Last week, new Prime Minister Scott Morrison gave us his statement of intent and core values. Our readers however, found it trite and ultimately content free — which doesn’t bode well for his time in office. Elsewhere, the responses varied as to whether Sarah Ferguson’s interview with Steve Bannon on Four Corners was justified, but they all concluded that Bannon got the better of Ferguson.
Dylan Taylor: Chock full of empty rhetoric and over used Aussie Cliches, delivered in the homespun style of the American Evangelicals.Good one about “helping our mates”. You can’t argue with that.
Robert Bearup: The Morrison speech was like an essay topic set for the over 10’s on what is your ideas for Australia’s future, and not your own future.The faith bit which implies we all have a belief in a higher immortal being as our guiding force is indeed strange.He does not understand what mateship really is or if it does exist. No mention was made of growing inequality and how this may effect our social fabric.The price of electricity seems to be a major concern when I am certain that the rent, food, clothing and school bills are of far more concern to most Australians with their lack of wage growth affordable housing.Praying for rain to help farmers who once again are experiencing drought conditions is hardly helpful.What they would like is how can we manage our properties to make them more drought proof. I thought the speech to be more ” look at me I am the PM” than a discussion of what we can do for an average Australian, no matter what his political or religious belief may be.
Lucille Rogers writes: Scott Morrison could be speaking in tongues for all the sense his clutch of hoary cliches make. A real hollowman. I despair for our country. Why can’t we produce good leaders any more?
Dr Brian Harlech-Jones: What has Morrison actually DONE that is notable? I follow politics quite closely, and when I think of Morrison, I think of only two things: (1) stop the boats and (2) him being a middle of the road, don’t rock the boat Treasurer. Stopping the boats wasn’t difficult, because all that he had to do was to put the navy to work and insist that he wasn’t being crass and cruel (when he knew that he was) because it was all for the refugees’ own good so that they wouldn’t die at sea. About being a Treasurer: perhaps naively, I have never thought that being a competent Treasurer is difficult because the (a) the big decisions that you make are (or should be) joint Cabinet decisions and (b) you have a competent and experienced technical team (i.e. the civil servants) to advise you, to juggle things around, and to put the numbers together.
So, in my mind, Morrison is very much an unknown in terms of the big things, namely leadership and vision. Unfortunately, I suspect that there isn’t much there, either.
Kat writes: Unfortunately Steve Bannon ran subtly cogent rings around Sarah Ferguson. He is a smooth manipulator who peppers his propaganda with valid and convincing points. Sarah, please don’t be flattered or duped by Bannon’s end of interview praise. Any impartial and sharply analytical viewer would most likely consider the Four Corners interview as timorous and lackluster.
Ray Bricknell writes: I am a swing voter, very interested in politics and current affairs, and I saw Bannon differently to Helen Razer. To me he came across as highly intelligent, articulate, reasonable and persuasive — all of which surprised me. I think Trump has lost a good man. His summation of China appeared to me to be disturbingly accurate.
If this guy is applying considerable resources to spreading a hard-right philosophy worldwide, he needs to be taken as a serious force to be dealt with by moderates who disagree with his line.
Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and cock-ups to [email protected]. We reserve the right to edit comments for length and clarity. Please include your full name.