pm | 15/07/10

The Public are entitled to know ALL the circumstances surrounding the removal of the former Prime Minister and Gillard’s hand in it.
This is an open democracy!

Joe Blow says:

09:31pm | 15/07/10

East Timor be warned .... any deal made with Gillard is a non-deal without the Unions’ approval.

Bob H says:

09:37pm | 15/07/10

Whats with all the indignation and shock, Gillard saw a chance and stuck the knife in, that is politics or does everyone believe the “I wish to serve my constituency” bollox.  Politicians don’t do nice, even the ones with plunging necklines.

Jozef says:

09:50pm | 15/07/10

Julia is cold, hard and calculating in the execution of her “duties” Her approach to other human beings (I think Kevin qualifies) seems indifferent as long as she gets what she wants. I dont see any empathy or sincere feelings or regrets about what she has done. Just lots of rhetoric and lots and lots of moving and going forward.
Rudd was sliced from the leadership and inner party sanctum by Julia - she then proceeded with the patronising charade of pretending to feel for Kevin’s unfortunate predicament. She even has the gall to tell us - the voters who elected Kevin (make no mistake it was Kevin who was elected not the labour party) that all is forgiven Kev, and we will make you a minister when we are re-elected.  Julia if you wanted to show that you cared then the time to do it was immediately when the other ministerial changes were made. 
Kevin a minister after the election. You must think that your constituents are pretty naive. No one in their right mind would keep on someone who they had sacked in the most cold blooded way in Australian political history. How silly do you think we are Julia. By the way you have not earned the right to play with the electorate. Even if you are elected at the next election just remember why you are there.
The electorate want to know what happened, why it happened and the circumstances of the demise of their elected representative.
Julia you should have the decency to respect your employer (the voters) and divulge the truth.  You (and all other politicians ) are always baying about transparecy   - well here is your opportunity.
This is your chance to maintain my vote. I voted for Kevin so help me vote for you and come clean (I am not sure that is the right word).
Tell the truth (ha ha ha )  or lose one single vote.
PS.
Why is it that we the people who elect politicians (in paid jobs) do not have the right to question them.

Adelaide Bob says:

09:55pm | 15/07/10

Yes she does owe an explanation to what transpired on that not that the Australian elected Pm was knifed in his first term of office. Everyone knows that what was asked of Ms Gillard has to be true or she would have told Laurie Oaks he was wrong. This government is not only inept but it has a leader who seems to be in power on deceit. This is not good for the country as she was a part of the failed policies of the Rudd government. If Australians re-elect this inept government the only people to blame is the voters themselves as we are aware of the short comings of this mob.

John Allen says:

09:59pm | 15/07/10

To swallow that the smug and smirking Auntie Julia was not complicit in kicking the chair from under the twitching Kalamity Kevin defies belief.
The Night of The Long Lies will eventually be chronicled.

This is one sugary Ginger Nut who requires dunking as soon as possible.
She is very bad for our health.

Unfortunately it appears that we have jumped, or been pushed,  from the frying pan into the fire.  Droning Julia is Rudd in a wig,  sort of like
the Greens are Labor in drag.

Labor has had a go and have made a real, tax wasting, mess of it.
Begone, vandals, deceivers, saboteurs, egomaniacal incompetents!

What will our neighbours be thinking?

NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

10:13pm | 15/07/10

Hi there,
Would it really make any difference anyway??  So much has happened so quickly that , why ask questions now??  I truly believe that it would not make a bit of difference right now, either way.  May be, Ms Gillard our current Prime Minister could write a book which tells all, if she is not elected.  It is amazing that she is getting this incredible amount of publicity, all of a sudden. I believe it can only do wonders for her image as a female Prime Minister and can only serve as a boost to her reputation.  And it can not be all that bad considering that there are only a handful of female leaders anywhere in the world.  I am certain most nations around the world are very much interested in the outcome.  It is very much like an international advertising campaign which does wonders anyway.  Best regards to your editors.

TJF says:

10:36pm | 15/07/10

Note to author if this article. Wrong Leo. Gillard is the elected Prime Minister of Australia. Elected by her Labour colleages as the leader of the party, who by default becomes the PM.  The same applied to Kevin 747. When the Unions & faction leaders didn’t want him any more they Gillar(d)tined him and threw him away like a used tissue. We don’t have Presidential USA style elections here thank goodness.

Lex says:

10:41pm | 15/07/10

I really can not see why everyone is frothing at the mouth over this. We will all have an opportunity very soon to choose between Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott. Both of them are politicians and both of them know that situations change - regardless of previous positions.
It seems to me that Ms Gillard is upsetting the media because she refuses to let them rattle her.

