We await the actions to back up the fine rhetoric from Malcolm Turnbull.

 

Malcolm Turnbull and  Bill Shorten have in common that both are bigheads in both senses of the word. And their careers have a lot in common. It is not pretty, but shows what it takes to be leader in politics,

 

Both men went to elite private schools. From an early age both were convinced that they were born to be PM. Both had connections with wealthy businessmen, Shorten with Pratt and Turnbull with Packer. Their fund raising methods raise ethical questions. They deposed sitting members with dubious tactics, including branch stacling, and are adroit backstabbers, two PMs for Shorten, one PM and one leader of the opposition for Turnbull. Nice guys come last in politics.

 

Canning By-election

The average size of swings against the government from 1983 to 2014 is markedly different according to the term of the government. http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/07/background-on-swings-at-federal-by-elections.html,

Two party preferred for first term it is 1.4%  for second term 5.9%, for third term 10.4%. Hence the Canning result of a 6.4% swing is a bad result for the Coalition. It is better than polling before the election, which on average showed a swing of 10.4%, just short of the 11.8% needed by the ALP, (except for a poll after Turnbull was elected, which was pretty close to the actual). The ALP campaign, heavily based on Abbott hate, was thrown into disarray in the last week. New leaders always get a bounce, it doesn’t last long. The result tin Canning is not a ringing endorsement of Turnbull.

 

The biggest disappointment is the poor result for the Sustainable Population Party,  0.6%, worse than most of the other minor parties. The SPP has a set of good policies, but nothing to distinguish them. Until they tap into the widespread concern in the public about immigration being too high by proclaiming their policy on zero net immigration loud and clear they are going nowhere.

 

Prospects for Turnbull

There was always talk of cabinet renewal by Abbott but nothing happened. Changing Hockey for Morrison and promoting a handful of younger high performers would have ben very beneficial. Turnbull has a better cabinet than Abbott, despite rewarding his supporters heavily. Some are dubious choices; e.g.  Mal Brough and Marise Payne. But the greatest risk is appointment as Cabinet Secretary of Arthur Sinodinos, who has the judgments of two ICAC hearings into his dealings still to be determined.

 

There is always an opportunity for a new leader to ‘remove barnacles’. He is not bound by predecessor’s promises. Expect a bit of that.

 

Turnbull has a low $A in his favour, likely to stay that way for the rest of his term, which helps exports and import competing industries, so keeping employment up. And he is the darling of Fairfax and the ABC. Witness the Leigh Sales simpering interview with Turnbull on 7:30 and contrast it with aggressive interrupting interviews with Hockey and Abbott.

 

However. Turnbull’s past will be raked over; initially by offbeat websites. https://newmatilda.com//2015/09/19/rise-malcolm-turnbull-staggering-wealth-surprising-aggression-substantial-intellect and http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com,

but later mainstream. 

 

Turnbull has come in with fine rhetoric, let us see how he justifies it with positive action.

 

Comment; editor@independentaustralian.com.au