Abbott to face leadership spill motion after move by WA MP

[slothpomba]

Tony Abbott: Western Australian Liberal MP Luke Simpkins confirms he will seek leadership spill against PM
By political editor Chris Uhlmann and Eliza Borrello

Prime Minister Tony Abbott will face a spill motion against his leadership early next week after West Australian Liberal MP Luke Simpkins emailed party room colleagues to announce he would push for the PM's leadership to be put to a vote.

The spill motion will be seconded by MP Don Randall, with a third WA Liberal, Dennis Jensen, saying he will support it.

The ABC has been told the MPs called the Prime Minister shortly before sending the email.

In Mr Simpkins' email he writes that: "In the last two weeks I have been inundated with emails and walk-ins to my Electorate Office all questioning the direction the Government is being led in.

"The knighthood issue was for many the final proof of a disconnection with the people.

Full Story

[Professor Polonsky]

The strategy will be interesting.

Oppose the spill motion, and there is no vacancy and thus no candidacies; but on the other hand, the pro-spill side will have a good idea of numbers.

Support the spill, they have no idea of numbers; but if an attractive candidate nominates, who knows what might happen.

[slothpomba]

Few points of interest:

• It's almost certain that this will happen Tuesday. Phones will be ringing off the hook over the weekend.
• There are several choke-points here. First the spill motion must be voted on to decide whether it will proceed. Following this, the leader must be also voted on.
• I believe Abbott mentioned it would be a secret ballot. Curiously, there is no strict requirement for this. It could be done by a show of hands if they so decide.
• Tony Abbott was elected to the leadership as the result of a spill motion. He defeated Malcom Turnbull by a single vote. A vote most people expected Joe Hockey to win.
• It seems this time Turnbull will be the sole alternative.

[Aaron]

Some MP's such as Andrew Nikolic (Tasmanian Liberal MP) are strongly against this spill motion because they don't want to 'repeat the labor years'. To be honest, this dysfunction and backbench chaos is already happening and the longer they wait this out, the worse it'll get.

Tony Abbott says it isn't a popularity contest... well technically it is because in the end you vote for the government you like more. Only a small majority of voters vote on the actual policy that is presented during a campaign.

I think Abbott alone isn't to blame, but as the leader he needs to take the responsibility.

Also he's extremely repetitive, shifting blame to Labor's "debt and deficit disaster" nearly every single time. How about take some accountability and explain to the people PROPERLY *WHY* you're making cuts and why you're making x policy decisions.

If the spill is supported by the party room, I really do hope Julie Bishop puts her hand up even though it's unlikely. She's been an extremely effective Foreign Minister, purely because of several world events that have happened over the past year that she has dealt with in a professional and capable way.

I don't think Malcolm Turnbull should be leader again, given he was booted out in 2009.

[slothpomba]

Here is the email that was circulated:





Luke Simpkins is a bit of a black sheep. Notorious of late for confusing a nightclub promotion sticker on a highway bridge for an Islamic State flag and ordering that it be painted over.


Given her interviews in the media, it seems that Julie Bishop won't challenge for the leadership. She's quite happy to remain deputy PM and foreign minister. It is quite obvious that her support for any candidate will be conditional on her keeping her current position.

[slothpomba]

Some MP's such as Andrew Nikolic (Tasmanian Liberal MP) are strongly against this spill motion because they don't want to 'repeat the labor years'. To be honest, this dysfunction and backbench chaos is already happening and the longer they wait this out, the worse it'll get.

In my opinion, Tony Abbot the opposition leader put the neck around the noose of Tony Abbot the prime minister. His extreme negativity around Labor's spill and his campaigning against that will cost the party dearly no matter which way this goes. Likewise, his insistence on being a government of "no surprises" and being so hard on "broken promises" (several of which are already broken) will harm him as well.

Tony Abbott says it isn't a popularity contest... well technically it is because in the end you vote for the government you like more. Only a small majority of voters vote on the actual policy that is presented during a campaign.