Ted says:

10:54pm | 15/07/10

Here we are - the best off economy in the world. All as the result of excellent (Treasury advised) action by the current government and using the reserves built up by previous Liberal and Labor governments.
Prime Ministers are NOT elected by the people - they are elected by the winning party. Ditto for Leaders of the Opposition.
So, let’s leave the parties to decide who their leaders will be. Let us just concentrate on which party should be in government next time.

Senate Watcher says:

11:43pm | 15/07/10

Don’t you just love how we keep hearing this “Surplus in 3 years” baloney -  Thanks to Gillard’s previous three year spendathon, we now all jointly owe a debt of $149,133,000,000, increasing at over $100 million a day - that Labor has absolutely no intention in paying off.  To check the facts, go back to this link each week see how much your debt is climbing  
http://www.aofm.gov.au/

C'mon says:

12:08am | 16/07/10

”  acotrel says:  07:38pm | 15/07/10

      Laurie Oakes was effectively told to mind his own business!”

Acotrel,
Laurie’s business is to inform the public and the public deserves to know who Julia is since she is seeking to be elected PM of Australia by the public.

Annie says:

06:42am | 16/07/10

There is much talk of Parties changing Leaders however

1/. Were Beazley-Crean-Latham-Nelson-Turnbull all different Leaders of their respective Parties sworn in by the Governor General to represent the people of Australia??
2/.  Were any of the above afforded the Privileges of the Office including living at the Lodge & Kirribilli House, the Jet, the Stationary, and Security etc??

Whilst I realise the Australian People don’t vote for the Leaders of the Parties, come each election a Leader is put to the Australian Public as the next possible Prime Minister of the country.

I remember well the last election (2007) the Labor Party ads “Kevin 07” nowhere did I see
“Labor Party 07”!  Also the Labor Party were constantly saying a vote for John Howard as Prime Minister was really a vote for Peter Costello as Prime Minister if the Liberals were elected!

After what happened does that now mean that a vote for Julia Gillard is also a vote for Wayne Swan/Anthony Albanese/ etc as future Prime Ministers when the mood strikes them to change Leaders in the next week, month, and year should they win the election? And if Ms Gillard isn’t elected in her OWN seat what then who will Arbib, Shorten, Feeney & the rest decide to bestow Power upon then??

I would also like to add that if the Labor Party has NO RESPECT for the position of Prime Minister, the Office of the Prime Minister or the Role of the Prime Minister of Australia how can the Australian people be expected to have any respect for it either.

In which case isn’t it time Political Parties stopped putting up Leaders as candidates for the job of Prime Minister & just run with Party Policies & come clean with the Australian People that if that Party should win Govt then the Government will decide which Party Member will be Prime Minister.

I have noticed on numerous occasions that Ms Gillard has gone to great pains to imply she realises she wasn’t voted in by the majority of Australian people as “Prime Minister” & also constant remarks about her being the “Unelected Prime Minister ! Thus perpetuating the MYTH that Australians think at the end of the day that they have any say whatsoever in who they want representing the country as Prime Minister.

RECKLESS says:

09:46am | 16/07/10

that!
Gillard gave Rudd no chance to recover from a bad patch in the polls was Krudd asking too much to have more time? Many think not in view of the fact many sitting Pms have had bad run in the polls
why was Gillards view of ALP going off track more important than the stability of the PMs office and Australias reputation both here and overseas
Ms Gillard your ludicrous inane explanations dont hold water
You are just holding your tongue to protect your self
ship out at the next election because your explanations re deposing Krudd dont shape up!
Kruud chose you as his deputy and your loyalty to him didnt last not even a full term!
you are loyal to one thing your ruthless poltical ambition!

Margaret says:

11:00am | 16/07/10

is there anything we really need to know?  Obviously the factions kicked in, Gillard had the numbers and Rudd was rather inelegantly dealt with..and now we have a new PM…it is the nature of Australia’s rather shabby political scene these days…on BOTH sides….what I would really love to see is a bunch of politicians with the courage of their convictions…and they seem to be almost non existent

Amber says:

11:42am | 16/07/10

Either with, the election so close, I don’t think we’ll have to wait too long to find out what happened that night. Rudd will surely be overlooked, if Labor wins and if they lose it won’t matter;  then he’ll start sharpening his pencil for a real page-turner. Can’t wait!

Bob says:

11:48am | 16/07/10

Laurie would not have gone public with this unless he was accurate which he has been every time in past. The next question goes to Gillard’s integrity and credibility. if she can reneg on a deal one hour ago, then just imagine how many promises she will break after this election. Gillard makes Rudd look very trustworthy. It’s time to give Abbott a go now. Gillard has truly done her dash.

It just shows how cold and treacherous Gillard and her union backers are. They couldn’t even give Rudd as prime minister the respect and fair go that he deserved. At least a few more opinion polls he asked for was not unreasonable. I didn’t like him or agree with him, but in Australia, we believe in a fair go for all. If the labour union bosses and warlords and Gillard can’t give their most popular prime minister a fair go, then there’s no reason for the Australian people to extend the same courtesy.

