We’ve been assured that Kevin is reformed, but the signs are there that nothing much has changed. Take the election date for example.
Who remembers 2007 when John Howard seemed reluctant to go to an election? The airwaves were full of Labor spokespeople, including Kevin Rudd, and fellow travellers, branding him a coward and anti-democratic for allegedly wanting to defer the election.
We last went to the polls on August 21, 2010. So Julia Gillard’s date of September 14 was actually an attempt to gain her another month in power.
The 2007 election was on 24th November, while the 2004 election was on October 9, so we can cede her that.
But a date in October, as Kevin Rudd appears to be proposing suggests complete contempt of the electoral purpose.
We have maximum three year terms of government, and without a change to the constitution, that is what they should be. The constitution does allow for some extension over that, and there are complications around the return of writs, but throughout Australian history barely anyone has been prepared to push it past three years and one month, with the Chifley government pushing it the furthest waiting for three years, two months and thirteen days before going to the polls in 1949 and being defeated by Sir Robert Menzies.
The polls may show that Kevin Rudd is preferred as Prime Minister to Tony Abbott, but Rudd’s behaviour shows he doesn’t believe them and so he wants to govern for as long as he can, with, or without the legitimate consent of the people.
He can’t be allowed to get away with this any more than John Howard should have. Where is the chorus calling for an election on the due date?