Opinion Domestic Politics BF style

Remove this Banner Ad

Watched part 2 of Nemesis tonight covering Turnbull's prime minister-ship.

Reporter Mark Willacy asks all the questions and you rarely hear his voice during the programs asking them and never see him asking them, started part 1 and part 2 asking Liberal, LNP and a few National Party members, to use one word to describe Abbott and Turnbull respectively, and I assume part 3 on Morrison will start the same way.

The words used for Turnbull tonight were;
Intellect/Intelligent/Smart, Ambitious x 3, Ruthless x 2, Determined, Flawed, Progressive, Urbane, Selfish, Superficial by Abetz, Narcissism, Vision x 2, Disappointing x 2, Complex, Relentless, Negotiator, Passenger by Tim Wilson, Considerate by Howard, Smooth as Silk by Barnaby and Integrity.

When Willacy lists them to Turnbull, he smirks and says, "well I think its a pretty good list." Then you hear Willacy ask Morrison the question and he says - "well he was a friend." Was? Morrison smirks and says "maybe one day we will be again."

After the Peter Dutton challenge, Willacy asks Turnbull to describe Dutton in one word and he ponders over it for 4 or 5 seconds and says "Thug."

Right at the end of the show, Willacy asks him for one word to describe Morrison, he says Scott Morrison, pauses, one word! then ponders it for 7 or 8 seconds and says 'Duplicitous" (and program ends and up comes the credits).

Turnbull in his arrogance/confidence didn't listen to his colleagues closely enough over his term as PM and had a tin ear at the end when they advised him not to do a couple of things including call a spill motion at the start of the last parliamentary week in August 2018, before they all headed off home for a few weeks. Classic Malcolm bull in a China shop approach.

Dutton stood and lost 35 v 48, but the damage was done and some of key people started agitating, 9 front benchers resigning, and 3 days later, after initially refusing to call another party meeting, unless they got a majority, 43 signatures to call the party meeting. After Warren Entsch told the agitators, if you get 42, bring it to me and I will be sign as # 43, a meeting was called Turnbull who had planned to stop Dutton. He decided he would call for a spill motion do you want me to stay on as leader. The spill motion was 45 for spill v 40 for Turnbull.

Turnbull basically saw Dutton as another Abbott and would be another wrecker. He was so determoned to stop him, that he drew up plans to go to the GG and call an election right in the middle of this battle, but sleeping on it, decided against it that it wasn't a good idea, and that he probably would have to pay for the election campaign himself - again.

So he stood aside and Julie Bishop, Dutton and Morrison ran for the leadership. He basically, as well his supporters, did what they could to stop Dutton. Bishop only got 11 votes and she dropped out of the next round as no one got a majority. Morrison won the second round 45 v 40.

Over the weekend I spoke to a mate about the first part and we debated what would come out in the second part. I told him about the 1991 Good Weekend article that I read when it was republished in 2014 in the SMH celebrating the 30 best features over 30 years of the magazine and sent him the link. I posted it in this thread back in November 2020.

We text each other a couple of times tonight and basically agreed on two things;
1. quite a few of the phrases and opinions expressed about a 36 year old Gung-ho lawyer/merchant banker in 1991 were repeated in the program, the old, the more things change the more they stay the same and
2. All are as bad as each other.

Watching it, I kept thinking of that classic line of Michael Corleone from Godfather III - real power can't be given, it must be taken!

Here is the link to the 1991 article, the opening of which, I've never read an equivalent start to an article/feature like this one.



Suddenly, he can turn. The charmer becomes the menacer, the defender of freedom of speech its most sophisticated challenger. He laughs, and disarms, but always be on guard. Remember, he can turn. Malcolm Turnbull, at 36, is one of the most powerful lawyers in Australia, and inspires a wide range of feelings among those who know him.

"He's a prick," says ex-business-partner Nicholas Whitlam, who says he is being restrained in what he says so as not to fuel an ongoing feud.

"He's wonderful, kind, generous, warm and friendly," says actor Kate Fitzpatrick, a longtime friend.

"He's a turd (haha that was repeated tonight)," says former Labor senator Jim McClelland. "He's easy to loathe, he's a s**t, he'd devour anyone for breakfast, he's on the make, he's cynical, he's offensively smug. He's a good exploiter of publicity, although I applauded the way he ran Spycatcher against [Margaret] Thatcher. He wasn't fazed by who he was up against." (Says Turnbull of McClelland, "I'm very sorry that many years of excessive consumption of alcohol and professional disappointment have reduced what was once a sharp wit into nothing better than gutter abuse. He's a bitter old man.")

"Malcolm doesn't create neutral feelings," says Trevor Sykes, editor-in-chief of Kerry Packer's Australian Business. "I don't think you are going to find a neutral commentator. The merchant banking world is the most bitchy I know. Malcolm, being a particularly abrasive character who doesn't suffer fools gladly, was always going to suffer his fair share of detractors."
........


Cover of Good Weekend, April 13, 1991.

1606052250136-png.1016763
 
Last edited:
Political journalist/economist George Megalogenis wrote 2 political books last decade, after doing a lot of digging into history and data in particular for both books.

In 2012 he wrote The Australian Moment looking at politics and the big economic reforms basically starting with Whitlam government's overnight in 1973 slashing tariffs by 25%, opening up Oz to more global competition, and to Rudd's and Gillard's handling of the GFC.

In 2015 he wrote Australia's Second Chance about how Australian history and economic progress went in 50 year cycles of struggle (1788 to 1830's) then boom (1830's to 1888 gold rush and immigration) then struggle again (1890's recession, WWI, great depression and WW II) then a 50 year boom / bust cycle between end of WWII and early 1990's and argues that we are in a 50 year boom cycle having ridden out the GFC unlike other major economies who got hit hard by it, and high young aged immigration and attracting some of the world's brightest, driving grow.

