The Australian Kevin Party

It's becoming clear that the biggest danger to Kevin Rudd, as soon as he gets IR legislation through the Senate, will be assassination by someone on the Left of his own party. Well OK, maybe not assassination, but a convenient accidental fall from some high point around Parliament House.

Over the past couple of weeks, Kevin has:

* warned all of his shadow cabinet that no one's position is secure;

* had to clarify that by saying he meant no one except for his closest 3 pals;

* then had to reassert his power by saying he alone (and not the factions) will pick the Cabinet membership;

* annoyed environmentalists by going along with the Howard decision on the Tasmanian pulp mill;

* criticised his shadow foreign minister for giving a speech approved by one of his (Kevin's) own staffers;

* on the 7.30 Report tonight, has seemingly added said shadow foreign minister as the fourth person at least "guaranteed" a job in cabinet (though maybe not foreign minister):

But as for the rest of the time team, I will select those on the basis of merit come the outcome of the next election. If we are elected to form the next government of Australia. But Mr McClelland will be part of that team.

(One can only assume that this is to placate McClelland for being publicly ticked off even when he had done everything right to see that Kevin approved the speech); and

* Upset teacher unions by promising to keep the Coalition's school funding system for the next few years.

Oh sure, every Labor politician is currently willing to bite their tongue for now while they think of the polls, but what Rudd is doing seems well designed to guarantee that he will not have loyalty in the long run. Certainly, he is positioning himself as the Prime Minister most likely to be punched in the nose by someone from his own party towards the end of the parliamentary Christmas shindig.

I also note that on the 7.30 Report tonight, Kevin said that even if the Commonwealth takes over hospital funding in the future after a referendum, this doesn't mean that actual control of the hospitals would be in the hands of the Commonwealth:

KERRY O'BRIEN: Well, very quickly, who would run those 750 hospitals?

KEVIN RUDD: In the document we released, we said the Commonwealth, if we went down the option of getting a mandate from the Australian people for the Commonwealth to take over funding responsibility, in taking over funding responsibility the Commonwealth, we said in that document, and we adhere to it right today, will not be running any one of those individual hospitals. The options available are for the States to continue to physically manage hospitals or for them to be managed privately or on a committee basis as the Prime Minister appears to have set up in relation to his Mersey model.

Seems to me that this is not what the public expects from the idea of the Commonwealth taking responsibility for the hospitals.

UPDATE: I see that Andrew Landeryou claims that McClelland was hung out to dry because Simon Crean has been promised Foreign Affairs. He doesn't seem the type, to me.

(Landeryou's blog is a lot of fun at the moment. If you missed the old Youtube video he posted last Friday, go have a look.)