In the culmination of a fast-moving crisis that appeared on the radar less than 48 hours ago, Ted Baillieu has stepped down as Victorian Premier. More on that to follow, but for the time being here’s a thread to discuss it.
UPDATE (30 SECONDS LATER): Denis Napthine?!
UPDATE 2: Lacking any substantial understanding of my own concerning Victorian Liberal factional politics, I await further explanation as to why Denis Napthine in particular was left holding the parcel when the music stopped. As Lefty E relates in comments, Barrie Cassidy has apparently told Lateline that Baillieu threatened he “wouldn’t go quietly” if it was anyone but Napthine. Leadership talk had been primarily focused on Planning Minister Matthew Guy, but this was presumably predicated on some scheme to move him to the lower house, which events have moved far too quickly to accommodate (on which note, PB’s resident legal authority Graeme Orr argues in comments that while it’s purely a convention that leaders come from the lower house, it’s sufficiently entrenched a convention that a Governor faced with swearing in a leader from the upper house would likely be advised not to proceed).
Also yet to be explained are the substantial reasons why Baillieu felt resignation the best course of action available to him, and what exactly Geoff Shaw had to with it. For the time being, we are left to suspect that it may have involved Shaw flexing the muscle he has fortuitously acquired as a result of the delicate parliamentary balance. John Ferguson of The Australian offers the following exhaustive list of Shaw’s accomplishments in public life:
Police late last year launched a criminal investigation into Mr Shaw after he was allegedly found to have rorted his taxpayer entitlements over the use of his parliamentary car. In other controversies, Mr Shaw made lewd gestures at the opposition during a question time; likened legalising homosexuality to legalising child molestation, speed driving and murder; was involved in a roadside punch-up with a young motorist in 2011; was fined and put on a good behaviour bond after being charged over a 1992 assault at a Frankston nightclub; and allegedly called Labor MP James Merlino a “midget” in question time.
Having been supported through all this by the leadership of the government, Shaw announced today he could “no longer support the leadership of the government”, taking it upon himself to diagnose a “general loss of confidence Victorians are feeling”.
The situation raises thorny questions about the circumstances in which one should advocate an early election. Although I criticised Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott for overlooking the wishes of their constituents when they cut their deal with the Prime Minister, I have been of the view that their transparent arrangement provided a workable basis for the government to go about its business and answer to its constituents in due course. It seems quite a different matter for a government to be at the fickle mercy of a single opportunist with all manner of question marks surrounding his probity.
That’s not to say an election is realistically in prospect, at least for now. Presumably Shaw will need to stand by the government if he wants to see out his term, and a government that badly needs to right its ship will be entirely content to tolerate the arrangement.
Napthine is a catholic( as is his aunt…the num)
I knew some relatives of his once and they all were catholic
John Ferguson in The Oz:
[Those close to Mr Shaw also believe that he will return to the party, but on the condition of tightening Victoria’s abortion laws. This was something Mr Baillieu would not tolerate, they said.]
I would LOVE to see them try.
William,
That is possibly the most disturbing part of this.
William Bugler Geoff Shaw is your classic tea party type …. From Wikipedia
Shaw is an active member of the Pentecostal church Peninsula City. In his maiden speech to the Victorian parliament, he acknowledged “the original owner of the land on which we stand—God, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of the Bible.”[11] This phrasing is similar to that typically used in the practice of recognizing traditional Australian Aboriginal owners of land during events.[12]
If the price of his support is tougher abortion laws I cant see the Gov lasting long. Just cant see sections of the Libs agreeing with such nonsence. And I suspect it presages a landslide ALP win at the next election, whenever that may be
I think Vic teachers will be delighted by this turn of events. With a charisma rating of zero, Napthine can have nothing going for him other than to get things done. The last thing he would want is for the dispute with teachers to continue to drag on. The teachers know this. They also have the coalition’s promise before the last election to make them the best-paid teachers in the country. Napthine will be desperate to settle, so the teachers hold all the aces.
Testing is the Blog open for business?
mari
This is the Baillieu thread. The essential thread is the main one. If you are interested. We also have this blog
http://pbxmastragics.com/2013/03/03/among-the-true-believers/comment-page-12/#comment-24951
Can Victoria survive without the Toorak toff?
If Geoff Shaw returns to the party fold, then we’ll know that the Fibs are completely morally and ethically bankrupt.
