Comments on: Essential’s “Best PM” poll

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:39:50 +0000

The decision on bank nationalisation was saying that the Commonwealth could not own all the banks. From its creation in 1911 until its privatisation (1992-1996) (stupid Keating) the Commonwealth bank was owned by the Commonwealth.

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 00:32:00 +0000

There was a clear right-wing shift between Whitlam and Hawke/Keating/Rudd. HECS, refugee detention, and a bunch of other things. It’s not just about nationalising the banks.

Although to be fair I’m not particularly a fan of any of them. Whitlam was my favourite in terms of policy, but he’s a man with the world’s biggest ego who frankly governed fairly incompetently and failed to make a lot of his policies stick. But he still stands up better than the others.

By: Charlotte Rose Long

Charlotte Rose Long — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:26:00 +0000

Thanks to the High Court though, you can’t do nationalisation or other socialist things in Australia so economic things will always remain pretty right wing

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 13:32:50 +0000

As far as I’m concerned, for those of us who lean to the left, none of the Labor PMs are perfect. Keating was great on social issues but his economic agenda was a lot more right-wing. Chifley did a lot of good stuff, but the ALP prior to the 1960s was a lot more socially conservative.

Sure, Whitlam did some bad stuff, including East Timor and the loans scandal, and a bunch of embarassments in his ministries. But he brought in free education, Medibank, and a bunch of social advancements. Not to mention the fact that he defeated the longest-serving conservative government.

By: Charlotte Rose Long

Charlotte Rose Long — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 13:17:47 +0000

Why is Whitlam so popular – he’s at least partially responsible for what happened to East Timor

By: Wayne

Wayne — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 01:15:25 +0000

Kris :What about john curtin?

Oh, I feel he was a great leader and PM however I don't regard him as a "post war" PM.

By: Kris

Kris — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:21:07 +0000

What about john curtin?

By: Wayne

Wayne — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:54:00 +0000

Also, on a side note, if Howard had stepped down in 2006 (pre Rudd), I would have ranked him equal 2nd with Hawke/Keating. His election loss was dismal and embarrassing (and that is coming from a centrist who neither hates nor loves the man).

By: Wayne

Wayne — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:48:59 +0000

Way too early to say, but if I were placed in a corner with a gun to my head I would place him below Fraser. Although I think he is doing a great job on many issues however he simply hasn’t been there long enough. He immediately moves up between Whitlam and Chiefly if he wins the next election and perhaps even higher if his leadership during the GFC is deemed to be a success and his educational, infrastructure and health policy programs are executed.

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:32:01 +0000

Where would you put Rudd? I know, it’s a bit early to say.