New Boss Not The Messiah, Just A 'Very Ambitious' Ideas Man

by Nicholas Stuart - Canberra Times

The startling difference with this new Labor leadership team is that they've forgotten government. Both Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard first came to Parliament in 1998. Although the rhetoric is all about a "new style of leadership", there will also be some fairly fundamental policy changes as a result of the leadership shakeout. That's indicated by the simple fact that the Opposition hasn't been spooked into a mad rush to establish a new front bench. Instead, if we are to judge from the annual opposition leader's background, there will be some fairly significant policy wonking taking place over the Christmas holidays.

He'll also be attending church, of course. Rudd doesn't swear, as became obvious in the first few minutes of his leadership. Promising to do everything possible to sweep the Howard Government away, he used the words "a hang of a lot". Presumably this meant he did not have to take the word hell in vain. Nevertheless, small stylistic changes like these are symbolic of a completely new mental landscape for the Opposition.

The biggest change will not, of course, be the sudden introduction of new policies into the political debate. But there has been a significant shift.

Labor's entire way of looking at the world has changed. Rudd believes in basing policies on theoretical underpinnings. We'll be hearing a great deal more about abstract ideas like community, together with condemnation of Hayek's neo-liberal economic notions of the individual. Rudd won't be America's deputy sheriff; instead there will be a reorientation towards Asia. He is promising to be an alternative, not just an echo. Labor is renewing its focus on the great middle class, promising not simply the ladder of opportunity but also well thought out policies to help the economy thrive.

There was none of the mixed excitement, perhaps even euphoria, which accompanied Mark Latham's accession. But of course, the ride won't be as wild as it was with him, either. Despite his intensely held "muscular Christianity", Rudd is not the Messiah. Nevertheless, he does represent a significant break from the past. The change is something far more significant than just dumping Kim Beazley.

Yesterday, it was the former leader himself who said, "the public mood has changed".

Rudd's fluency and style while sometimes grating has always displayed a determination to succeed. To get to the top and make a difference. Quite sure that he has the answers, Kevin obviously and desperately wants to get his vision out, because he was sure if people could just understand it they'll become converts.

Years ago, while still a backbencher, he asserted, "I'm happy to serve in whatever position the party wants me". But there was flatness to his tone that revealed the formula nature of this reply. Prompted for a real answer, he went on. "Yes. Off the record, yes, I am ambitious," he admitted. Then, he paused, as if something had still been left unsaid. "Very ambitious."

That ambition has always been obvious to everyone. The first time he put himself forward was during Beazley's abortive coup attempt in December three years ago. Simon Crean's leadership had been terminally destroyed that November, when senior Labor figures told the leader he'd lost the confidence of the party. But it was obvious Beazley lacked the numbers to firmly seize the top job. The party became split into two. Kevin Rudd hopefully put up his flag as a tie-breaker. His candidacy went down well with the academics, however they are not in Parliament and don't vote in ballots for the leadership. After a few days of desperately hoping a breeze would flicker his flag into life, he accepted numerical reality. Yet, perhaps not everything had turned out badly. Kevin had put his name up not in lights yet, perhaps, but at least it was up there, all the same. He felt obliged to pretend he had some chance of becoming leader again when Latham stood down. Some in the party were openly dismissive about his pretensions. However, the indefatigable Member for Griffith's drive ensured he retained his place as Foreign Affairs spokesman.

Finally, Beazley just imploded. He could no longer promise to re-make himself into a new model in the hope that this time, somehow, it would "cut through". And so the unlikely candidate finally rose to lead the party. It remains to be seen how easily he will convert that to a broader resonance with Australia. It would be nice to say something like "he wears his learning lightly", but this is not the truth. Yet even here the real picture is somewhat more complex than it first appears.

Years ago, the only decorations on the newly elected member's parliamentary office wall were two fine Chinese calligraphy paintings. Their form was relatively typical, an interesting combination of ideas and appearance, with broad brushwork in what appeared to be Running Script. Yet Rudd the politician quickly recoiled from the dire prospect of being labelled highbrow.

"Oh no," he rapidly insisted. "Just the product of a late night out on the town in Taipei." And then some muttered excuses about how he ended up with the artwork.

Questions about exactly what Rudd will bring to Labor are, ironically, best answered by focusing on the tangential. When Beazley, the Whitlam government minister's son travelled overseas as a youth, he went to India as a missionary. Kevin Rudd, the kid who had to sleep in a car when they were kicked off the farm after his father died, went to engage with the culture, not convert it. That's because the only way he could travel was with work. He threw himself into work and study because that was his way of escape.

People at Foreign Affairs still make the occasional snide comment about his Mandarin. That's because a first-class honours degree from the ANU is somehow considered not to be quite as good as immersion training.

Rudd required this intense self-belief in order to survive. It also gave him the independent focus required to be "such a bastard" when he was working for Queensland premier Wayne Goss. It's a mistake to think yesterday's ballot was a popularity contest. It was a tough analysis of competing choices, neither of which was overwhelmingly popular. The result may shake up the political equation, but it won't change the political dynamic overnight.


Nicholas Stuart is a Canberra writer.

[No Comments ]