Gerard Henderson wrote a piece published in The Australian on the 28 May titled, “election 2016: Media should just let Turnbull be.” As you would expect there has been a lot of comments. Most of it seems to be negative anti-Turnbull.
It was an interesting piece. Much of what G Henderson said was in my opinion true. But there were contradictions. There was one statement in particular I thought was a contradiction. It also generated most of the negative comment from those who state they are conservatives. Honestly, who would know if they are or aren’t. But the statement was this, “If Turnbull wins on July 2, then he will have a greater opportunity to fashion the Coalition’s policy with reference to his own policy vision.”
The point made related to SSM and the Nationals. The point escaped most of those commenting. They see it as a broader issue. But, it plays to the fear many people on the liberal/conservative side of politics express. If Malcolm wins he’ll take the party down the left channel.
The statement conflicted for me because it clashed with other points made by G Henderson.
“Some of those who want Turnbull to be Turnbull overlook the fact he is the leader of a right-of-centre Coalition administration. No Liberal Party leader can ignore the views of party operatives, parliamentarians and the rank-and-file members who keep the organisation together and do most of the work at election time.”
Correct and it won’t change if he is elected. So why would he be stupid enough to revert to the ‘stereo-type’ Malcolm the leftie? He remembers what happened last time. He’s been warned what will happen if he tries it again.
G Henderson stated, “And then there are the Nationals. When Turnbull led the Liberal Party in opposition in 2009, he was close to presiding over a situation where the Nationals dumped the Coalition agreement. The issue turned on Turnbull’s support for an ETS.”
Do you honestly believe the Nationals wouldn’t threaten this again should Malcolm stray from the path of the straight and narrow? Perhaps the not so happy Libs who are championing a vote for Barnaby might like to consider that and insist on an agreement to be sure. I think it makes sense to have one.
Our elected representatives have shown they are prepared to remove a leader. They have done that twice in recent times. Malcolm as opposition leader and Abbott as PM. Why would Malcolm or indeed us think they wouldn’t do it? If the LNP with Malcolm as leader are elected. If he strays too far to the left changing agreements we vote for, I’ll be one of the loudest voices calling for his head.
Tony Abbott broke promises. That didn’t sit well with many centre moderate Libs. If (and it’s a big if) Malcolm was to break promises after being elected there would be a monumental revolt. I’m in doubt it would be the case.
Malcolm Turnbull is many things but a fool he is not. He knows the score and I doubt he wants to be turfed for a second time assuming the LNP gain government and he remains leader.
I will refer to one comment to G Henderson’s column. It was this from someone named Andrew.
“I agree with the very many right wing Abbott supporters who attack Turnbull.
Not because Abbott was deposed as he was hopeless and had to go.
(I concede border protection etc)
Turnbull has turned out to be a socialist and bereft of ideas, and more hopeless than Abbott.
I'm very sorry that Costello left Parliament he would have been an even better PM than Howard.
Unfortunately I'm voting for the truly awful Labor lot in the hope that a new liberal-conservative party will arise from the ashes.
The Other Andrew.”
I have no idea who The Other Andrew is. Or whether he is genuine. But if he is, there's not a lot you can say about comments like that except HELP!!!!! No self respecting, genuine conservative would ever vote Labor. Ever advocate voting for Labor. I don't often reply to media comment but I did to this one.
“To reward Labor after they almost led this country to the point of ruin, on the off chance a new conservative Phoenix will rise from the ashes of a decimated LNP I find astounding. Even more so given Labor are promising to spend more, tax more and weaken our borders in removing TPV's that's just for starters.
There's also the very real likelihood you could be waiting 20-years for the 'saviour' to reach maturity. There is no guarantee it will happen.
So good luck with your gamble. I just hope the rest of us don't end up paying for the bet.”
So back to G Henderson’s headline. Yes. Let Turnbull be. Let him be the leader he has committed to being in leading a right-of-centre Coalition party. Not the leftie, republic pushing, social engineer so many would will him or wish him to be. Hold to account on that commitment.
People do change and they do modify their opinions. It's called maturity and taking into account team and voter expectations. Turnbull knows the score. Time will be the judge of his conviction. He may never completely give up his attachment to a republic. I’ve little doubt that we will traverse that path one day. When the time is right. The same goes for SSM. He has stated he supports the party’s plebiscite decision. The will of the people will decide. As it should. Turnbull will stand firm on border protection. As PM he knows more about the inherent risks of weakening our policy that the armchair experts. Turnbull will hold the line on the economy. As he absolutely must. He's no fool. We must not forget; there are still people waiting in the wings to topple him (that isn't a dig at Tony Abbott). There are others. He knows it and so do we.
Back to focusing on what is really important. Bill Shorten and Labor. Keeping them OUT. If they get in as conservatives we can't control them. We can control Turnbull.