Definitely, thats one issue that caused so much strife when Rudd was replaced. People had a real sense that they not only voted for their local member or Labor Party but that they voted for Rudd.

It definitely is a popularity contest. He's only saying that because his approval ratings are absolutely in the toilet. I think the public are already mentally prepared and indeed, want, Abbott to be replaced. There is already some sense that he isn't exactly the Prime Minister. This is totally unlike the Rudd scenario which was more sudden.

Tony Abbott
Approve: 37%
Disapprove: 52%
Net Approval Rating: -15%

Bill Shorten
Approve: 37%
Disapprove: 40%
Net Approval Rating: -3%

Preferred Prime Minister
Abbott: 27%
Shorten: 44%
Difference: 17%

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Australian_federal_election#Poll_results

I think Abbott alone isn't to blame, but as the leader he needs to take the responsibility.

They were actually doing very well in the polls for the first few months then it took a dive off a cliff. He actually achieved what he promised to some degree. He "stopped the boats". He dispatched the mining and carbon tax. Heady days for the liberal party.

I think the problems and the drop in polling occurred around their budget. They ran out of steam since they delivered on many of their major promises and hot button issues. Not just that but they sprung a whole bunch of surprises on the public that the public didnt understand and felt weren't justified to them. Of course i'm talking about things like the GP copay and the university changes. It's been spiraling out of control ever since.

Abbott wasn't elected so much because people liked him. He was elected because he was the mechanism by which they could get rid of the dysfunctional Labor party. Now that the afterglow has settled, they are seeing him for what he really is and they don't find him all that likeable.

Contrary to what you say though, i think Abbott is in large part to blame. A lot of his tactics in opposition have slit his and his parties throat in the present. Many of these unpopular policies are supported by him and the result of his input. His "captains calls" like creating Sir Prince Phillip (Knightgate) and other issues have also been instrumental in his unpopularity inside the party.

The fact that he's about half way through his term and can no longer just blame labor for everything has left people looking for positive policies that achieve something rather than cuts or blaming labor. On this front, the public has clearly found them manifestly left wanting.

[slothpomba]

Tony Abbotts 3:30 PM Press Conference

He's looking absolutely gutted.

I also predict this photo will feature heavily in the next few days...

[Professor Polonsky]

Confirmed that Abbott's camp will oppose spill motion - wrong decision, imo.

Even if the motion doesn't get voted up, everyone will know exactly where the numbers are. If it's up, it opens the floodgates for candidacies (mostly Bishop's).

[Aaron]

They should vote for the spill to go ahead. Not because of "loyalties" or "stability", but more so it can finally be resolved. If Tony Abbott does win the spill, then the issue can be put to rest and the MP's who have problems can find alternative approaches (e.g. resignation). If the spill does go ahead and some other candidate wins, then the party room can be satisfied that this is the right call and move forward.

Of course none of the cabinet members are going to vote for a spill, because most likely it will backfire if Tony Abbott does win it. All it will do is prove disloyalty.

If no spill goes ahead and the current team remain, the same issues will remain. It doesn't matter. The damage is done. Everyone has now seen that the Liberals can be just as dysfunctional as the Labor party and they aren't the "perfect party" they perceived to be at the election.

P.s - Did anyone see Kevin Andrews' press conference? How he referred to 'Julia Gillard' instead of Julie Bishop. Hilarious.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153116243236789

I remember before the election the liberals were bagging Julie Collins (Labor frontbencher from Tasmania, Member for Franklin) because she got tumbled with her words on television... I just think this whole party are a bunch of hypocrites.

[pi]

On the note of the spill, Tony should suggest the spill motion vote be one where people put up their hands (this is allowed apparently) and then secret ballot of anything after that. Would be good tact from him imo.

