Neither genius nor monster. Wayne Swan. Bob Brown

In the punditry national political babble of the past few weeks there were few sensible, fair voices – well apart from TT’s Kim Peart here. Mike Steketee in The Australian, was one. And, there is no better example of discarded political promise than Hagar Cohen on Radio National’s Background Briefing A sinking feeling in the Torres Strait, here
• Today: Listen to Treasurer Wayne Swan launch into the Elites, National Press Club here

Mike Steketee:

IT was Winston Churchill who said history is written by the victors, and Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard who have proven it to be doubly true.

Between 2007 and 2010, Rudd was the colossus of Australian politics, succeeding where three of his predecessors – Kim Beazley, Simon Crean and Mark Latham – failed: defeating the Howard government, with the bonus of toppling John Howard in his own seat. Rudd was hailed as an uncommonly talented politician, with a breadth of vision and reforming zeal.

Earlier, in 2006, when his colleagues chose him as their leader, it was his competence displayed as opposition foreign affairs spokesman that trumped what even then was personal dislike for him, based on his intellectual arrogance and overweening ambition – that and a touch of desperation about losing another election. He was not the first leader to be resented for such character traits: Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke and Malcolm Turnbull at various times found it difficult to win complete acceptance from their parliamentary parties, though the first two succeeded where Rudd and Turnbull did not.

Rudd never was quite the political genius he was portrayed as. It helped that he was in the right place at the right time – at the end of 11 years of Coalition government with a prime minister who had overstayed his welcome. But he took full advantage of the opportunity given him.

In government, the problems started becoming evident, including over-promising and under-delivering, the restless energy and unreasonable demands of a control freak and blockages caused by centralised decision-making.

Last week, courtesy of the extraordinary free character references from his colleagues, we heard much more: that the government he ran was chaotic, that he holds no Labor values, that he showed contempt for the cabinet, caucus and parliament, that he was a leaker who undermined the government, and a psychopath.

What was on public display from ministers such as Wayne Swan and Stephen Conroy was the factional thuggery normally practised only behind closed doors, with the aim of puncturing any popular pressure to bring back Rudd. That and self-interest: a refusal to admit they were wrong in 2010 or bear the consequences. It was politics at its ugliest.

Of course the accusations were exaggerated. Those who pointed the blunderbuss at Rudd all served with him in government for more than 2 1/2 years, sometimes frustrated, but content to ride along on his popularity. If it all was so impossible, surely they would have resigned or at least got around to telling Rudd they would dump him if he did not lift his game.

If there were roadblocks, government also continued to function in many areas, including in the quick and comprehensive response to the global financial crisis and in the emissions trading legislation, one of the most complex bills to come before the parliament. What triggered the coup was polling suggesting that Labor could lose the election with Rudd and win it with Gillard, even though such political beauty contests always are ephemeral.

As Maxine McKew, who won Howard’s seat of Bennelong in 2007 (and lost it in 2010), said, if Rudd was such an autocrat why did he allow Gillard (among others) to talk him into dropping the emissions trading scheme in which he had invested so much of his personal credibility? For a person who is supposed to have no Labor values, Rudd placed a high priority on social issues such as tackling homelessness, indigenous disadvantage and world poverty, not to mention staving off high unemployment in the wake of the GFC.

And, believe it or not, Rudd is not the first politician to talk to journalists off the record as a means of advancing their interests. That’s what politicians with ambition do and always have done. It is how Canberra works.

The extreme criticisms of last week do not pass the commonsense test. Parties, and voters, don’t elect psychopaths as their leaders. Mind you, a touch of madness is not unusual, given the single-minded ambition that makes people willing to crawl over broken glass to get to the top and stay there is not normal behaviour.

This week, safely confirmed in her job, Gillard paid belated tribute to Rudd, honouring his “many achievements” as prime minister, including his leadership during the GFC, delivering the apology to the Stolen Generations and as “an amazing advocate” of Australia’s interests internationally. Not bad for a dysfunctional person presiding over chaos. Voters are entitled to feel confused. Oh, and you better believe Gillard is a brilliant politician who makes the government run like a well-oiled clock.

The trouble with Labor’s recovery strategy – of putting all the ugliness behind it and, ahem, moving forward – is that Rudd has portrayed the events of last week as a contest between the people and the party. Of course, the parties, through their parliamentary wings, choose their leaders under our system. But, if there is one thing learned from the Rudd coup, it surely is that the voters resented removing the leader for whom it seemed they had just voted. Gillard has had the look of illegitimacy in the eyes of many voters ever since and last week only reinforced it.

If it really was the case that ministers did not dare say “boo” to Rudd as prime minister and warn him of the consequences of his style of government, the party should go back to the Labor tradition of caucus choosing the members of its front bench – the system Rudd advocated last week, even though he overturned it as leader. That would make ministers less beholden to the leader, who still would have the power to allocate portfolios.

In the ultimate act of reconciliation, Gillard could have offered Rudd a job. How about foreign affairs? If she was genuine in her claim that she would choose her front bench on merit, surely she could not overlook someone who had been “an amazing advocate” of Australian interests overseas?

Alas, she can’t do that because, she said this week, “Kevin Rudd today has made it very clear what his vision of his future is as the member for Griffith.”

Sure, and she is Australia’s greatest Prime Minister.

Mike Steketee, The Australian, here

• Today: Listen to Treasurer Wayne Swan launch into the Elites, National Press Club here

• Senator Bob Brown, Greens Leader MR: Tax gold, uranium: drop tax cut for big business

Australia should secure its future with a fair dinkum mining tax, Australian Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.

“Treasurer Wayne Swan is right. Australia’s fair go is under threat,” Senator Brown said in Hobart.

“Australia can fund its education needs – including the $5 billion proposed by the Gonski review, health services, public transport, a national dental program and high speed rail. There is an additional $100 billion available over the next 10 years if we implement the original super-profits tax,” Senator Brown said.

“As Mr Swan says, ‘deep pockets, conservative political support, biased editorial policy and shock-jock ranting has been mobilised in an attempt to protect vested interest’. The full-page ads running in the nation’s newspapers show why the big mining companies should not have their company taxes cut from 30% to 29%.

“Today Mr Swan rejected calculations of the difference in revenue between the MRRT and original RSPT. He should release Treasury calculations on the foregone revenue, based on the same assumptions about the exchange rate, commodity prices and volumes. The rate has dropped from 40% to 22.5% and many minerals have been excluded, so let the taxpayers have the information.

“We think small businesses, which employ half the workforce, not the big banks and the big mining corporations, should be getting the proposed tax break. This will keep billions of dollars in Australia which might otherwise go as profits offshore.

“As well as dropping the corporate tax cut for big business, the proposed mining tax needs to be amended to include gold and uranium, if not all minerals, and the daft plan to refund royalties should be dropped,” Senator Brown said.