Inexperience vs proven incompetence

Which is worse? The Federal Government has been trying to paint Kevin Rudd and the Labor opposition as lacking the experience and judgement to govern Australia. The attacks on Rudd for his meetings with Brian Burke, and over the stupid reference written by former opposition front bencher Kelvin Thomson are designed to cast doubts on their integrity, judgement, character and competence.

But isn’t this a dangerous comparison for the government to draw? After all the competence (and judgement and integrity) of some senior government ministers is highly doubtful after some of the things they’ve happily presided over. Witness the AWB scandal… Alexander Downer and Mark Vaile (and their advisers and public servants) hardly conveyed the impression of being on top of their portfolios (let alone being even barely competent). Likewise Philip Ruddock achieved huge successes at Immigration during his spell there, didn’t he?

So seemingly, the government thinks Labor’s potential incompetence is worse than its own proven incompetence.

It seems the voters aren’t buying it, given latest opinion polling results, which show Labor 61-39 on a 2 party preferred basis. There’s a long way to go until the election, but I’d say that John Howard really needs a big rabbit to pull out of his hat if he’s to avoid defeat. (another Tampa, Bali bombing, Iran, major league scandal in ALP ranks?).

Technorati : AWB, Alexander Downer, Brian Burke, John Howard, Kelvin Thomson, Kevin Rudd, Labor, Liberals, Mark Vaile, Philip Ruddock, opinion polls