Will Tony Abbott lead the Coalition at the next election?

[Lior]

I hesitate to engage a medico when discussing the politics of health management in Australia but it brings up a pet subject of mine: Commonwealth/State relationships. Hospitals are "paid for" by the states (albeit with a hefty Commonwealth contribution) while health is paid for by the Commonwealth. At every turn in the public hospital systems the states have a vested interest in billing the Commonwealth for anything they can, that's why you're pulling your Medicare card out for any MEDICAL service your local hospital delivers. Personally, I'm not in favour of the Commonwealth taking over the various hospital systems as I philosophically don't think the Commonwealth's role is to deliver basic services. On this issue I'm at complete odds with the Labor Party.

Taking this point further, what on earth is the Commonwealth doing interfering in school education? School education is/should wholly be the bailiwick of the states and I honestly can't see ANY role for the Commonwealth here. The former journo and eminence grise Max Walsh reckoned Australian governments wasted about $5bn a year on duplicated services, and that was 10 years ago! If anything it's become worse in the intervening period with do-gooders like KRudd dispensing laptops to 15 year old school students on top of the poorly-thought out BER policy. Gillard proposes the Commonwealth intervene to grade teachers and "reward" those who shine on their imaginery scale. Is the Commonwealth going to improve garbage collection next?

On another note I'm married to a hospital health admin wallah. The money wasted in her (small) department would drive a sane man to tears.

I don't agree with State Governments however I will acknowledge that they are here and here to stay. So I would agree with you Lindommer, getting rid of federal funding for states for Education (at a school level, not a University level). Also this goes with what I had earlier to say, I think increasing the GST to 12.5-15% I think would allow for extra funding to be allowed, and for Federal Governments to perform Federal issues and State Governments to perform State issues.

 

[Ruggo]

Does your GP Super clinic bulk bill? Because if it does, than it will be easing pressure of Royal Darwin A&E. A high percentage of admissions to A&E are patients who could be seen by GPs, but choose the hospital because they can't find a doctor to bulk bill.

No it doesn't. The GP super clinic concept was sold to us as being capable of treating anything short of major trauma. It sounded like a fantastic concept given Darwin is a one hospital city and is one of the fastest growing areas in the country when it was sold to us but has fallen well short of what was promised. There is nothing super about it at all.

I also think a lot of patiens are drawn to A&E departments because the staff care about what they do. I think there is a growing lowering of standard in GP care. Not all of them but there are plenty that just ship patients (or should we say customers) in and out like cattle. That is fine if all you need is a doctors certificate but if you need to monitor an ongoing medical condition it if not good at alll.

 

[FiveStarStu]

I think that Tony is unelectable.

Australia is a country won on the middle ground. As long as that remains the case, TA is stuffed. His support has come from a very effective working of his base, coupled with general dissatisfaction towards to government after the hung parliament. The fact that the government controversy has made most of the headlines has allowed scrutiny of whatever policies he may have to fall by the wayside, but this does not usually last as an election approaches.

Turnbull said something interesting last year, that base politics is flawed as you cannot win elections by having your supporters vote for you with more ferocity. Surely a jibe at TA.

Half way through next year will be the clincher. The fact that the carbon tax is done, the NBN has started, the MRRT is done, the pokies stuff will be done, the plain packaging stuff will be done, all with 1 year out to an election, it will leave TA stranded unless he can prove a real disadvantage that's occurred as a result, or provide a credible alternative. If we face a GST-style implementation of 'July 1 comes around and nothing really happens', then he's stuffed. His electoral campaign will be based around issues that many people would have gotten over.

Remember, Keating's ALP had ratings in the 30's before winning 1993. Howard had an approval rating of 29 before winning 1998. Australian voters aren't stupid, but they have short memories (the fact that TA is considered an alternative PM should illustrate that). If Gillard and the ALP keep getting things over the line, without majorly screwing it up, they'll cruise it in.

Turnbull might not be in favour now, but if the LNP Right sniff a chance to win the election, they'll have no hesitation in sacrificing TA. Never say never.

 

[Cutter]

I voted no, but that is more in hope than anything else. Abbott doesn't properly hold the government to account meaning that our national politics is weaker as a result.

 

[bryce]

I think that Tony is unelectable.

Australia is a country won on the middle ground. As long as that remains the case, TA is stuffed.

Part of me agrees with you. He really doesn't seem like the kind of politician that the middle ground, the swinging voters who decide elections, would vote for.

But the other part thinks that you could have said the same thing about Howard before he became PM. Abbott I think is similar in many ways. Arch-conservative, even reactionary, but at the same time a populist. You only have to see the change in public perception of him. Before he became leader Abbott was just seen as the mad monk, a hard right-winger who no one thought would last as head of the party. Then he came within a whisker of being PM. If he is as good at judging and capitalising upon the public mood as Howard was then I wouldn't write him off. He might just prove to be a bit too much of a loose cannon. We'll have to wait and see what he comes up with in terms of policy over the next two years.

 

[Schadenfreude]

To me he looks like a puppet. A politician in the mould of George W Bush.

I always wonder who's pulling the strings.

 

[FiveStarStu]

Part of me agrees with you. He really doesn't seem like the kind of politician that the middle ground, the swinging voters who decide elections, would vote for.

But the other part thinks that you could have said the same thing about Howard before he became PM. Abbott I think is similar in many ways. Arch-conservative, even reactionary, but at the same time a populist.

Howard was a much smarter politician than Abbott is though.

Look at the GST. Howard took a policy that even he didn't agree with, crafted it in a way that he could argue it, and then turned the populist angle on and built support for it.

Abbott has the populist angle, yes, but it's built on nothing. He was lucky the election came around as soon as it did, because it allowed the populist angle to BE his policy. People just voted against Gillard as a rebuke for the Rudd axing.

Howard did the policy first. That will be Abbott's downfall if his recent form continues.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

I think Turnbull would make a good leader. Obviously it's unlikely though, even if Abbot gets knocked off he doesn't appear too popular with the Liberal party currently.