National
The Abbott dirt file and a Bolt ban: things go negative
Before most Australians arrived at work on Monday, at least half a dozen Rudd Government ministers had already responded to the opinion poll in that day’s Fairfax newspapers; the one that had the Coalition in front 53 per cent to 47 per cent.
They said a lot of things, but none of them – including Kevin Rudd himself – missed the critical spin for the day: that if those polls were repeated on election day, then Tony Abbott would be prime minister. They were just about word perfect.
Peter van Onselen, writing in The Australian, saw it this way:
“They think their best asset is who they are not. Inspiring stuff!”
The coordinated attack does imply that the Labor Party now accepts there is one major hurdle for voters to overcome before all is lost. They will not, when it comes to the crunch, vote for Tony Abbott.
That is negative, narrow, and yes, uninspiring. But if it is true, then you go with what you’ve got.
The truly sad aspect of the spin that day was how some otherwise intelligent senior ministers, robot-like, took their instructions from some “junior woodchuck” in the Prime Minister’s office, and dutifully did as they were told. Once those contributions were bundled together by ABC political correspondent Mark Simkin, they looked foolish and demeaning.
It may be just a perception, but perceptions are important. And the perception is that no humiliation is beyond the current crop of ministers who long ago abandoned any sense of personal self respect or individual authority that once came with achieving such high office.
Yet now we read on page one of Wednesday’s Financial Review that maybe at last changes are about to take place; that the head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Terry Moran, has initiated a Cabinet review that will result in the full Cabinet being briefed on the major issues. Not necessarily taking part in the decision-making process, mind you, but at least finding out about some of them before they read about them in the newspapers.
…
Meanwhile, the Government will charge resolutely on, convinced that Abbott is the bridge too far; that fear of an Abbott prime ministership will cause the shaky hands to hesitate in the polling booths.
To that end, some government supporters have started hawking around anti-Abbott material to the gallery, so far without much success.
One attempt involved suggestions that he had been gifted an expensive state of the art road racing bicycle, and then failed to declare it on his pecuniary interest register. It turned out, after investigation, that he owns just two bicycles. He keeps one in Sydney and one in Canberra. The third bike, the subject of the potential scandal, was given to him by a dealership in Clarence Street, Sydney, and he promptly returned it.
The second attempt came to the attention of a journalist by a more circuitous source. It related back to Abbott’s days at university and appeared to be an attempt to reopen an incident that Abbott referred to briefly in his book Battlelines.
As Abbott tells it, at the end of his second year at university, he attended a political meeting and was challenged by an opponent to explain where he stood on a particular issue. He was in fact standing right behind her, so he says he touched her on the back and made a “facetious” remark. It’s not clear whether it was the nature of the touch or the remark itself that got Abbott into trouble that day, but after the woman complained, he was charged with indecent assault. It went to court, but failed.
…
Abbott turned up at the court that day with a QC and seven witnesses, all of whom supported his version of events.
Outside the court, he alleged the episode had been a “politically motivated and malicious prosecution”.
And just to clear the decks, Abbott also confesses in his book to being caught by police “trying to bend over a street sign in a test of strength with a fellow student”. To that incident, he pleaded guilty but no conviction was recorded.
There was one other intervention by the Prime Minister’s office this week which went virtually unreported, but deserves closer scrutiny and debate.
Noted Melbourne conservative columnist, Andrew Bolt, was apparently barred from interviewing Kevin Rudd.
On Tuesday, the production team behind Steve Price at the new talk station, MTR, was given five minutes notice that the Prime Minister was available for interview. The call came during the 40-minute segment when Bolt joins Price and routinely takes part in all of the interviews. In fact, when the call came through, he was on air and jointly interviewing the mayor of a remote Western Australian town, hosting asylum seekers.
Bolt says: “At the request of his office, I’m out the door while he chats to Steve alone.
“Rudd is entitled to chose who to talk to, and the station is entitled to decide that it is well worth having a professional like Steve interview him, even if I can’t.
“But I’m entitled to draw conclusions when Rudd won’t talk to me, and so are you.”
Curious if the Prime Minister’s office specifically barred a particular journalist; even more curious that MTR would not insist that they decide who stays in their studio and the circumstances in which they stay. The new station, at the very least, may have missed a valuable publicity opportunity; and at best an interview that would have warranted far more than five minutes notice.
Barrie Cassidy hosts Insiders and Offsiders on ABC1.