The man who never was: Costello closes the door
|
I thought until yesterday at about 1.40pm that the consensus among MPs, journalists and commentators was that Peter Costello would re-nominate for Higgins, setting in train further destabilisation of Malcolm Turnbull. As we trooped into Question Time, however, the word spread: Costello had bailed out. Suddenly, the new consensus was that, really, it was the sensible thing to do — his colleagues had got sick of the speculation and Costello finally recognised it. We media types are never wrong. Several things to say about Costello before he vanishes into history — barring, of course, that last minute, Colin Barnett-style draft when Malcolm Turnbull sniffs a chair next year (go on, who can resist?). The lack of ticker line is, as Costello himself argues, balanced by the fact that he was unwilling to tear his party apart for the sake of his desire for the Prime Ministership and there is something to be said for that. In Australian politics, we — as in, the media — tend to back those whose ambition is unqualified — who let neither personal feelings nor party unity nor anything else get in the way of their quest for glory. All of our Prime Minister since Fraser have been men who would do anything to get and keep the top job, men whose laser-like focus on the Prime Ministership had no regard for splitting their parties, driving the country to the brink of crisis or wrecking close friendships. Malcolm Turnbull is the same. Costello, like Kim Beazley, was cut from different cloth — which is not a bad thing simply because the Press Gallery says it is. But even so, John Howard’s willingness to wreck his own party and earn the undying enmity of many colleagues in his quest for the leadership in the 1980s was a critical part of the development of the man who kept his party in party through four terms. On balance, which was the better approach? Incidentally, Howard’s statement about Costello last night has to be one of the more graceless acts in the long career of a man who, despite everything, always liked to observe good form. Costello’s entire career can be summed up fairly simply: he had so many opportunities and never used them. This is the bloke who had a rails run into the Liberal Party, who arrived in Canberra in 1990 with a huge reputation from his legal stoushes on IR matters, who always seemed set for big things and yet never took the leadership, despite what, four separate chances? And any number of provocations from John Howard who, like John Hewson before him, seemed to regard Costello as overrated. Similarly, on the economy Costello did the hard yakka of returning the Budget to surplus in 1996-97, but dropped the ball after that: letting Howard waste the proceeds of the long economic boom, apparently content with the GST and Workchoices as the Coalition’s primary economic reforms; unwilling to pursue a real small-government agenda; refusing to make any substantial changes to competition policy as oligopolies closed in our key sectors; unwilling, or too lazy, to pursue personal tax reforms until Malcolm Turnbull arrived and put a bomb under him. In the end he was responsible for leaving the Commonwealth budget dangerously exposed to corporate tax revenue — for which we will be paying for a long time to come. So many opportunities, so little result. He didn’t even make use of the platform afforded by his own memoirs, providing a drab account of his career and offering the solitary lesson from his time in politics that, surprise surprise, the Liberals should do succession planning better. Perhaps there’s something in the Costello psychology that has always prevented him from really seizing the many chances that came his way. Maybe, deep down, he didn’t feel he deserved them. Oftentimes arrogance is a cover for insecurity. We can engage in such psychobabble endlessly, but ultimately only Costello knows and maybe even he doesn’t. Yesterday in Parliament, it was the Prime Minister, rather than Malcolm Turnbull, who was the more eloquent about Costello, which is a rare reversal. Rudd made the excellent point that Costello’s work during the Asian financial crisis (which is the only issue on which his memoirs really get off the ground) and in establishing a broader finance ministers’ grouping than the G8, had significantly boosted Australia’s reputation in the region and established the basis for the G20. It is not out of the question that Rudd might see Costello, despite his deregulatory instincts, as ideal to represent Australia’s interests in the development of new financial architecture in the wake of the London G20 meeting, which breathed life into international regulatory frameworks and the role of the IMF and the Asian Development Bank. In particular, the development of the “quota and voice” reforms of the IMF to give emerging economies a greater say, an issue on which Europe has been dragging its heels for so long, would be an area that would benefit from Costello’s occasionally vituperative attentions. Given Costello, due to John Howard’s recalcitrance, his own poor timing and the financial crisis, appears to have missed the boat on entering the private sector (another missed opportunity), a senior role in global financial governance might be both remunerative and perfectly suited to his CV. I said back after the election that Peter Costello would have to die and be born again to leave politics with a fraction of the goodwill and admiration Kim Beazley left with, but he got generous praise from his enemies and a rare round of applause from the chamber. It might have been tinged with relief, but he finishes up with more goodwill than one would have expected, and good luck to him. |
|
|
|
12 Comments
Costello never had a strategic bone in his body. He did balance the books but did little to set the country’s balance sheet up for sustainable growth; rather he pursued Market-led Economics 101 and combatted critics with clever but flippant commentary. As a Treasurer he made a great lawyer.
