With the US result some friends and I have been discussing who the worst PM was/is.
This thread is a product of our collective ages. Billy McMahon is pretty universally thought of as the worst PM ever, but we’re too young to remember him first-hand. A rich guy, I think he still holds the record for longest time in parliament. He was probably gay, but persecuted LGBT+ people.
Laurie Oakes: [he was] “devious, nasty, dishonest - he lied all the time and stole things”. He tells a story where McMahon tried to steal (clearly labelled) radio station gear after an interview, claiming to own it.
Robert Menzies: “the most characterless man who was ever prime minister of Australia – a dreadful little man”
John McEwan almost succeeded in keeping McMahon out of the PM spot, by absolutely refusing to work with him. McMahon couldn’t get party leadership until after McEwan retired. Gough Witlam reportedly called him a “notorious homosexual” and a “cunt” in a story told by McMahon - who complained that he “couldn’t be both”.
Challenge for anyone here: Google him and see if you can find anyone with something nice to say about him. The quotes you’ll find about him are honestly hysterical. 😃
Yeah recency bias is always a thing.
I’d say the entire Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison trifecta was terrible.
Abbott was definitely out of his depth as PM, he never stopped being the leader of the opposition and was always pugilistic, impulsive and didn’t think things through. He promised stable leadership but didn’t have his party under enough control to ensure it - probably because he sort of skated into the role because those who the party actually wanted didn’t make it. He got into power on the back of a campaign focused on debt and deficit, but had no policies to address it and I don’t think he ever intended to. He played his pet issues but was aggressively ineffective at everything else.
Turnbull was a devastating disappointment. Hated by his own party, only used as a more popular and sensible replacement for the ousted Abbott, but never having any party backing for his agenda. I’d say he flamed out, but he was never even on fire. Reneged on his promises and ambitions for fear of reprisals from his party - a spineless creature whose years in power were an absolute waste and a net loss for the country.
And then of course Morrison. A sociopath who bradbury’d into the role because enough people in the party room had the self-awareness to realise Dutton as party leader would be a disaster. Obviously Morrison schemed his way through that entire leadership crisis and lied whenever he opened his mouth, not least when professing his support for the embattled Turnbull. He was probably the most useless PM, out of the country in times of crisis and actively refusing to show leadership. Not to mention the shameful mishandling of the pandemic.
Collectively these three set back social, economic and political development in this country back by at least a decade. We’re all worse off thanks to the nine years of having these three clowns in power.
This was an excellent summary of all three.
Bob Menzies followed by John Howard.
set up the system where big companies didn’t have to pay for resources
For me it was Howard. He was really effective at furthering many neo liberal economic policies to fuck over anyone not born in to wealth. Sure some of the more recent PMS have been more embarrassing and stupid (scummo, abbot) but Howard was an absolute arsehole.
He brought in the capital gains tax discount for real estate which when combined with the existing negative gearing policy was/is a major contributor driving investors to real estate thus making property become unaffordable. Not to mention it’s just so unfair inequitable. Why the fuck should a person who buys existing houses pay less tax on money gained from that than someone who actually produces something of value does on their income?
He was the political equivalent of the FIFO miner spending all his cash on a Malloo, jet ski and glass BBQ party. Howard pissed the early - mid 2000s mining boom proceeds up the wall on middle class welfare. Instead we could have had a future fund like Norway. To be fair every politician we have had since has either been too corrupt or scared to attempt anything like that.
Howard also realised he could fuck over unions by bringing in masses of extra workers via record immigration in order to lower wages. (Added Bonus this increased demand on real estate too) He won’t be remembered for that on immigration, instead he will be remembered for his “boat people” rhetoric. It was like a magicians distraction, look at these bad immigrants, meanwhile opening the floodgate for “good” immigrants.
He sold telecom setting our internet tech back at least a decade.
He dragged us in to the middle east wars like a good little lapdog for George dubbya.
He started the erosion of Medicare to please his private health fund donors.
As a millennial, not born in to 1% wealth, Howard and the liberal parties message to me has always been “go fuck yourself”. I will never put liberal anywhere but the bottom of the ballot. Potato head might be fantasising about winning the votes of the working class by paying lip service to some issues we face and then campaigning against social issues we don’t care about. I don’t think that many of us are so foolish to think that the liberals will ever be anything but the party for the elite. Even then they are only the party for the honest elite, that wear their arseholery as a badge of honour. The other elites have the teals.
Howard was to Australia what Thatcher was to the UK and Reagan to the US. He ushered in neoliberalism and set the Liberal Party on an accelerated course towards right wing christian fundamentalism.
Reagan undeniably paved the way for Christian nationalism to take over the republican party.
