Oceania Crean steps down as leader of the ALP: who will replace him?

Crean steps down as ALP leader. (Taken from NineMSN)

Opposition Leader Simon Crean announced he would stand down as leader of the Labor Party.

Mr Crean, in a brief statement, told reporters he would call a ballot for the leadership at next week's caucus meeting on Tuesday.

He said he would not be a candidate.

"It's been a pretty sleepless night but when I got up this morning I decided to call a ballot for the leadership of the parliamentary Labor Party next Tuesday and I won't be a candidate," he said.

This is a positive for the labor party, I believe, and good on Simon Crean for stepping down for "the good of the party." I'm hoping that Mark Latham (the only politician with any balls and decent policy ideas) replaces him. What about everyone else?

 

*****...this is all kind of out of the blue!
There'd been leadership rumblings over the last day or two but who thought they'd culminate so quickly?

My money is on Mark Latham who I think could do very good things for Labor given the chance but Kevin Rudd probably shouldn't be ignored either....these are two who seem to have been raising their profiles the most in the last few months.

But can either of them turn it around before the next election? ?

 

Kim will return! I have forseen it!

 

Kim "What's a policy" Beazley is the WORST thing that could happen in this most grevious of time.

Below is a transcript of Simon's speech.

---

[b]Simon Crean - Former Leader of the opposition[/b]

[b][u][color=red]Transcript - Parliament House, Canberra - 28 November 2003[/u][/color][/b]

It's been a pretty sleepless night, but when I got up this morning I decided to call a ballot for the leadership of the Parliamentary Labor Party at next Tuesday's Caucus meeting and I won't be a candidate for the leadership.

It has become obvious to me that I no longer have the confidence of the leadership group and a majority of my Shadow Ministry, and in those circumstances I propose to relinquish my position in the best interests of the great party that we all serve.

The events of today come at a time when the Australian people are reaping the consequences of John Howard's Prime Ministership:

Rising interest rates and the beginnings of trouble in the property market.
Plunging rates of bulk billing and a sham policy to fix it.
The pricing of education out of the reach of ordinary Australians.
Labor can win the next election. Australia needs us to. And my strategy of building a case based on solid, fully-costed, early-released policies is working.

I hope that my successor will continue to let the Australian people know what we in the Labor Party stand for and that we're in there fighting for their interests every day.

The Australian people are not clamouring for a change in the leadership of the Labor Party; they are clamouring for a change of government and policies that serve the many not the few.

I believe the events of today point to a fundamental difference of priorities between political and media decision makers in Canberra and the majority of the Australian people.

Nevertheless I accept the result of these events and wish my successor, whoever that may be, well.

Right throughout my life in politics and in the trade union movement I have never been afraid to take on the hard jobs.

I tackled party reform ? which everyone knew we needed but no one else would touch.

I confronted the ugly politics of immigration and gave Labor a strong and compassionate policy alternative.

I rejected ?small target' politics and released alternative policies ? which I believe will play, and still play,a decisive role in defeating John Howard.

I also faced young men and women being sent off to a dishonest war and told them the truth ? that whilst I admired them, they should not be going.

This is the level of honesty with the Australian people and the toughness from the Labor Party that must continue if we are to win the next election.

I also leave my successor with one point of advice.

It comes from the millions of Labor voters, supporters and members in the suburbs and country towns of Australia.

Time is running out if we are going to save egalitarianism, compassion and the fair go in this country.

Our opponents have set themselves on a course to change this nation for the worse and we mustn't make it easier for them.

Don't let your personal ambition cripple the Labor Party as it puts its case for a fairer and better Australia.

Select a new leader on Tuesday and stick with him or her.

Don't put a revolving door on the entrance of the Opposition Leader's office. That door only leads to permanent opposition.

This ballot next Tuesday, is not only about leadership, it's about Labor standards, Labor values and how we conduct ourselves as a party.

During the two years I have had the privilege of serving this great as party as Leader I have enjoyed the support of colleagues and members from all sections of the Labor Party as we have sought to provide an alternative vision to the Howard Government, and I want to thank everyone of them for their loyalty and their dedication.

I especially want to thank my senior front bench colleagues who have served the Parliamentary Party well and have remained loyal to me and the ideals and goals that we have pursued

I want to

 

The events of today come at a time when the Australian people are reaping the consequences of John Howard's Prime Ministership:

Rising interest rates and the beginnings of trouble in the property market.
Plunging rates of bulk billing and a sham policy to fix it.
The pricing of education out of the reach of ordinary Australians.
Labor can win the next election. Australia needs us to. And my strategy of building a case based on solid, fully-costed, early-released policies is working.

Well said! Thanks for putting the speech up, PoT.

But can either of them turn it around before the next election?

They're going to have to come up with some damn fine policies and publicise them well. I think Latham would be a good PM, but the Australian public will probably go with Howard again (if Costello doesn't stab him in the back by then ).

We need someone in office who isn't full of crap. And if anyone is full of it, it's Howard. That's what I like about Latham. He tells it how it is.
For example: "The PM is an arselicker." ~Mark Latham. Someone had to say it!

