Nelson calls spill...

[thejester]

...Costello backs him!

Peter Costello has backed Brendan Nelson to lead the Liberal Party to the next election and says he will not be standing as a candidate in this morning's leadership ballot.

Mr Costello told Radio National's Fran Kelly that Dr Nelson should continue as leader but would not confirm whether he would be voting for Dr Nelson at this morning's party room meeting.

"I have said since last year's ballot when Brendan was elected leader as far as I was concerned that gave him the right to lead the party to the next election," he said.

"I haven't seen anything that would make me change my mind."

Aunty.

Started ten minutes ago. Will be interesting to see if anyone challenges him - Costello has obviously had all of the limelight recently, Turnbull has been quiet and Julie Bishop virtually invisible. Seems a strange time to do it as well - Labor is obviously hurting in WA and NSW but Rudd is still ultra-popular, and in the middle of September? If they'd waited another month they'd get twice as much attention.

[White Haven]

As an aside, it's nice to be able to know what nation/continent an article is about without hunting for context clues or checking the link URL.

[CaptainChewbacca]

As an aside, it's nice to be able to know what nation/continent an article is about without hunting for context clues or checking the link URL.

I was gonna guess Canada, but Oz was my second choice.

[thejester]

Sky is now reporting Turnbull as the new leader of the Libs. What a pack of dolts - Nelson stage manages himself into implosion, Turnbull inherits a busted arse party years from the next election.

As an aside, it's nice to be able to know what nation/continent an article is about without hunting for context clues or checking the link URL.

*shrug* People who know enough about the topic to want to talk about it would clearly understand what I was talking about. You don't and finding out should have taken you the grand total of 5 seconds, but next time I'll put LOL AUSTRALIAN in the title just in case.

[mr friendly guy]

Nelson was a wanker anyway. Lets see what Turnbull can do. Maybe more of the same since the Federal liberals are in disarray with Howards defeat and Costello's bitching.

While the ALP is hurting in NSW, isn't the state election there more than a year away? That gives them time to sort out their internal problems, whether they will succeed is not for me to say.

As for WA, I voted for Liberals this time round mainly because of Colin Bartnett's promises to not merge us with Royal Perth Hospital by keeping RPH where it belongs. But even then the ALP secured as many lower house seats the Nationals & Liberals combine (and these two aren't in the traditional coalition, but have an alliance of sorts with the Nats reserving the right to vote against the government). With the numbers like they are, its going to be precarious for the Liberals, as the Nats would demand a lot to keep from bringing down the government.

Hey, as long as Barnett keeps RPH where it is.

[thejester]

Malcolm Turnbull says he is "humbled" to take the reins of the Liberal Party after beating Brendan Nelson in this morning's leadership spill.

Mr Turnbull fronted a Parliament House press conference after beating Dr Nelson 45 to 41 in this morning's vote.

He paid tribute to Dr Nelson, pledging to restore unity to the Liberals and sell their values to the Australian electorate, and described Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as vain.

"Ours is a great party, a party whose values are as important to the prosperity and security of Australia in the years to come as they have been in years gone by," he said.

"This is a land of opportunity. Australia and Australians can do anything.

"But we need to have confidence, we need to have leadership, we need to have the opportunity to do well."

ABC.

It's interesting, my parents will probably disown me but I'm pretty sympathetic to Turnbull. While I'm still mighty suspicious of the Liberal party as a whole and have bugger all intention of voting for them (not that I have to for a while anyway), Turnbull is probably closer on social issues to me than Rudd and they share virtually every other piece of policy, so...

And Friendly Guy - I think the Nats are finally clocking on that if they don't take a more aggressive stance to the Libs they'll kick the bucket. They went independent in the lead up to the last Vic election and they did much, much better than expected.

[Lusankya]

Isn't Turnbull a wet liberal? That could cast some doubt on party unity (as though the near even vote split didn't do that anyway). Still, Turnbull's bound to be a better leader than Mr 7%.

I'm just surprised that they changed leaders this early. I was quite convinced that they were planning on throwing the next election and then having Turnbull take over when Rudd's popularity was waning. Now, I have no idea. Either Nelson was so bad that they had to do something, or it's quite a masterful stroke from the anti-Turnbull faction - getting him to be leader now so that he can never be PM.

Any thoughts? Am I sounding too tinfoil hatty?

[mr friendly guy]

Generally governments tend to at least stay two terms before being voted out, most likely due a few factors, such as incuberancy, dislike of the party your just voted out last election etc.

In which case Turnbull can lose the next election to Rudd, but Australia becomes a republic as both support it. Then Rudd can retire without doing a John Howard and overstay his welcome after two terms. Maybe they will make him ambassador to China or something Then we might see if its Gillard vs Turnbull.

At least Turnbull seems to have his head screwed on a bit more tightly, if rumours are true that he opposed certain of Nelson's popular policies, like that stupid cut in fuel excise which Howard refused to do. I can't remember what his views was on with the "oh no, Kevin Rudd is sacrificing our relationship with Japan by not visiting them soon enough or giving them a phone call" (never mind that the Japanese apparently didn't feel it was important enough to ring us either ).