I don’t think that the people of Victoria will ever reward the creature that knifed, what most considered, as a decent bloke, regardless of his politics
[If Geoff Shaw returns to the party fold, then we’ll know that the Fibs are completely morally and ethically bankrupt.]
In fairness anyone who hadn’t worked it out before Abbott was made federal leader didn’t take long after that
OTOH Napthine could claim that he didn’t make the promise so he’s not bound by it.
But you’re right, the dynamics would seem to suggest ‘settle’.
Martin B, he could try to disown it, but that would go down very, very badly. He would not want to start his premiership with a giant cop-out. Also, all coalition MPs, not just Baillieu, were voted in on the basis of their policies at the last election, so it would be a pretty poor excuse apart from anything else.
[ I don’t think that the people of Victoria will ever reward the creature that knifed, what most considered, as a decent bloke, regardless of his politics]
I had a lot of time for Ted. He was a moderate – a dying breed in a party that is lurching to the right. And I say that as a card-carrying ALP member.
The ALP doesn’t have a monopoly on infighting, horse-trading, and factional wars. Now that Coalition/LNP governments are everywhere, we’ll see a lot more knifings in the future.
William Bowe
[So can anyone tell me why Napthine in particular?]
Answer: Naphthalene is an organic compound with formula C10H8. It is the simplest polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, and is a white crystalline solid with a characteristic odor that is detectable at concentrations as low as 0.08 ppm by mass.[1] As an aromatic hydrocarbon, naphthalene’s structure consists of a fused pair of benzene rings. It is best known as the main ingredient of traditional mothballs.
No, I think you’re right. I’m kind of speculating (for some reason) that that might be a line used as an ambit claim in negotiations before compromising very quickly…
A brief comment on this extraordinary mess. The Victorian situation is actually worse than Federal Labor’s with Thompson. Vic Libs have a one seat majority, not two, and Shaw’s investigation relates to things he did while in government, with government property, not prior to election, with union property.
I’m not defending either situation, but it would be breathtaking hypocrisy for a single Victorian Liberal to now say anything about the Gillard government’s hold on power. Likewise if Tony Abbott says anything, the obvious follow up question should be what he thinks of Vic Libs accepting Shaw’s vote.
Socrates, it would be worth asking but I’m sure Tony would wriggle out of it, mostly on the basis of the amount of money involved, where it came from (those poorly paid HSU members), that there have been findings against him made by FWA, and he would be sure to include gratuitous references to brothels etc. Thomson is so soiled in the public eye that for perceptions of bad behaviour Thomson v. Shaw is a no-contest. Abbott would easily bat the question away and for good measure give Gillard another couple of sharp jabs for defending Thomson.
I think I just heard “like a cockroach” in the Vic QT. I don’t think the Reps would accept that.
Agree, this doesnt play at all well for the LNP.
Check Phoney’s hapless attempt to distinguish the two situations. Risible!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-07/abbott-says-world-of-difference-between-rudd-and-baillieu/4558286
I wonder if Andrew Elder of Politically Homeless is going to do a thing on the “factions” in the Victorian Liberal Party, in light of what has happened.
My knowledge of internal Liberal politicking is very poor, but the impression I get is that this was two friends and allies getting their other friends and allies to approve a switcharoo to keep a more serious and destabilising challenge at bay.
More news from Marvellous Melb….
__________________
An hour ago a Lib Backbencher Tilley(who was dumped earlier in the scandal over the police..from his job as a Parlimentary Sec…has been calling for Shaw the MLA for Frankston to be re-admitted to the Liberal Party(despite the police investigation into his misuse of his car et al (theft of petrol ?)
Tilly is an-ex-cop too
Shaw is said to want a change in the abortion laws and may be pressuring Napthine…and many Libs see this is dynamite
…
Shaw is a tea- party type and a pentecostal christian
..a mate for Bernardi ??
An argument about abortion in Melbourne…a city with a long raidical/small “l” Liberal tradition would be fatal for the Libs
What interesting times in Mervellous Melb !
“An orderly transition” says Abbott.
Oh certainly! And so well-accounted for by the protagonists. As I understand it, its about the thing, you know…with the guy, in the place. And the government of Victoria.
And lets not forget the no mystery whatsoever about why he would be replaced by a rising star like Napthine.
Graeme, your ‘trust’ that the Governor would receive advice not to appoint a member of the upper house as Premier is misplaced. (Incidentally I wonder who it is that you are imagining would give the Governor such advice.)