I disagree on Thatcher and Howard accelerating fundamentalism, though neoliberalism is a fair call. You were damned if you did or didn’t and Hawke/Keating set a lot of reforms in motion prior to Howard. We weren’t equipped to cope with global changes without major economic reforms. The decision to have reforms advantage some while leaving others further behind was pure shitfuckery and Thatcher did everything as contentiously as possible.
Blair and Rudd strike me more as god botherers than Howard or Thatcher and the ALP have perpetuated and extended Howard’s drive towards private religious education and service delivery. The ALP right has an equivalent group in the Libs. Its all the same here. Organised religion has an each-way bet on Australian politics and in 2 horse race they can never lose. The conservatives have had some obvious problems with religious branch stackings and people leaving in frustration and its arguable the party has shifted to its detriment. Labor and some unions have a complex history with organised religion. In some ways it might be symbiotic and reflective of membership but it can appear like cronyism.
I can’t be sure if Howard’s government changed Australian society for the worse or if we were already changing and he was a reflection of that. Either way there is pre-Howard Australia and post-Howard Australia and they are basically different countries. A lot of people did very well under Howard, even a lot of battlers were better off for a time. He is always going to be a highly notable PM. There have been a few since who were just hopeless, ineffective, incompetent and its a struggle to pin that label on Howard regardless of politics.
The trouble with labeling Howard as best or worst is that there were very definitely winners and losers under Howard. I would say he was the worst in terms of impact on society but unfortunately I think he was more a symbol of the times. I think we probably got nasty, greedy and divided all by ourselves.
I guess that’s why I really dislike him. I don’t want Australia to be so unequal. A good leader would have attempted to bring people together. Instead he drove as many wedges through society as he could, both economically and socially.
No question people who already owned real estate did very well under Howard.
IMO Howard changed our society from being one of mate-ship and egalitarian values to the current “fuck you, got mine” society we have. Ironically whilst giving speeches to the media about “Australian values” including mate ship. Agree it’s hard to say if he caused it, or just reflected society at large.
There are lots of contradictory things about Howard. I get why people feel very strongly about him one way or another.
In the end a lot of people voted for him because he put money in their pockets whether it was tax refunds for families, economic reforms, wealth transfer or a booming resource economy. Honestly I wouldn’t mind a bit of that right now. And that is the shitty bit isn’t it. Like you know we wasted opportunities, increased social divides etc. Fundamentally we are just a meaner, nastier bunch. But I kind of get why Trump won so decisively despite being such a disgusting person. You have to grab those swing voters by the pussy and one of the best ways to do that is put money in their pockets and Howard understood that.
The problem with a “Future Fund” is that our politics isn’t geared up to handle it. Imagine a kitty of $50 Billion sitting just there and a new party gets in. They’ll spend it, of course. So even if you get a fiscally responsible PM who establishes such a fund, the other party would get in three years later, spend that money immediately on [PROJECT] and then claim all the credit for it.
I think Norway’s has legislation around the percent that can be used now vs what has to be reserved for future generations. Although I agree with the sentiment that the calibre of politicians we elect couldn’t be trusted to think beyond one election cycle.
The thing about legislation is: The new government can make/change/remove it. Unless you enshrine it in the Constitution - and we have a pretty poor track record of changing that.
I would think that if something were established with legislation capping how much can be spent, it would (a) be very difficult to get past the Senate crossbench and (b) be very expensive in terms of political capital, if you didn’t take it to an election as a core issue.
I agree his economic policies were garbage, but Howard deserves some pretty serious street cred for gun law reform in Australia after the Port Arthur massacre. It was a pivotal moment for the nation, and looking at the USA, I’m very grateful for his influence.
I agree he absolutely did do the right thing on gun control.
It’s definitely a competition between Abbott and Morrison.
You could make an argument for Fraser, but that would be purely on the fact that he got into power initially in a completely undemocratic foreign-backed coup. His actual governing was relatively reasonable.
Abbott was an idiot out of his depth. Morrison was a fucking sociopath
Don’t make the mistake of falling for Abbott’s image. He was a very clever and calculating man who knew exactly what he was doing.
He was a drunk and a twat who could only fail upwards
Wasn’t Abbott quite smart? He was just an evil wanker
He was educated. Didn’t make him smart.
You can be quite smart and still an idiot
I hate that I only learned about this after I got out of school. Love to tell us about all the corrupt govs in the world, hate to tell us that time and elected official got replaced because of a bunch of shitfuckery and a bunch of CIA dollars.
Mr Fraser privatised Medibank (the original Medicare). Universal healthcare was the dream-child of the preceding government. The Liberal Party hated it and tried to block it. One of the first things they did was kill it. I fully recognise that my views of Mr Fraser were the product of my childhood - where my political views mostly boiled down to “Liberals are evil and Labor are the good guys” thanks to my parental influences.