In his 2012 book he looked at events since the 1970s and he said the boom/bust forged institutional and political leadership and a canny populace. He examined how we developed from a closed economy racked by the oil shocks, toughed it out during the sometimes devastating growing pains of deregulation, and survived the Asian financial crisis, the dotcom tech wreck and the GFC to become the last developed nation standing in the 2000s. As a result, whatever happens next, we're as well positioned as any to survive the ongoing rumblings of the GFC.

I remember when he was discussing the 2012 book on Richard Fydler's Conversation program he compared the first 12 years of the 21st century to first 15 of the 20th century. No Australian government between 1901-1915 won back to back elections and several times the government lost confidence in the House of Representatives and governments change. In those first 14 years, there were 11 different administrations and it took WWI and a national government for stability to set in.

Megalogenis on Fydler's show in 2012 said we might have to flip a few governments before we have long term political stability, given the rapid change in the economy and pace of life after only have 3 administrations between 1983 and 2007.

When he came back in 2015 to discuss his 2nd book, the country had its 4th administrations between 2008 and 2015.

Most of the flipping has occurred by politicians infighting than by the populace.

Watching tonight's Nemesis and last week's, I wonder with so much polarisation in politics and society, how many more governments will be flipped in the next 5 to 10 years. We are now into our 7th different administration since November 2007 and who knows if we will or wont get our 8th by early/mid 2025.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

I love his explanation.

“I was walking back to my accommodation after Parliament rose at 10pm,” he told Daily Mail.

“While on the phone I sat on the edge of a plant box, fell over, kept talking on the phone, and very animatedly was referring to myself for having fallen over.”
 
I love his explanation.

“I was walking back to my accommodation after Parliament rose at 10pm,” he told Daily Mail.

“While on the phone I sat on the edge of a plant box, fell over, kept talking on the phone, and very animatedly was referring to myself for having fallen over.”

5x34fb.jpg
 
I love his explanation.

“I was walking back to my accommodation after Parliament rose at 10pm,” he told Daily Mail.

“While on the phone I sat on the edge of a plant box, fell over, kept talking on the phone, and very animatedly was referring to myself for having fallen over.”
It is common knowledge he has issues with alcohol.
 
I love his explanation.

“I was walking back to my accommodation after Parliament rose at 10pm,” he told Daily Mail.

“While on the phone I sat on the edge of a plant box, fell over, kept talking on the phone, and very animatedly was referring to myself for having fallen over.”

My god is that for real? It’s hard to tell what is real and satire anymore…


Sounds like an excuse a 5 yr old would come up with to explain how a cookie got out of the cupboard and into their hands.
 
“While on the phone I sat on the edge of a plant box, fell over, kept talking on the phone, and very animatedly was referring to myself for having fallen over.”


Note that there is actually a seat at the other end of that planter box - missed by the obviously sober Barnaby.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Forgot to post this the other day after Nemesis part II was shown and Dutton's back down on stage 3 tax cut whinging.


David Rowe is a farken master at the small details to really show the full picture.



GFoZ3nUaMAALXa6
 
Last edited:
Episode 3 of Nemesis, I had almost forgotten the endless :poo:show that was the Morrison government. And they didn't even get to Robodebt. :eek:

At least those self-funded retirees on the decks of their yachts were able to keep their franking credits, so there's that.
 
Don't be lulled into thinking that this is not what most major corporation CEOs are thinking - this guy made the dumb mistake of saying the quiet bit out loud in front of the cameras.



I'm more commenting on how poorly he expressed himself and how unprepared he seemed. He also threw in the towel at the first sign of trouble.
 
I'm more commenting on how poorly he expressed himself and how unprepared he seemed. He also threw in the towel at the first sign of trouble.

He's going on four corners, and doesn't expect that maybe there might be a question about the lack of competition in the Australian market?

What a dingdong. He's paid $13 mill a year. Or was a couple of years ago, it's probably a fair bit higher now.
 
I'm more commenting on how poorly he expressed himself and how unprepared he seemed. He also threw in the towel at the first sign of trouble.
Yeah I get it.

My point, or rather the point of the X post I linked, was that the real issue here is that most CEOs have been media trained and know how to avoid the gotcha questions that the media love. So the story becomes the outlier who doesn't know how to dodge questions rather than the issue

The real issue for us shouldn't be a CEO being caught out but the issue itself - in this case the lack of competition in retailing.

Coles and Woolworths argue that they have plenty of competitors - retail and online - which is true. But they know full well that area competition is what matters which is where their dominance across all suburbs count.

As an example. Take a look at this screen shot I took just then of petrol prices across a large swab of the Adelaide Metro area. Notice how one short stretch of North East road has the lowest petrol prices across the metro area -different petrol retailers owned by different companies (Shell, Mobil, AMPOL, OTR, United, St Agnes Independent) all selling 91 unleaded petrol for around the same price of 179.9 while the rest of the metro area has prices 20-30c/litre higher.


Screenshot 2024-02-19 at 8.43.54 pm.png

Having just one retailer in an area willing to compete on price forces the others in that area to lower prices to match. But companies outside that area keep their prices the same.

When it comes to supermarkets the same concept applies, which is why breaking the duopoly of Coles Woolworths matters.
 
Last edited:
I'm more commenting on how poorly he expressed himself and how unprepared he seemed. He also threw in the towel at the first sign of trouble.

I think he needs some resilience training.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top