The parliamentary Liberal Party (or, for that matter, the parliamentary Labor Party) would not choose a member of the upper house as leader except in the special case where there was an expectation of that member promptly transferring to a lower house seat.
But if a government party with a majority in the lower house did choose a member of the upper house as leader, it is a safe bet that no Governor would refuse to appoint that person as Premier. The most that might happen is that the Governor might ask about a transfer to the lower house.
Barrie Unsworth, having been elected leader by the parliamentary Labor Party, was appointed Premier (by the Governor) in July 1986 while still a member of the upper house. He remained Premier when he resigned from the upper house to contest the August 1986 by-election for a casual vacancy in the lower house, which he won (narrowly). Obviously nobody was silly enough to advise the Governor not to appoint a member of the upper house as Premier or, if some fool did, the Governor wisely and properly disregarded that advice.
There’s also the example of John Gorton, being a member of the Senate, appointed Prime Minister whilst still a senator.
Prior to the 1900s some UK Prime Ministers were also from the House of Lords, prior to the development of the convention that they be form the Commons.
Interesting interview with Jams Campbell (who is the journo that broke the Weston tapes story) Killer quote:
“This is a Government that has been essentially destroyed by a team of first term backbenchers who have very limited political experience.
Imagine Casey Council comes to Spring Street, this is what a lot of these people are. They’ve brought down a premier I don’t believe with any sort of serious plan as to what, who they were, what they were going to do next”.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2013/s3710108.htm
The Internet Surname Database says that ‘Napthine’ comes from an Old English place name, Knapton. Other surname spellings include ‘Nappin’, ‘Naptine’, ‘Naptin’, and ‘Napton’. There are two Knaptons, one in Norfolk and one in East Yorkshire. The place name comes from ‘Cnapa’ and ‘tun’, ‘Cnapa’ being an Old English personal name which originally meant ‘boy’ and ‘tun’ meaning a settlement or enclosure.
Researching this is the first time I have come across the Internet Surname Database. I have no idea how reliable it is. It offers three different origins for ‘Bowe’, but my own surname, it says, has not yet been researched (hardly surprising, given its rarity).
According to the Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vaiben Louis Solomon was the only Jew to have been a colonial or State Premier. He was Premier of South Australia from 1 December 1899 to 8 December 1899.
http://www.frankstonweekly.com.au/story/1348485/geoff-shaw-talks-to-the-weekly-my-options-are-open/?cs=1197
[Geoff Shaw talks to the Weekly: ‘My options are open’
By ALECIA PINNER March 7, 2013, 3:29 p.m.
FRANKSTON MP Geoff Shaw has refused to rule out a return to the party.
Mr Shaw yesterday informed his party he would become an independent. The bombshell contributed to the resignation of Premier Ted Baillieu last night.
Mr Shaw told the Weekly his actions reflected the Victorian people’s loss of confidence in the leadership of the party.
‘‘I put my resignation in separate to him (Mr Baillieu), we didn’t speak at all yesterday. He’s been terrific for the Liberal Party but have a look at the polling — have a look at what the people of Frankston were saying. If we want to win we need a change in leadership,’’ Mr Shaw said.]
Oh its the voters fault, is it Piers?
@PiersComments: Don’t blame it on Ted Baillieu, blame it on the constant stupidity of the average Victorian Voters.
230
Does he think that Brumby should have won the election?
@Leroy/229
Isn’t that what Media been trying to blame Gillard?
WTF is the world coming to!
Yes, although because of S64, there was a clear constitutional timeframe for him to comply with the conventional requirement that he sit in the lower house.
Which makes me think otherwise to the advice above:
I would, as an itinerant non-authority, argue that, although not binding, the federal constitution should be guiding and that where state constitutions are silent on the matter they should be read as no more restrictive than the federal one. Thus a governor should swear in a Premier in the upper house who undertakes to find a seat in the lower house, but should be able to withdraw that commission if within three months that does not take place.
233
Gorton could have remained in the Senate and still been PM as there is no legal restriction on that. It was however relatively easy for him to move because Hold had died, his seat was automatically vacant. Ted is staying in Parliament and so not creating a vacancy.
And he still became Premier? Clearly this was pre-Facebook.
As is the subject of this conversation, the existence of unwritten conventions can still guide the actual practice of politics.
Of course if Kerr had been GG at the time, sure. 🙂
I can’t believe that Christine Fyffe or Brad Battin couldn’t have been arm-twisted if it truly was the will of the party to elevate Guy. (And that this didn’t happen makes me discount the ‘this was all done for Tonez commentary that seems to have spread through PB.) The problem is that with parliamentary numbers, they would have to do the whole thing through a recess. Very messy.