Reg says:

12:52pm | 16/07/10

Just as well the genders are not reversed or that headline would have choked its writer. Is this discrete sexism?

Eye4anEye says:

01:24pm | 16/07/10

All’s fair in the snake pit of Labor – Gillard reneged on an agreement regarding leadership and Rudd reneged on an agreement to keep it all secret and John Faulkner having a backbone and some morals left the party (maybe due to witnessing the low it’s sunk to?). In summary 3 in the room 2 lied and backstabbed each other and 1 quit completely.

Don’t know if the Liberals are that much better but at least they don’t have union power brokers pulling strings.

Before you ask/flame yes I will be voting Liberal this election (unless something happens to change my mind, and yes my mind can be changed I vote for who I think will do best for the country and myself - yes myself I admit I vote in my own best interest).

A question to those voting Labor this coming election, why? and please no because otherwise Tony Abbot will be PM as that doesn’t wash. What has Labor done in office that you think is worthy of them remaining and/or what has the coalition done in opposition that makes you want to keep them out of office?

I can not really think of a reason to keep Labor in 3 years they’ve done bugger all:
laptops for school kids - incomplete (and off the radar)
housing/indigenous welfare - incomplete (also off the radar)
insulation scheme -cancelled and lethal
school infrastructure scheme - rorted and inefficient (but hanging in there)
Health scheme - in limbo somewhere and unsure if it will be good or bad
ETS/environment - in hibernation until possibly some future post election date in the meantime lets go with something like the coalitions policy
Immigration -lets head right and go with a meto to the coalitions policy but lets make it less efficient and not consult the nations involved before we announce it (Super tax style) oh and while we’re at it lets screw up the green loans program epically.
Tax - Lets not talk to the involved parties and consult before announcing then lets have a bunfight with them using tax payer money for the “emergency”
Leadership - The wheels have fallen of Rudd quick knife him and stick the next lemming in (make sure puppet strings are attached firmly this time).

Ignorant... says:

01:47pm | 16/07/10

While the Westminster system may be both dated and irrelevant, the fact remains that these parties should be a reflection of the people. Is this the kind of behaviour that we as the Australian population can support, condone or enable?

While underhand dealings may have always been prevalent in Australian politics, the bottom line is that the Labor government tactically branded themselves in the ‘07 election, and the Australian people voted in Kevin Rudd as the Prime Minister. Yes, I know that we in fact voted specifically for local members, but to hide behind the fine print of the Westminster System is both misleading and in most cases, untrue. Honestly, what percentage people actually vote for a local member without any concern for the party leader?

What kind of message does this give to us about the Labor government?

How can we give any weight to policies, plans and promises that are made throughout election campaigns given that the leadership body can be replaced within hours, and without due process (as reinforced with the whole East Timor embarrassment…)?

How can we condone this sort of immature, sneaky, and agenda ridden behaviour - especially considering these people are our representatives abroad?

Can we support a party that cares so little for the voice of the Australian people? That gives so little justification? The has so little accountability? That believes they can back stab the Prime Minister and not provide the Australian people, the people they represent, with any true rationale?

Ben says:

01:48pm | 16/07/10

To those who comment about the power-shift in the Liberal party as excuse for the Labor action… the liberal party is in opposition, therefore at no time did the Australian people “vote” for Tony Abbott.  (Party and Person voting aside, its clearly time that the Australian people get to vote for a Person.  Backroom power brokers is poor form of Democracy).

Gerry Sinclair says:

02:19pm | 16/07/10

Its becoming very “Yes Minister” isnt it? Or maybe Monty Python! Or both!
He is so terrible that we “had” to get rid of him as PM, yet he is so competent that its OK to swan around the world behaving like a defacto Minister or even PM whilst only a backbencher, and actually he is so good that he is an absolute “must” to have in the Cabinet after the election!

And they say all this with a straight face!

How much more evidence does one need that the ALP has a very,very, low opinion of the intelligence of the average voter - it is an opinion that may well be correct given the fact that a number of posters here cannot distinguish between opposition leaders & Prime Ministers, & the former changing through a voting process and a PM being changed though a non voting process,but nontheless it confirms what they think of you the voter, and it obviously isnt much.

David says:

04:11pm | 16/07/10

Newsflash: Laurie Oakes cannot confirm whether there was a deal.  Even he doesn’t know for sure.  He is relaying third-hand gossip from someone Kevin talked to at some point through the evening.  Listen to the 2GB interview this morning.

Also, I can’t believe the lack of understanding a lot of comments display about our democracy.  Enroled voters elect a local member, and the parliamentary party elects a leader.  Simple.  Don’t you remember what Howard used to say?  He would stay on as long as his party wanted him to?  Nothing about being elected by the Australian people there.