Albanese finishes the year at the Lodge, will he finish 2024 there?

A question on social media (I generally do not pay much attention to) caught my attention – why are we importing other countries' problem here?

This was, as I understood, in relation to the concurrent protests (on Israel-Hamas/Palestinians) by supporters of both sides. In some sense these have become regular and recurrent events. The issue not only poses problems locally, but also has significant implications on our international relations.

Being a multicultural society that we are, where people of all sorts of heritage live next to each other, our politicians should not turn their back on the broader national responsibilities which they swear to, upon being elected to parliament which is to act in the best interest of the country.

For that to happen, there must be a TOP-DOWN direction, from the Prime Minister, which seems to be glaringly missing.

One could argue that the Prime Minister has failed to lead his team as a leader.

That raises the question – Are the factional warlords controlling the Labor party power structures running the show as ever? Some might be tempted to say his job is at the mercy of the 'invisible' faces (remember 'faceless' men of Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era?).

Factional power play is an integral part of the Labor party's functional structure. But I think, independent of the factional settings, it is also the persona of the Prime Minister at play here.

There cannot be any argument about his intention to serve the country to the best of his ability. But I do not believe his knack of dealing with the robust, cut and thrust of the day-to-day politics is as good as perhaps once was. Politics is far more ferocious today than when he joined. I believe Anthony Albanese would have enjoyed his time at the lodge when Bob Hawke or Paul Keating had their turn.

The question now is – is he the right fit?

The times are really tough; the cost-of-living pressures are rising on a daily basis with no end in sight. And the government seems incapable of being able to do anything to control it, primarily because all essential services levers have already been privatized, only run to make maximum possible profit.

Without sounding partisan, do you not look for a leader like John Howard who, when the Port Arthur massacre happened, resolved to give Australia gun control laws in less than two months of being elected in 1996?

John Howard could have shirked it. He or his party had no case to answer but, like a true leader, he took charge and delivered what was needed.