It turns out that universal healthcare is pretty popular, though. It was the main issue that kept the Libs in the wilderness for over a decade. They had to promise not to kill Medicare to ever get another shot at government.
Oh yeah Fraser was definitely not good for the country. But compared to every Liberal who came after him?
Fraser was uncompromising on things like refugees so he gets some credit for that as Howard/Fisher did for gun control. I don’t think Howard was proud of the children overboard stuff and not sure Fraser would have done that but he governed in different times. I think there is at least one PM since who had no moral compass at all, like clinically lacking, there was just the mask but I am struggling to remember anything he did.
I had several disagreements with Mr Howard, but I believe that despite those differences, he really was trying to do the right thing for the country.
I liked Mr Turnbull. In an alternate universe where he was permitted to actually lead the nation and wasn’t held down by his party, I think he could have been one of the great PMs.
I didn’t have a lot of time for either Mr Abbott nor Mr Morrison. Both were bad for the country. I honestly can’t recall a redeeming thing to say about either of them.
I think I could have agreed with you on Howard except for two things. Children overboard was not just had in itself, but it basically set Australia on its now 20 year history of politicisation of refugees’ lives. It was bad enough in its own right, but looking at the long term ramifications of his actions, I rate him as one of the worst we’ve ever had, even if he’s not quite in contention for the #1 spot.
Turnbull I agree with you. In an alternate universe he could have been one of the best LNP leaders we’ve ever had. But the fact is that he had no spine and was more than willing to throw the country and his own personal beliefs aside for the sake of retaining power, and I cannot forgive him for that.
Immigration and asylum seekers have been politicized my whole life. When I was little, it was “wogs” - though which nationality that referred to was confusing. It was originally Italians and Greeks after World war 2, but later evolved to Lebanese. Then it was the Vietnamese/Asians. Then it was Middle Eastern / Arab nations. I think we’re still hearing about Sudanese gangs yeah?
It’s an unending cycle that has showed no signs of going away. Ned Kelly resorted to crime because of being discriminated against for being Irish. Yes, Mr. Howard absolutely tapped into that cycle with the Tampa incident, but he didn’t start the fire. It was always burning like the world’s been turning.
Bloody Jeff.
Sold all our Publicly owned infrastructure to private companies.
Now we have to deal with electricity resellers screwing us over and the government needing to fork out Corporate Welfare in the form of “Energy Relief” to line their mates pockets.
The SA Libs sold off the rights to charge rent on our electricity grid for the next 200 years to a foreign owned company. Yeah, its not the wind farms and solar panels that are the problem. I want to hate the government that did it but the whole state was plunged into a lost decade after a state government backed bank collapsed and the taxpayer was left to cover their debts. So I should blame the Labor party in government at the time of the collapse? They were cleared by the subsequent investigation. The bank management were the problem.
Most of the blame falls to an establishment private school alumni with a double barrel surname who managed the bank like a personal plaything buying bad assets. They set a whole state’s economic and population growth back even further compared with the rest of the country for years and doomed us to paying the highest worlds highest electricity prices for a couple of centuries. Nice. I suspect this is kind of the norm. People gain positions of great trust and responsibility as much by who they know as what they know and then proceed to fuck it up while receiving praise and pocketing bonuses then fuck off with no real consequences and leave the rest of us to clean up.
The worst SA premier imaginable is incomparable to the damage caused to this state by this one establishment idiot.
WA still owns its power grid. My power bills in WA are far cheaper than they were in Victoria. These two facts are probably related.
Also, the WA government reserves a stash of gas for local reservation before companies are allowed to sell the rest “at market rate”. That gas belongs to everyone, not just the company that extracts it. This policy also helps to keep energy prices in WA reasonable.
My theory is Uncle Sam’s fingerprints are on high east coast gas prices. Giving it away for nothing has to put pressure on Russia’s LNG export income. The donkeys that head Origin, etc. are on board because they can gouge the home market as compensation, knowing (as part of the deal) that Canberra won’t contemplate a reservation policy.
That’s adamn sight better than here in Vic. Shit is expensive and inefficient.
@wildwhitehorses I doubt any state has ever had a leader worse than Joh Bjelke-Petersen.
Tell us more!
“don’t You worry about that…”
For me it was Scomo by a country mile. Abbott had some peculiar views, but he didn’t seem as totally incompetent.
I can only go back as far as Howard, so my personal take is Albo; easily. There is lying on policy which is the norm but lying on values makes him the worst. He championed himself being the kid raised by single mum in a housing commision who was going to be strong on the strong. It was all BS.
Albo is less honest than we’d all like, but scomo hasn’t told a truth in his lifetime.
Edmund Barton. What an arse
