Costly system for choosing Labor leader

What a costly, inefficient, wasteful system for choosing a leader Kevin Rudd has imposed upon the Labor Party.

We have the two aspirants travelling throughout the country with their individual entourages at enormous cost to the party (and I hope not the tax payer) engaging in some sort of American style presidential campaign while the ALP is effectively left directionless and in limbo with a temporary and powerless leader.

Talk about RUDDerless.

The whole debacle smacks of another typical Kevin thought bubble which sounded good at the time but as usual is proving extremely difficult and expensive to implement.

We are told that 40,000 members of the ALP as well as the Caucus are entitled to vote.

Hello... has anyone worked out the logistics and the costs associated with this exercise?

The so called democratic process put in place by Rudd carries with it the proviso that the leader cannot be removed once elected unless he or she loses an election.

I think this was Kevin's main concern and his attempt to ensure that he could not be dumped again, which was very much on the cards, in the unlikely event that he won the last election.

While the current leadership campaign is being conducted discreetly and respectfully, what damage could be caused to the party if next time the two (or more) candidates decide to conduct their campaigns in a less agreeable manner and resort to a traditional ALP knock down drag out affair?

Email, 23 Sep 2013

Vic Jefferies, St Huberts Island