Martin Hamilton-Smith issued a media statement late this morning, saying he will not contest the leadership ballot on Wednesday.
On Saturday, Mr Hamilton-Smith defeated Vickie Chapman 11-10 in a spill motion.
The confirmed contenders on Wednesday are Ms Chapman, Isobel Redmond and Mitch Williams.
Who do readers think is the best person to lead the Liberal Party?
Anonymous
Posts: 36
Premier Mike Rann was correct to say the whole leadership saga has been a "shambles". Saturday's showdown should have been the end of the matter.
However, I think Vickie Chapman offers the best prospects for the Liberals to win in 2010.
I don't think a country leader (ie Mitch Williams) can lead the Liberals to victory at this stage.
Mitch might just be setting himself for the deputy's job regardless of which woman wins the leadership.
Anonymous
Posts: 74
I like Vickie Chapman for this one.
Anonymous
Posts: 36
Comment in the metropolitan press today is that Mitch Williams has no chance of winning and he's not mentioned as a contender for deputy.
From a regional media perspective I like the fact Vickie Chapman has always been accessible and she's pro-active in raising Mount Gambier issues.
When I heard Isobel Redmond was running for leader I had to find out who she was.
Anonymous
Posts: 38
I don't think we have seen the last of Hamilton-Smith.
You don't get to be a Major in the SAS by giving up and showing a lack of guts and determination.
My money is on him returning to the front, in due course.
Anonymous
Posts: 74
Listening to Isobel Redmond speak is kind of disturbing for me.
The sound of her voice really does not thrill me to bits.
Am I being picky?
The pitch of someone's voice can become personal if it does not resonate...we unfairly distort an image of a person by the sound of their voice.
(this is only my weird view)
Go figure.
Anonymous
Posts: 6
I don't think we have seen the last of Hamilton-Smith.
True. I think Redmond is a fill-in leader until the election is lost. Then it will be a fresh contest between MHS and Chapman.
Anonymous
Posts: 66
Ebony Jackson - 2 weeks ago »
Listening to Isobel Redmond speak is kind of disturbing for me.
The sound of her voice really does not thrill me to bits.
Am I being picky?
The pitch of someone's voice can become personal if it does not resonate...we unfairly distort an image of a person by the sound of their voice.
(this is only my weird view)
Go figure.
It is true that we often do assess politicians based on things other than their policies; it is often a sub-conscious thing.
I'm not a Liberal supporter, so I can only assess Isobel Redmond based on how I perceive her to be viewed by the broader community. Whilst I did have my doubts about Redmond early on, I do think in the past couple of weeks she has done a good job so far; much better in fact than I think Vicki Chapman would have done.
Redmond's fairly open, un-polished approach (even a tendency to make blunders on various issues), can come across as refreshing. This is somewhat the opposite to Chapman's persona; Vicki's 'Eastern suburbs' air is seen by many as a liability, especially when it comes to winning the currently ALP-held marginal seats in Adelaide's outer-suburban areas, which is what the Liberals will need to do to win office.
Anonymous
Posts: 66
Alistair - 2 weeks ago »
I don't think we have seen the last of Hamilton-Smith.
True. I think Redmond is a fill-in leader until the election is lost. Then it will be a fresh contest between MHS and Chapman.
This is true in the sense that it is an almost foregone conclusion that barring some major change in the state political scene, that the Liberals will lose the 2010 election. However, many media commentators are saying that given the very bad electoral position of the Liberals at the moment, that Redmond may be viewed as a success if she is able to hold onto all Liberal-held marginals at the next election, plus gain a small number of ALP-held marginals, perhaps as few as 2 or 3 seats. If this occurs, she may be able to hang onto the position of Leader of the Opposition.
I doubt that Martin Hamilton-Smith will return as leader; he's been too politically damaged by the Dodgy-gate affair (don't you just hate how every major political scandal gets the '- gate' suffix added to it?)
Vicki Chapman will then be a strong contender. At the very least she can claim that all the alternatives have been tried and failed! Chapman is very popular among a significant part of the Liberals; however the problem is that she is a very divisive figure in regard to the internal politics of the SA Liberals. She is a factional warrior of the Moderate tendency ( 'tendency' refers to factions with the Libs, which they claim they don't have, but of course they do!) of the party and is hated by the Conservative tendency; she could prove a very divisive leader. This is in part the attraction of Redmond; although she is a conservative (I think?), she is not highly factional and is an acceptable compromise for both groups.
I think there may be some truth in the saying that just as the next Liberal Prime Minister may not be in the Federal Parliament yet, the next SA Liberal Premier may not be in the SA Parliament yet, either!
Anonymous
Posts: 36
Good commentary Adam. I agree, except I think Isobel Redmond is a "moderate". I'm no expert on SA Liberal Party factions, but I understand she's unaligned, which helped her leadership bid.
Her past rhetoric has shown her to be a small "l" Liberal, inviting attacks already from Labor, especially on law and order.
Unless Chapman becomes leader after the election, you're probably right that the next SA Liberal Premier is not in the parliament.
You must log in to post.
