At 4pm on Monday, Malcolm Turnbull announced he would ask Tony Abbott for a leadership ballot. Just over six hours later he had been chosen by Liberal politicians as the new leader of the Liberal party. Today, he was sworn in as Australia’s 29th prime minister.
The impact of this fast-paced ousting remains to be seen. When we asked Guardian Australia readers what they thought the impact would be on Australian politics, responses varied.
“Well if he runs the country like he ran the NBN we are screwed,” wrote robinvir.
“Turnbull offers optimism and a change of tone in Australian politics/society,” said bronski66, who commented on his progressive social policy. “I feel like I’ve shucked off an ugly, awkward weight...and I am, by no means, a conservative.”
“As an optimist, I can’t see that things could be any worse under Turnbull and I hope they improve,” commented katega. “As a realist, I’ll sit back and wait for the results.
“Either way, I think we’ll all miss the “suppository of wisdom” ... mindless, brain fart gaffes. Turnbull is, if nothing else, eloquent and capable of nuance – two skills totally devoid in Captain Clownshoes.”
“I won’t miss being embarrassed every time the prime minister takes the international stage,” replied TonyDun.
Aside from the comments of those who subscribed to the “anyone but Abbott” school – and there were many – there was a general sense that changes in leadership of the Liberal party were little more than window dressing. Asked how Turnbull’s ousting of Tony Abbott would change politics, centreline replied, “Very little other, than expanded vocabulary. The king is dead. Long live the King.”
Notldefix was only a little more optimistic: “I’m hoping for a change from three-word slogans to maybe a complete sentence.”
“I agree that little will change with policy, unfortunately,” wrote grant0321. “I think Malcolm Turnbull will do better at selling LNP policy but it will still be the same policies; selling out Australia and benefiting only multinational corporations and the already very wealthy.”
The Liberal party’s close ties with business was also noted by deucer: “As I said same shit different shovel.” Others echoed the sentiment that the Liberal party would never represent the interests of workers and families, especially those on low incomes.
Turnbull’s promise of a new style of leadership – even the idea that any politician should be taken at their word – was met with some scepticism. Eleutheros seemed to echo the general consensus when he described Turnbull as “a more effective communicator and much smarter than Abbott”, but on whether this would be a good or a bad thing, there was more disagreement. Eleutheros suggested both Turnbull and Abbott had the same ambition and resolve to “do anything, good or bad, to stay on the job …
“It is the LNP’s ideology that is at odds with the majority of Australians, not its leaders. I doubt that Turnbull will be willing or able to change this ideology and for that he will also fail.”
Ktholos’ comment that Turnbull would only be an improvement on Abbott if he oversaw the removal of children from Nauru detention centre was applauded by other readers.
“He’ll change the way politics is conducted,” said Felvy13 of Turnbull. “He’ll be more respectful and focus on communicating his views properly.
“That doesn’t mean his views are any good though. But at the end of the day, if he takes the political discourse up a notch and it’s much more respectful, I’m happy.”
Phil Atkinson, among others, made the point that much would depend on how Turnbull organised his cabinet.
The change at the helm from Abbott to Shorten might be inconsequential for the Liberal party, but it could be meaningful for Labor and the smaller parties. “Turnbull will be formidable opponent,” commented cnog01. “The ALP & Shorten know this & have feared this outcome for sometime – they already have the anti Turnbull attack ads ready to roll so you know they’re scared.”
Several readers predicted that one outcome would be increased scrutiny of Bill Shorten in particular, who might pale in comparison to any leader more competent or better-liked than Tony Abbott – especially since Turnbull was “not regarded as a true blue” within the Liberal party, commented chinaplatemate. Shorten had been “blessed by comparison with the worst Prime Minister in living memory,” said TheotherClaw: “in the stark light Shorten will be found wanting in terms of communication and self confidence.”
Others also commented on Shorten’s relative lack of experience and enthusiasm: “I have not seen anything inspirational from him, nothing to say true change will happen under his leadership,” said Saltyandthepretz.
At least one reader disagreed with this assessment. “There is nothing wrong with Shorten,” argued deucer. “It is a beat up by the press because they know he can perform.”
“Have you seen him speak to camera?” retorted Ben Cantwell.
Regardless of what Turnbull’s time as prime minister might mean for Labor, readers seemed optimistic that he would be better than Tony Abbott – not that, for many of them, that was saying much.
“I am hoping it will raise the tone of politics in Australia. Abbott was a terrible leader and treated the Australian public as if we were idiots. Labor will actually have to do something instead of just watching Abbott run their election campaign,” wrote Vanessa Brown on Facebook. “I will still never vote for the Libs, they are still the same party with the same policies, same ideals and same backers.
“As far as being a better PM, a turnip would have done a better job than Tony, and I would hope that this finally debunks the myth that a Conservative government is better at managing the economy, balance a budget and is good for ALL business sectors,” commented Orwell2015.
“But the show must go on, so we’ll see what Malcolm 0.2 brings.”
Read – and contribute to – the full comment thread.