Beasley has announced that he'll be contending for the leadership...when will he learn? The guy's a joke.

 

Nice speech, shame he hadn't had the balls to say it before today. An honest and gutsy speech like that would have eneared the man to alot more people, I reckon.

Which is why Mark Latham should get the nod, the Australian people like people talking straight and Latham does just that (as outlined above ). It's a style that isn't very common in politics but it certainly seems timely at the moment.

Edit: I'm a big fan of Beazo but I reckon he should take a backseat on this one. He had his punt and lost it, leave it be and help guide someone else through it.

 

Wow, this is out of the blue. Still though if they wanted to dump Crean now is the time to do it so as to give the successor time to build up support.

Judging from a number of news sites it appears the leading candidates to replace Crean are Beazley, Latham and Rudd (though only Beazley has actually announced his intentions).

The Labor caucus is going to vote next Tuesday.

It's going to be an interesting half week or so - a twice-defeated candidate (Beazley), a candidate with a reputation for a dirty mouth (Latham) and finally a candidate who appears to be simply a third alternative (Rudd).

I'm tipping for either Latham or Rudd. No offense to Big Kim, but 2 failed elections against Howard isn't a good thing to have in one's resume.

 

It's got to be Latham. It's about time someone like him took the top job. Not this namby-pamby type we have now.

 

Steve Waugh retires a couple of days ago, Crean steps down today.

Coincidence? I think not.

 

"...2 failed elections against Howard isn't a good thing to have in one's resume."

Although keep in mind that John Howard lost to Keating, only to return victorious (tragically).

 

Rising interest rates

Yes, it rose a massive quarter of a percent. Lets compare that to the 18% when the ALP was in power. Or not.

Which is why Mark Latham should get the nod, the Australian people like people talking straight
Yes, Keating got so far with it. Where is he now? Oh, that's right.

I'm a big fan of Beazo but I reckon he should take a backseat on this one. He had his punt and lost it

Twice.



I'd prefer Beazley. If only because PoT despises him.

 

Although keep in mind that John Howard lost to Keating, only to return victorious (tragically).

Howard lost to Keating? ? I know Howard lost to Hawke back in the 80s (though that was primarily due to a split in the conservative vote with Joh-Bjelke and his 'Joh for PM' campaign) but I don't recall Howard going against Keating until 1996 (which Howard won).

Though I do acknowledge the point - until 1996 the self-proclaimed Lazarus with a triple-bypass was seen by many as a loser in the polls.

Which is why Mark Latham should get the nod, the Australian people like people talking straight and Latham does just that.

That depends on who you talk to - some may see his antics in Parliament as nothing more than an attempt to grandstand himself.

One problem that Latham may face is that he has made clear that he's a Crean ally, which might end up being a liability if the caucus wants to clear all memory of Crean next Tuesday. His situation is even worse when you consider that he's attacked anti-Crean people in the past, which may further alienate support for him.

Which is where Rudd comes in - quiet achiever in shadow cabinet, VERY well spoken, isn't really allied with (or against) any major faction, doesn't have the baggage that Beazley (2 election losses to Howard) and Latham (close ties to Crean, bit of a mouth) carry etc. It's quite possible that if Rudd does stand for nomination it'll be as the 'other alternative'.

As I said earlier, it's going to be interesting to see how this all plays out.

 

"Lets compare that to the 18% when the ALP was in power."

I think the minor difference you're missing is the state of the global economy, given that we're living in a globalised world now. An 18% interest rate was the result of a global recession (verging on depression) while the current climate is one of recovery (verging on prolonged boom). These figures always quoted in relation to interest rates have little to do with Government innovation. It's like saying that we had a 65% unemployment rate during the Depression era Labor Government of 1936 but the Liberal Government today only has a 16% unemployment rate! Isn't that freaking amazing?!?!?

"Yes, Keating got so far with it."

I doubt paul keating would have lied about refugee's throwing their children off cargo ships or involved Australia in a war based on...well...nothing. I doubt he'd lie about his ministers creating funds to smear opponents with the goal to having them imprisoned. But maybe not

"I know Howard lost to Hawke back in the 80s...."

Hawke vs Howard = Keating vs. Downer/Hewson? Maybe that's who I meant, they're so hard to tell apart these days

 

An 18% interest rate was the result of a global recession (verging on depression) while the current climate is one of recovery (verging on prolonged boom)

I believe Howard has faced worse economic conditions (9/11 and the war on terror spring to mind... the aftermath of the Asian economic crisis as well) yet Australia is one of the strongest economies in the world. Amazing.

or involved Australia in a war based on...well...nothing

No, I hoped he would've done it to free an oppressed people from a murderous dictator who tortured his citizens. Your leftie comrades piked out of that issue once the facts started piling up against them here.

Anyway, you ignored the point to bash Howard. Keating's smugness and attitude didn't go down well with the voters. I doubt Latham would fare much better.

 

Hawke vs Howard = Keating vs. Downer/Hewson? Maybe that's who I meant, they're so hard to tell apart these days.

Tis the truth - they're all just unionists or lawyers these days.

