How can we possibly endorse this man?

rudd.jpg“Megalomaniac”, “vengeful”, “unstable” and “a b*stard” with a “vicious temper” who put “his own self-interest ahead of … the country as a whole.”

That’s how some of Kevin Rudd’s Labor Party colleagues have described him to the press. Members of the Coalition have been just as critical in their appraisal of the temperament and character of the former Prime Minister.

Now, background character assassinations are the stock-in-trade of many in parliament but rarely has such personal vitriol been so openly levelled at a former PM.

His track record is well known. He presided over one of the most dysfunctional governments in the history of the nation, amassed a public debt and implemented a spending binge from which we are yet to recover.

Now he has asked the Australian Government to nominate him as a candidate for the position of United Nations Secretary General. That decision is a matter for the Turnbull Cabinet.

As usual, Labor are playing politics with the situation, claiming Rudd is eminently qualified for the position despite their own experience. Having been betrayed by Shorten because of his hopelessness, the hypocrisy of Labor’s position cannot be lost on anyone.

Privately, Labor bigwigs confirm Rudd’s dysfunction but feel compelled to fall into line because of the solidarity movement. In other words, they are prepared to compromise global diplomatic relations to save their own skin in the Labor hierarchy.

Little wonder they recorded their second lowest primary vote in eight decades at the last election.

However, the decision now falls to the Cabinet. Some claim that supporting his nomination is no endorsement for the role but it would be hard to see it as anything other than a validation of his disastrous national stewardship.

While Rudd is unlikely to win the position, how in good conscience, having lived through the Rudd leadership and destabilisation, can any of us suggest he is fit for the role he seeks?

Now I know some readers will take the parochial position of wanting to support an Aussie for any position they seek, but we do have our international reputation to think about.

Others will seek to justify the nomination by highlighting the embarrassing track record of the UN in installing other ‘unworthies’ to positions of influence. Libya and Saudi Arabia as chairs of the human rights council are excellent examples, but that doesn’t mean we should abandon reason and suspend critical judgment simply because others do.

The world is in a difficult state. We face almost unprecedented levels of global debt, terrorism, social dislocation and a crisis of confidence in government. Whatever its failings (and there are many), the UN attempts to resolve some of those problems and needs the best possible leadership.

Why would we make their job any more difficult by throwing Kevin Rudd into that mix?


  • followed this page 2016-08-17 17:40:37 +0930
  • commented 2016-08-03 14:50:15 +0930
    Wayne Swan on Kevin Rudd in his book, said: “The problem, to be extremely frank, is Kevin is not suited to lead a team, if you want to sum it up. He had neither the temperament nor the interpersonal relations.

    Tanner’s restrained assessment of Rudd, conceded Rudd’s “slightly manic habits” and suggested a cabinet system bordering on chaotic
  • commented 2016-08-03 14:06:20 +0930
    Yes, I was relieved when KR became a ‘former PM’.
    As for him being the UN Sec-Gen, well, would Hillarious Clinton be a good President? Cory, thanks for your blogs. Blessings to you.
  • commented 2016-07-25 14:53:48 +0930
    Thank you Cory for being a voice of reason and common sense…
  • commented 2016-07-22 15:23:54 +0930
    Corey thankyou for your blog.I hope your leader’s on the same page since he’s good friends with Kevin Rudd.
  • followed this page 2016-07-22 12:33:12 +0930
  • followed this page 2016-07-22 11:12:07 +0930
  • commented 2016-07-20 20:14:31 +0930
    Is this Irony? One embarrassment criticizing a more successful embarrassment?
  • commented 2016-07-20 15:53:59 +0930
    We should be thinking of leaving the UN not endorsing it by sending a Australian to try for the key job. It would make us look even more ridiculous if our government started posturing & chest thumping to extol Rudd’s virtues, which he does not possess, then try to exit the drain on the western world’s economies. Leave the UN & cut our losses before Turnbull gives them all our money then signs us over as slaves .
  • commented 2016-07-20 15:13:14 +0930
    Thank you Cory, but under no circumstances should the Government recommend Mr Rudd. Mr Rudd displays the symptoms of megalomania, but to be honest, he would be amongst the same species, at the corrupt and hostile to the West UN. The sooner we exit the UN, the better for our democracy and freedom.
  • commented 2016-07-20 13:50:49 +0930
    Rudd is a thorough embarrassment. It is not as though a Laborite colleague put forward his name, the little egotist is putting forward his own name for nomination.
  • commented 2016-07-20 12:57:32 +0930
    Oh dear Cory. When I started reading your email I thought you were referring to Malcolm!! I was shocked when you said that was Rudd! It might be true but I didn’t see that coming.
    I agree Australia should NOT nominate Rudd though. Who knows what deals have been done to get him there.
  • commented 2016-07-20 12:56:28 +0930
    It would be a disgrace for the liberal government to support Rudd’s nomination. If you support the concept of meritocracy then Clark is the logical person for our support. Even Kristina Keneally sees the mere thought of Rudd being supported as a bad joke –