I read that comment in the sense of ‘it would be advisable that they not do this’ rather than that there would be formal advice from a specific person.
It’s all beautifully moot, but:
1. Premier tenders resignation – he’s in no position to advise Governor – so Governor is obliged to consult the precedents built up in his office and further legal advice.
2. If Guy had had a clear or even credible pathway to lower house, of course a Governor should install him. But on that proviso. Gorton just reinforces the precedent. Section 64 of the Cth constitution isn’t strictly relevant or needed. Consider Newman – commissioned as Premier before sworn as MLA. What mattered was that he had a pathway to lower house.
Car’n the Rabbitohs!
(J-D@ 4:35pm. Precisely – my comment was made knowing that Guy had no-one resigning to offer him a safe or even winnable seat. I was merely responding to speculation that nonetheless an MLC could still be an ongoing chief minister. Though elected an MLC can’t have his confidence tested on the floor of the lower house.
Conversely, I’ve argued elsewhere there’s no reason, other than sanity, why Barnaby can’t lead the Nats and be DPM and hence acting PM whilst PM Abbott is o/s, at Lords etc. DPM isn’t a traditional office; and in terms of day to day accountability is much less important than Treasurer, where Australia hasn’t built up a must-sit-in-lower-house precedent).
Rossmore, and what would be the average stupidity on PB? modlib or rummel?
Outsleft, PB is a broad, generally tolerant church. Mod Lib and Rummel are pretty good posters, generally. I’m occasionally stupid myself.
Reposting here, if that’s okay.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/super-sweetener-for-shaw-20130307-2fomj.html
[Frankston MP Geoff Shaw is likely to be offered a sweeping overhaul boosting the parliamentary superannuation scheme for recently elected MPs as part of a package of sweeteners to induce him back to the parliamentary Liberal Party.
Securing Mr Shaw’s vote for the government is being viewed by nervous Coalition MPs as Denis Napthine’s most pressing task as Victoria’s new premier.]
243
Latham got Ted!
The Age reckons Napthine has shot down the ridiculous Alabama-style abortion politicking… so instead will bribe Shaw back into the Liberal Party as a concession. Probably successfully.
God help Napthine if the cops charge Shaw AFTER being accepted back into the fold. Would be a pleasure to watch the reaction of course.
What a thoroughly disgusting human being Shaw is, by the way. He’s an embarrassment even to FRANKSTON. He ought to take his Jesus Camp circus to Western Sydney where it belongs.
Post 245…Absolute…
Yes
re Shaw what a creep
________
Tonight he was struting around on the media like the victor…which perhaps he is !
He is close it’s said to Bernie Finn a fanatical Right-to-Lifer in the Upper House and several others of the “Tea Party”..type…including the Dragon Mother Inge Pulich whose recent disaster on Casey Counci…when she tried to get the Libs to make her son Mayor… was reported in the Age et al ….and a sign of growing strife
…and with several others of the far Right they now form a kind of fndamentalist faction
all very dangerous for Napthine…with the potential for instant conflagation as they throw up more radical-right issues
I, for one, give 100% support to Shaw’s attempt to tighten abortion laws. Only because Tony Abbott would be t-o-a-s-t if the Vic Libs did this. I hope Shaw proposes and wins similarly nutty concessions from the VicLibs over the next few months. I hope he pushes for compulsory prayer in schools, the end of no-fault divorce, end of state funding for birth control programs and IVF, and other stuff Abbott and his DLP loons have given the nod to in the past.
Is it just me, or is it getting a bit Arkansas around here (Australia) lately. The Howard-Murdoch era seems to have spawned a bevy of dumb, far right, middled age angry white men red-necks in the fiberals. Labor needs to draw them out and get their views be expressed and derided (rather than trying to win their votes, lambaste them and try to win any remaining moderate libs), and link abbott to these views.
247
Medicare and Divorce are Commonwealth matters.
I know Tom @248, but I’d love to see Shaw push for this sort of stuff (& there is state money into hospitals he could try to get away from IVF and abortion services), so that labor and the greens can remind the public that abbott has supported such changes in the past. Labor needs to stop pandering the alan jones listeners and go after moderates by painting abbott’s liberals as extremist religious tools. shouldn’t to too hard..
JD @ 228
At this rate, Mr Solomon’s one week may outdo Mr Napthine.