Screw them all - vote One Nation!

 

At least Keating could form a good insult.

"I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot..."

 

Keating's smugness and attitude didn't go down well with the voters. I doubt Latham would fare much better.

This may well be a relevant point. Indeed, one of Crean's biggest problems was trying to convince the voting public that he could a be a 'nice guy' after having defined himself as a headkicker under Beazley. Needless to say, he never really succeeded.

Latham may face a similar problem as leader since he's been Crean's headkicker.

Anyways, Latham has announced he'll be discussing the leadership issue with his family before deciding whether to stand or not:

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/National/story_37835.asp

 

Interestingly enough, apparently the majority of AM talkbackers favour Kevin Rudd, then Latham, with Beazley last. While Beazley may give ALP some extra votes since he is "familiar", it seems many voters still don't see him as a legitimate alternative.

Despite this, I still think Howard is beatable. They've got a year. A few more scandals concerning the government coupled with a more vocal and accessible opposition could see the ALP coming into power again at the end of next year. It's unlikely, but doable.

 

Depends on how many more tax cuts Howard gives us, conveniently close to election time. I know I'd rather have an extra $4 a week than have accessible higher education.

 

Or a functioning national media.

"No, I hoped he would've done it to free an oppressed people from a murderous dictator who tortured his citizens."

I trust we'll be invading Americanext to liberate them from a Presidente who detains and tortures not only his fellow countrymen but foreign nationals without charge, access to family or private legal representation? America sounds more opressed than most other countries in the world to me so lets get an international posse together and march on Washington! I hear they have the worlds biggest stock of weapons of mass destruction too....

 

It's about time Crean stepped down. He was hopeless as a leader. I hope Kim returns and wins the next election. Anything to get damn Howard out.

 

The problem we have is that Kim lost 2 elections to Howard. And with Crean steeping down now, it doesn't say much about the leadership of the labour party does it? As much as I hate little Johnny, if he's staying for the next election, he'll probrably win.

 

milney, you're probably right. There is no way Beazley can win the next election. Did he ever form one coherent policy idea? Apart from 'Knowledge Nation'? Howard is the favourite now because he has pandered to the ignorant Australian fears. The war on terror, his stance on refuges, minimal tax cuts (as opposed to things like health or education, mentioned by Hawk) and so on. Latham or Rudd, whichever takes over the role as opposition leader, will need to present very good arguments to the public as to how they can combat these issues in a better way than the present government. They're going to need a ruthless campaign. Beazley couldn't do that, we've seen this before. This is why I think Latham's ability to 'tell it straight' would help labor. Whether it's enough to win the election, I don't know.

 

DA: I trust we'll be invading Americanext to liberate them from a Presidente who detains and tortures not only his fellow countrymen but foreign nationals without charge, access to family or private legal representation?

What need would accused war criminals have for representation in a military tribunal? This isn't an ordinary court case and in no way violates the Geneva Conventions.

America sounds more opressed than most other countries in the world to me so lets get an international posse together and march on Washington!

Yes, what with all our rights and opportunities. We are extremely oppressed. Especially that whole free speech and right to a militia nonsense. Now excuse me while I burn the flag and defame the president.

I hear they have the worlds biggest stock of weapons of mass destruction too....

Yes, used so frequently, as well. And can you imagine if we didn't have them? There may well be no USA, and then the world's economy would collapse, as well as the security and independence of nations around the world.

Too much Michael Moore, Brett.

 

DA:
America sounds more opressed than most other countries in the world to me so lets get an international posse together and march on Washington!

Just as you marched when Saddam gassed between 200,000 and 1.6 million Kurds? If you think America is one of the most oppressed countries, you need to expand your reading list outside of Stupid, White, Fat, Rich Moore (er, Men)

Bec
Howard is the favourite now because he has pandered to the ignorant Australian fears.

If only the country was as enlightened as you, BecJedi.

You > majority of Australians.

Good to know.

The war on terror

There isn't a war on terror? Howard should just have ignored 9/11 and Bali, then?

his stance on refuges

Illegal immigrants, not refugees. Australia takes more than its fair share of refugees every year, thanks. Go and protest against NZ which, until recently, let in about 19 refugees a year.

And, hey, Howard may as well put the illegal immigrants in those detention centres; afterall, that's the purpose that the Hawke Labor government built them for

minimal tax cuts

If you don't want an extra few hundred in your pocket every year, give the money to charity. Give it to a hospital or a local school (which are, for the most part, the responsibility of the States). Heck, the economy is going so well at the moment, you may as well.

lexu:
I hear they have the worlds biggest stock of weapons of mass destruction too....

Yes, used so frequently, as well. And can you imagine if we didn't have them? There may well be no USA, and then the world's economy would collapse, as well as the security and independence of nations around the world.

You forgot to mention the fact that if any American administration used WMDs inappropriately (such as nuking a random country), they would not only lose their power, but would go to jail.

If Saddam did that, on the other hand, nothing would happen to him in his own country. His people couldn't speak out against him. He couldn't lose the next election when his is the only name on the ballot either.