Dandrews' strength of leadership vs. Scotty's dithering

[What'sinaname]

Roar, I’m tempted to let the Liberal and Labor diehards on here get into a ring and wrestle it out, Graeco-Roman style.

In the traditional style too....combatants must be nude.

[David]

That goes without saying!

[stui magpie]

That would add something to the Rikishi finishing move
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ2G-EH88CI

[watt price tully]

I'm curious which 3 ministers you think he's moved on.

He sacked Somyurek for being beter at branch stacking but being caught (to be fair he'd have sacked Somyurek for breathing too loud, he just needed an excuse) so that's 1.

Mikakos resigned after he threw her under a bus to protect his own arse, so who's the other 2 he's sacked?

The twice elected Premier of Victoria the Right Honourable Daniel Andrews has either sacked or moved on (forcing a resignation has the same effect) in 2020

1. Adem Somurek
2. Marlene Kairouz
3. Robin Scott &
4. Jenny Mikakos

In addition Eccles and Peake two top public servants have also gone

This thread of course is about twice elected Premier of Victoria the Right Honourable Daniel Andrews Strength of Leadership vs Scotty from Marketing and his dithering.

Now I'll ask you a simple question:

Which Ministers has "Scotty from Marketing" sacked or forced to move on since he's been PM? Just a list will suffice

[David]

Am I the only one who doesn’t necessarily see sacking / not sacking as much of a litmus test for leadership? Anyone can sacrifice an underling, but something I’d love to see from Andrews or Morrison is a capacity to take responsibility for their own failures, and I’m not sure I’ve seen much of that inclination from either of them so far.

[stui magpie]

^

Exactly. Sacking Ministers is hardly proof of great leadership, neither is having them resign because they no longer feel they can trust their leader.

Morrison has sacked no one, that proves exactly nothing about his leadership either way.

[watt price tully]

In the Westminster system of Government which we largely have is the concept of Ministerial responsibility. To that extent leaving minsters & others in their positions when significant wrongdoing has occurred is avoiding responsibility and shows weak leadership.

To force the resignations of or to sack ministers in the circumstances noted is not a sole determinant of strength of leadership and moral clarity but is a determinant of strength of leadership.

In contrasting the twice elected Premier of Victoria with Scotty from Marketing we can see that apart from that what has already been mentioned that is taking action vs inaction we also see on leadership that when a national disaster was happening like the bushfires Scotty’s decision-making led him to go on a family holiday to Hawaii. Compare that to the daily work of the grinding relentless press conferences as merely one part of Daniel Andrews work and thereby the taking of responsibility.

[Tannin]

Am I the only one who doesn’t necessarily see sacking / not sacking as much of a litmus test for leadership? Anyone can sacrifice an underling, but something I’d love to see from Andrews or Morrison is a capacity to take responsibility for their own failures, and I’m not sure I’ve seen much of that inclination from either of them so far.

You are (possibly intentionally?) missing the point.

WPT didn't spell it out - assuming, no doubt, that any reader of intelligence could join the dots. It is about probity.

Where there has been dishonesty or incompetence on the part of senior members of the government a PM or premier leads, what has been the response?

Andrews has cleaned out the incompetents (either sacked or pushed into resigning) and outright sacked the scumbag branch stacker.

Morrison, faced with a much worse collection of subordinates - worse on the incompetence front, and much, much worse on the dishonesty scale - has done absolutely nothing.

Morrison's aged care minister - responsible for many hundreds of deaths and so disconnected from reality that he didn't even know how many people had been killed on his watch - got nothing. Still in the job.

Morrison's IT minister - responsible for so many massive farkups at vast expense that no-one can even remember them all, but let's mention the four year Robodebt 1.4 billion debacle and the $40,000 a month "home Internet" bill (which was pure corruption) and the provenly useless Covidsafe farce - nothing. He still has the same job!

Then there is Dutton, who completely failed to stop the only boats that ever mattered. And Angus the Goose Taylor, provenly dishonest, provenly stupid, and provenly incompetent ..... and on and on the list goes.

The point here is that while both the Morrison and the Andrews governments have had farkups, Morrison has had many more of them in a shorter time, and has completely failed to address any of them. It's a big difference.

[David]

[eddiesmith]

Exactly, he sacked one minister who was in another faction and wanted him gone. Such brave leadership. He also only sacked a member in the upper house and threw another minister also in the upper house under the bus. Too scared to have a by election? It won’t cost him government it results could be very damaging.

Might explain why Lisa Neville and Martin Pakula still have their jobs. Or they are just allies and he has no intention actually sacking anyone for their gross incompetence during this pandemic and definitely doesn’t want to lose any allies in the party...

But it’s great leadership to blame mass failures by the government solely on one minister and taking no responsibility as the leader of that government, what a courageous man

[Tannin]

Too scared to have an election? Andrews is well in front in all the polls, and getting further in front as time goes by, both because of his success defeating Covid, and because the Victorian opposition are hopelessly divided, hopelessly out of touch, and getting more unpopular than ever (a 15% approval rating is amongst their recent benchmarks). The only state Liberal with a bit of credibility lost his seat at the last election and the nonentity holding the chair warm has been disgracefully white-anted by the unelectable loopy religious right faction - a faction doomed to never win government because they are far too extreme and loopy for most voters, but which has huge power in the Victorian party because they haven't had the courage and honesty needed to address their branch stacking disaster.

[stui magpie]

^

I tend to agree, the Victorian Liberal party is about as un-electable as the federal Labor party.

[Tannin]

Yep to both of those, Stui. The Feds were doing fine under Shorten until they got overconfident and stopped listening to people. Albo is a good bloke - hardworking, honest, and dedicated - and would be a decent leader, but he has zero chance of getting the job because of his charisma and public speaking skills. Or lack of either, more to the point. Meanwhile, Joel Fitzgibbon is hell-bent on wrecking the whole party by taking it back to the 1960s. He needs to be expelled.

Federal Labor needs a personable, intelligent leader who can speak well and take the public with him or her.

The Victorian Liberal Party is probably beyond hope. I mean, they just put the corrupt and incompetent, very unpopular Matthew Guy back into the leadership team FFS! You have very serious problems indeed when you are reduced to re-promoting a known failure and land developer shonk with more form than Phar Lap.

[pietillidie]

Albo is the bloke down at Salvation Army soup nights who accompanies the sing-alongs with a tambourine. He seems nice enough, but it's really hard to tell if he's a volunteer or one of the homeless.

[David]

Ouch!