P.s - Did anyone see Kevin Andrews' press conference? How he referred to 'Julia Gillard' instead of Julie Bishop. Hilarious.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153116243236789

Yeah I saw that live stream on YouTube and I have several Labour-die-hards on my newsfeed saying how funny it is. Really? Just a slip of the tongue, it's not even a slow news day.

I remember before the election the liberals were bagging Julie Collins (Labor frontbencher from Tasmania, Member for Franklin) because she got tumbled with her words on television... I just think this whole party are a bunch of hypocrites.

People can be so petty sometimes, on both sides.

[slothpomba]

They should vote for the spill to go ahead. Not because of "loyalties" or "stability", but more so it can finally be resolved.

I do and don't agree with this at the same time. If he clearly, very clearly defeats it, it'll put it to bed. It's embarrassing and damaging to have it in the first place.

If he narrowly wins, it'll still cause a lot of problems and discontent. It just might continue to simmer beneath the surface. The real question here is whether Tony Abbott is willing or able to change his character and leadership style. IF he stops making captains calls he just might put the simmering tensions out under this scenario.

If Tony Abbott does win the spill, then the issue can be put to rest and the MP's who have problems can find alternative approaches (e.g. resignation). If the spill does go ahead and some other candidate wins, then the party room can be satisfied that this is the right call and move forward.

[slothpomba]

In other news, the spill motion has been moved to Monday.

I thought this was quite an interesting choice but understandable. He is trying to hold it as early as possible in this parliamentary sitting week. The media kicks back into full swing during the working week, he'll have numerous questions and criticisms for it in parliament from Bill Shorten and the rest. It's smart to head it off as soon as he can and get down to business.

However, it looks bad that it was changed from Tuesday to Monday. It gives the impression of desperation and that he knows he's on a sinking ship and trying to head it off.

Malcom Turnbull pulled off a great piece of political rhetoric this morning during a doorstop interview, he said that the move to change it was a captains call. It's such a political buzzword right now, a very negative one for Abbott. It was his captains calls that caused all this tension, he even apologised for them during his press club speech. The claws are out.

[Aaron]

If Malcolm Turnbull puts himself forward and wins (provided the spill motion goes ahead), there will also be issues. In my opinion it doesn't matter who leads, it's the policies that are the issues for the Coalition. In regards to Turnbull, if he gets elected again, one needs to question why he lost the leadership in the first place. I know it was only by one vote, but it makes the LNP look bad.

It's like a repeating cycle. Kevin Rudd gets ousted for Julia Gillard. They then realise Julia Gillard is dragging down the polls and popularity is low, so they resort back to the man who they booted. Similar situation here right now with the Libs.

I do agree, but when you think about it, the damage is already done. Abbott rambles on about stability and 'not repeating the Labor years'... If there is dysfunction and complaints from the backbench (including respected Liberals such as Arthur Sinodinos) then isn't it just repeating Labor anyway?

Defeating the spill motion won't do anything. It'll still make the apparent 40+ MP's dissatisfied and the complaints will continue. Stability is no longer an option unless someone new is in the PM's office.

The only option in my view is Julie Bishop. I know she said she wouldnt, but I really hope she does put her hand up in the end. Consider the options: Tony Abbott who needs to go, Malcolm Turnbull who's already led the Coalition once before and got voted out by his own colleagues, or Julie Bishop who's been a loyal deputy since 2007.

It's quite evident Abbott won't change. In 2009 Tony Abbott said he'd be a consultative and open leader. It's 2015 now and look how far he's come... Literally no change whatsoever. I really wish I could remember specifically where I saw that speech but my mind's gone blank at the moment.

.. and the one thing that annoys me the most about Abbott is his communication. Literally nearly every press conference involves blaming Labor and not taking responsibility for the policies and decisions he and his government have made. I'm a frequent viewer of Question Time and the amount of repetition they use is just frustrating.

Whatever the outcome is, this will be remembered by everyone involved. Political parties and electorate mainly. The coalition can no longer use the 'dysfunction and instability of the Labor Party' card anymore.

