loquasagacious
NCAP Mooderator
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,636
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
Ross GittinsRoss Gittins in smh said:
In the short time he’s been in office, Rudd has established a record of over-promising and under-delivering.
One of his greatest weaknesses is an inability to set priorities. He has a thousand things he wants to do and problems he wants to fix, and while he’s focused on fixing something, it’s his top priority.
He invariably claims the fix he cobbled together is the biggest and best in ages. But then he moves on and something else becomes top priority.
...
Another thing we’ve learnt about Rudd is that, though he talks incessantly about ‘‘tough decisions’’, he doesn’t actually make any. I guess it’s what the medicos would call a contraindication.
He talks about tough decisions because, unconsciously, he knows he’s not capable of making them.
When Rudd talks about ‘‘reform’’ he doesn’t mean knocking things into shape – getting rid of impediments and inefficiencies and treading on toes – he means setting up new organisations and giving them more money to spend.
This seems to be a common criticism of Rudd and his Government. The era of reform thus far can be summarised as:
Step 1: Announce bold promise to fix/reform/tackle [insert issue]
Step 2: Commission white paper/report/etc
Step 3: Consult widely with stakeholders
Step 4: Get distracted by something else in the news cycle
Step 5: Have some committee meetings
Step 6: More consultation (even if no one shows up to the information sessions)
Step 7: Backpedal from major reform and launch a rebranded but otherwise similar/identical service/policy or make minor tweaks only
Step 8: Congratulate everyone on a job well done
For examples refer to: Indigenous Agenda, Health, Tax/Welfare, Defence, Climate Change, Employment, Workplace Relations, etc
This is a process which puts off decision making as long as possible and then typically takes the easy decision when it (finally) comes to crunch time. In my opinion this is symptomatic of a Government which is fundamentally populist in nature and doesn't so much lead as follow. It watches opinion polls slavishly, is desperate to avoid treading on toes, it bends over backwards to compromise.
It is hard to summarise the situation better than Ross Gittins so I won't try. Rudd has a record of over-promising and under-delivering, this to me is a critical failure of his leadership personally and his Government generally. What do you think?
PS: I am attempting to be somewhat apolitical in that I don't think I need to agree with the policies of a leader to think that they did a good job of leading (and vice versa).
