Unlike the USA, our neighbours across the ditch have no problem with disposing of political leaders when a party decides that keeping the current Prime Minister is not in their (and perhaps the nation’s) best interests. In fact, Australia has just appointed a new Prime Minister – their seventh since the beginning of the millennium. Of the previous six, four were deposed by their own party.
This seems to have become “standard practice” as both major political parties indulge in the deposing of political leaders while in office. Of course, a change of Prime Minister usually results in a major cabinet reshuffle, and frequently sees some change in government direction.
|Prime Minister||Term ended||How|
|Howard, John||03 Dec 2007||Lost Seat at General Election|
|Rudd, Kevin||24 Jun 2010||Deposed|
|Gillard, Julia||27 Jun 2013||Deposed|
|Rudd, Kevin||18 Sep 2013||Defeated at General Election|
|Abbott, Anthony||15 Sep 2015||Deposed|
|Turnbull, Malcolm||24 Aug 2018||Deposed|
In a parliamentary style of government such as Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia, the UK, and Canada have, the roles of Head of State and the country’s top political post are held by different people, but I wonder how many Americans envy the ease by which Australia can replace the person holding nation’s top political role, especially in the light of their current leader being Trump.
Should impeachment, death or incapacity be the only means by which a president can be replaced, or would it be better if presidents could be replaced on other grounds? America does have a problem in that presidents are elected for a fixed term, instead of a maximum term, and if the president is removed, then the vice president takes over. This is not an issue with deputy Prime Ministers, as they do not take over as Prime Minister except in a caretaker role while a new Prime Minister is chosen. However I suspect those who would like to see Trump go, would be equally unlikely to want to see Pence take over the presidency.