IIRC Turnbull was also in favour of apologising to the stolen generation, unlike Nelson who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do it when Rudd was going ahead anyway without the support of the Liberals. And even then Nelson fucked up the speech.

And just for kicks this election parody video which describes Nelson as the white guy with bad hair and Turnbull as the mega rich white guy

[Lusankya]

IIRC Turnbull was also in favour of apologising to the stolen generation, unlike Nelson who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do it when Rudd was going ahead anyway without the support of the Liberals. And even then Nelson fucked up the speech.

Turnbull's also the guy who said (before the election, IIRC) that we might as well sign Kyoto because we were meeting the targets anyway. That didn't go down too well with the rest of the Liberals. And he may have also publically stated that Labor had a mandade to repeal WorkChoices, sign Kyoto and say sorry due to those issues losing the Coalition the election so badly. Apparently that didn't go down too well either.

Maybe he'll help the Liberals to look less stupid when he's the leader, because while he's leader, they'll have to fall in behind him.

[thejester]

Isn't Turnbull a wet liberal? That could cast some doubt on party unity (as though the near even vote split didn't do that anyway). Still, Turnbull's bound to be a better leader than Mr 7%.

He is on social/environmental issues, but he's rock solid on what is increasingly the most important issue in both the party and Australia (ie the economy). Hard to question the economic credentials of a self made millionare.

And in a sense I think this won't matter that much. Whether or not Turnbull genuinely believes in Kyoto etc is sort of irrelevant; that is the way the wind is blowing, so if he wants to win votes he has to follow it. What was pretty clear at the time (and has largely been confirmed by Costello's book) is that the upper ranks of the Libs had a collective 'oh shit' moment a few months before the election, when they realised they'd had gone too far to the right, economic scare tactics weren't going to work against Rudd and that dogged old ideologue Howard wouldn't change his ways. That's when Turnbull urged them to sign Kyoto. As long as Turnbull talks good on economics and gets poll results, I think the Libs would be happy to follow a softer line on social and environmental issues.

I'm just surprised that they changed leaders this early. I was quite convinced that they were planning on throwing the next election and then having Turnbull take over when Rudd's popularity was waning. Now, I have no idea. Either Nelson was so bad that they had to do something, or it's quite a masterful stroke from the anti-Turnbull faction - getting him to be leader now so that he can never be PM.

Any thoughts? Am I sounding too tinfoil hatty?

Nelson called the meeting by surprise, clearly with the belief he had the votes. The idea being that he would win (as apart from anything else Turnbull would be too gutless this far from an election), ending speculation about leadership and allowing him to forge some policy. Clearly it backfired and the party had had enough of his bloody inept leadership.

[Lusankya]

Isn't Turnbull a wet liberal? That could cast some doubt on party unity (as though the near even vote split didn't do that anyway). Still, Turnbull's bound to be a better leader than Mr 7%.

He is on social/environmental issues, but he's rock solid on what is increasingly the most important issue in both the party and Australia (ie the economy). Hard to question the economic credentials of a self made millionare.

Isn't that what a wet liberal is, at least in terms of Australian politics: fiscally conservative but socially liberal. I don't mind that too much, so long as healthcare, etc. get funded.

[Archaic`]

From the sounds of things, finally I have a politician I can vote for without having to hold my nose. I've grudgingly voted liberal ever since I came of age, simply on the economic issues alone, in the hope that a better economy would eventually push the electorate to demand better social positions from the government. That still hasn't happened, and probably won't, but we may yet have hope with a politicial leader actually going out of his way to push that kind of agenda.

Besides being a self-made millionaire, and pro-Kyoto prior to the election, I know he's staunching pro-gay rights, and was the leader of the Republican movement. Anything else I've missed?

[bobalot]

I always thought that Turnbull was a bit of a snobby wanker. How anybody can describe him as "humble" is beyond me.

[Archaic`]

I always thought that Turnbull was a bit of a snobby wanker. How anybody can describe him as "humble" is beyond me.

Let's be honest here. Pretty much all politicians are snobby wankers.

[mr friendly guy]

At least with Turnbull's ascension, the choices might not be so clear cut to this swing voter. I have voted ALP more than the Libs except for the WA state election, although that was based on local issues.

Turnbull and Rudd seem to have views I agree with. I agree that Rudd might seem to flaunt his Christianity, and it is a slight concern, but at the end of the day I see this as just a tactic he had to adapt with the Libs quite willing to do it (even if Howard just had his ministers milk it - remember the attack on Latham for being an atheist) and the "rise" of family first. In short, I don't see him rubbing his Christianity onto us like the Liberals did.

Come next election, I might have some decent choices on who to vote for, which I am not complaining.

Although I feel Turnbull can only do so much against the conservative idealogues in the Libs.