Tag: Paul Keating

Kevin 07 – Revisited?


There are reports Rudd is considering a challenge against Gillard. I had to remind myself what some of the misgivings against Rudd were, back in Nov 2007. I had these thoughts then…

 

After midnight on 21/11, no electronic election campaign advertisements would be permitted. I don’t know if there is a similar blackout from the print media. On television and radio however, we would not hear anymore election campaign advertisements after tonight. Well, for the next 3 years anyway.
The last 3 Labour Prime Ministers have all been very flawed characters. By and large however, you knew who they were, before they became Prime Minister.
With Gough you knew his social agenda. It may have been the ideals of that time for state support nearing total state welfare which sounds repugnant to present thinking and his total, take no prisoner attitude as he steams ahead with his agenda may have seemed suicidal. For that he may have seemed irresponsible. He may have been an idealist, but irresponsible. Yet he made no bones about it. Everyone knew what he was on about. He didn’t try to manipulate anything to project a different image.

With Hawke it was the same thing. He was a womaniser and boozer. Yet he did not pretend to be something else. Keating continues to dish out his tongue lashings and continues to speak his mind about anything he has a view on. You always knew he would do that. I liked both Hawke and Keating. It was Keating who made it cool to appreciate antique clocks. If not for him, whenever I stepped into the antique shop of my brother in law (Daniel Ching) I would not have stopped to stare at these clocks.

Rudd however, is a different animal altogether. His public image has been a carefully crafted one. Just over a year ago I read an interview with him where he quoted Dietrich Bonheoffer extensively. He claimed to be devout Christian. I watched him spar with Joe Hockey, then the Minister for Human Services (or some ministry like that) and thought he was such an articulate, sincere and likeable man.

My perception of Rudd has changed. I now see him as someone who is prepared to lie about anything to get what he wants. Integrity is not part of his vocabulary. He’d go to a strip club and claim he’d forgotten (because he was too drunk). When I get drunk I want to sleep or pick a fight, not go to a strip club. Maybe he got drunk in the strip club, who knows? He faked things on television. Before an audience of mainly Muslims, he would not affirm his belief in Christianity (would not say Jesus is the Son of God). How can someone hold such polarised stance? You cannot say you are a devout Christian and express agreement with Dietrich Bonheoffer’s theological writings and then cannot bring yourself to confess Jesus is the Son of God. He’d say things for years which he would not permit his team to say, if it meant being against the grain of the moment.

He appears to hold no views, sways according to popular opinion and would not tell you the truth. In fact he would lie, if that makes him look good or better. John Howard may appear to be like a grumpy old man at times and his “liberal” (read conservative a la Thatcher) views may not always be agreeable to the average wage earners (like me) but you knew where he stands. With Rudd, his true colours may only surface if/when he becomes Prime Minister. It may mean 3 disastrous years which would take a long time to fix.

Related articles

John Hewson and the Modern Leader


I watched Andrew Denton interview John Hewson last night. I wonder how he ever became a politician, let alone the opposition leader with an outside chance of becoming a prime minister. I remember him as the economics professor in my university, occasionally sighting him on campus. He appeared very serious and certainly very ambitious, but the type who would neither stand for rhetoric nor suffer any fools.

The GST was his brainchild. He of course lost the elections to Paul Keating and it wasn’t until the Liberals came to power under John Howard and Peter Costello that the GST came into being – was it in 1995 or 1996. I think few remembered Hewson as the person who brought it about. Sure it was Costello’s push and Howard’s deal making which made it happen but it all started with Hewson.

From the interview, it appears as though Hewson should have been the owner of the moniker “Honest John”, instead of Howard. It was his honest albeit disastrous answer to Mike Willessee’s (forerunner to “A Current Affairs”, even before Jana Wendt) question about whether GST will make a cake more expensive, which buried him. The political naiveté oozing out of that very honest answer was cringe worthy – I can’t imagine any politician going through such an intellectually honest but non media savvy answer but on the other hand I also cannot imagine Tracy Grimshaw asking either Wayne Swan or Joe Hockey a similar question today. Or maybe I can but the response would certainly be more media polished.

Hewson was a workaholic personified. He was working in Hill Samuels, the precursor of Macquarie Bank, while also working in the university. His 18 hour days and 100+ hour weeks saw 2 marriages crumble. Still only 60 years old now and often appearing as a political commentator on Fox, he appears to have mellowed a lot. He has always had that know it all look, creating an arrogant aura about his character, which of course was never going to help his political career, honesty notwithstanding.

What Hewson appeared to have patently lacked was what some of my mates would call “relational skills”. He didn’t seem bothered with what others’ agendas were, only with issues at hand. His objectivity was looked at as callous refusal to consider deal making. Leaders today are expected to engage people, often almost at all costs. If a leader concentrates on substantive issues at the expense of exercising “relational” elements, he or she is often viewed as an ineffectual leader. What this can lead to is leadership which is across opinions and feelings but lacking in substance. Hence we observe an absence of intellectually rigorous and robust policies or statements of values from our leaders today. Truth and objectivity requires time and hard work. Emphasis on “people issues” can come at the expense of neglecting this area. Perhaps the solution lies in knowing exactly what we want from our leaders – people who meet and greet and listen to you often or people who meet and greet issues and decide the right course to take.