[Aaron]

In regards to the party room meeting being moved forward, I can see both sides to it. Abbott's explanation seems legitimate, but at the same time I can understand why critics are saying he's desperate.

I think it's a cheap shot as the Liberal party room get less time to decide their vote. But wouldn't you think that they would have considered their options since the intention was made by the WA MP?

[mahler004]

In regards to the party room meeting being moved forward, I can see both sides to it. Abbott's explanation seems legitimate, but at the same time I can understand why critics are saying he's desperate.

I think it's a cheap shot as the Liberal party room get less time to decide their vote. But wouldn't you think that they would have considered their options since the intention was made by the WA MP?

It's more about preventing them from talking to each other. Many MPs will only fly into Canberra tonight, Abbott may want to prevent face-to-face canvassing or meetings.

The issues are that it came out in the media before he sent out an email to backbenchers, and it was a decision only he made - another 'captain's pick,' at the worst time for Abbott.

If Malcolm Turnbull puts himself forward and wins (provided the spill motion goes ahead), there will also be issues. In my opinion it doesn't matter who leads, it's the policies that are the issues for the Coalition. In regards to Turnbull, if he gets elected again, one needs to question why he lost the leadership in the first place. I know it was only by one vote, but it makes the LNP look bad.

I can't remember the source, but it's been alleged that the levels of support for Abbott and Turnbull were much different in the party room. Many people voted for Turnbull to prevent a big defeat for the moderates in the party, even though they supported Abbott.

Turnbull was ditched the first time on the back of support for aETS (which was widely unpopular among the right of the party,) and on the back of the 'Utegate' scandal.

It's otherwise unimportant. Australians are happy for oppositions to change leader, they don't like it when governments change leader. People have been opposition leader multiple times - John Howard went to one election as opposition leader (in 1987,) was kicked out after the election for Andrew Peacock, then finally kicked out Alexander Downer and won the 1996 election, becoming PM for 12 years. Likewise for Kim Beazely, Laurence Springborg, etc (although neither of them have won an election ... yet.)

It's like a repeating cycle. Kevin Rudd gets ousted for Julia Gillard. They then realise Julia Gillard is dragging down the polls and popularity is low, so they resort back to the man who they booted. Similar situation here right now with the Libs.

The difference was that Abbott was never popular with the public. Rudd was always fairly popular with the public (even if the Labor party wasn't all that popular.) Abbott and the Coalition won in 2013 in spite of themselves - they just got lucky that Labor was so dysfunctional.

Additionally, when Rudd was kicked out the first time, it took many people by surprise (it literally happened at 9pm, iirc.) I think the reason that there's been this weird half-week leadership spill leadup is to prepare people for an eventual change. So people don't wake up on Monday afternoon, surprised that there's a new PM.

quote author=Aaron link=topic=159256.msg812299#msg812299 date=1423378994]
It's quite evident Abbott won't change. In 2009 Tony Abbott said he'd be a consultative and open leader. It's 2015 now and look how far he's come... Literally no change whatsoever. I really wish I could remember specifically where I saw that speech but my mind's gone blank at the moment.
[/quote]

Yeah, many of the articles are saying that Abbott is communicating poorly with the backbench, and he's poor at managing his frontbench. It's largely (but not solely) to do with his office - Credlin's micromanager tendencies are well-known, and she's well overstepped the bounds of a prime ministerial chief of staff, if the newspapers are to be believed.

As for the topic at hand - I think at the moment it can go either way. If Malcolm Turnbull declares he'll seek the leadership in the event of a successful spill tonight, all bets are off - again, if the newspapers are to be believed, Turnbull could well be PM this time tomorrow. If Turnbull doesn't declare publicly before the spill, the spill motion will be narrowly defeated. But not enough to put this issue to bed for now, it'll come back if Abbott makes any more major blunders, particularly around the Budget.