By all means, good luck to him. Perhaps the slightly sour taste retained by many of us who were once supporters—even, or especially, those who voted Labour—was that all those missed opportunities meant that the country was stuck with the unspeakable Howard for at least 6 years more than should have been the case. Of course in the intervening period it seems those hopes might have been misplaced or just plain wishful thinking. In the context of the dark days of Howard/Abbot/Ruddock/Downer/Andrews et al. one had to believe there was someone in the government who had a heart and an appropriate vision (there was: it was Petro Georgio…). Certainly his poor and lazy articles published recently in The Age do not reveal much depth of analytical thought or fund of reforming zeal. Likewise his very disloyal and entirely negative and bitter grousings from the backbench. Obviously much better if he had done this on matters of principle (even if mostly careerist) during the latter part of the Howard years.
A few comments:
Michelle Grattan being Age, Melbourne focused readers and a target of Costello’s ill judged sledge last year, half picked it with Fran Kelly ‘that with PC anything could happen’ or to that effect on RN yesterday morning.
And what about as I blogged after attending at the time of his Seymour Centre function in Sydney with father in law Peter Coleman late 2008 about their their book, where PC said ‘the purpose of politics is not about being opposition leader’. Think about that.
Does this mean he thinks Turnbull or himself for that matter can’t win the next election given the green shoots in the GFC? (The CBA etc PUTTING UP RATES??? For Godsake.)
Or maybe he realises climate policy has to be cleaned up and giving comfort to the Nats with a redneck wedge is really quite unpatriotic given the gravity of the science involved and impacts on Australia either in relation to global reinsurance or direct physical impacts?
Or that his job is done offsetting Howard effectively discredited and now long gone though the power grasping Short Man still howls from the political grave every now and then. On the other hand did Howard really break PC’s confidence/backbone year by year?
For me the soul sapping blow to his morale and political confidence must surely be as Peter Hartcher refers today, the “strategic blunder” of invasion of Iraq. With criminal sanctions against AWB still (!) outstanding, PC really is on the wrong side of history on that one while Turnbull came in untainted in 2004.
Or any combination of the these above plus the fact Turnbull having decided to have ‘a red hot go’ has turned the corner in the polls. As the Bard would say there is a tide in the affairs of men ….
Oh Tom, why on earth do you attempt to read more into Costello’s character than ever existed? He has always been a deeply flawed person. A ton of superficial ambition as long as he didn’t have to work too hard for it. Ask Treasury they’ll confirm it. As Bernard K puts it the man had a dream run on the rails but didn’t race true on the bit. As soon as someone challenged Peter Costello he’d quit. Having convinced a lot of people he was the right horse for the course, he would drop his head and eat the grass.
In short, don’t start feeling sorry, or reading too much into a person who expected everything to come to him without even trying. He was useless as the Member for Higgins and only as strong in Parliament as that awful little man, John Howard, allowed him to be. He has been nothing but a waste of space. As such his only value is to be a yesterday’s wanna be.
CLOSING THE DOOR — OR RUNNING OUT?
On my reading Costello has clearly seen the prospect of both an election later this year and the Coalition not only not winning but losing its grip on the Senate in a double dissolution.
As is the elected Government cannot govern
I’m glad to see the back of him. In Parliament, he was one of the nastiest, petty, vicious person; he took great delight in his own performance/s, and only made me cringe and turn off. He was a weak person who couldn’t stand up either for himself, or for anyone else for that matter. In short, good riddance!
The nonsense about his aptitude as Treasurer was mainly the propaganda of the Howard Govt spin team, repeated ad nauseum by a supportive media. He had huge opportunities with the boom times of the majority of his time as Treasurer, but allowed infrastructure to run down to an alarming degree. I feel angered by the now Opposition castigating the Rudd govt’s spending on infrastructure etc. If they’d had one ounce of care and concern for the country, they wouldn’t have plundered a golden opportunity. With Howard the dominator, Costello remained silent while Howard threw money around, just to win votes. Of course, those who didn’t NEED the handouts got heaps, and the NEEDY were left bereft. Just one example, the removal of the surcharge on superannuation for people receiving over $100,000 per year. This, coupled with tax cuts cost infrastructure $38 BILLION over 4 years. Costello exhibited this type of bias constantly. Even the increase in family benefits went to millionaires; payments to the wealthy to supplement their health care payments did not help those who were struggling and also ill. Wealthy private schools benefited over struggling public schools. There are heaps of examples I could name. Sadly, the present govt doesn’t seem like balancing the ledger in a just manner either?
Perhaps if we had pensioners, or sole parents, or people with disabilities and serious illnesses as journalists, reporting the news(as opposed to opinion pieces all the time) instead of middle class people earing a healthy income, there may have been more honest reporting over the years. Anyone reading Peter Hartcher’s article today must, like me, sigh with weariness at the inability of many journalists to not suck up to the conservatives.
What really galls me, is the shock jocks, current affairs programs, and too many so-called journalists castigating people on centrelink payments, who often unwittingly receive monies they’re not due, while Peter Costello sat in the Parliament being paid by me and others, while he wrote a book and received income from giving advice to companies, or overseas interests! Makes a so-called dole bludger pale into insignificence. This from a man who’d have liked ‘Worst Choices’ to be even more unjust than it was, and given the opportunity, he’d have done just that! Sickening! I wish he’d leave today!
Why do journalist have to report on these things, you should concentrate
please consentrate on the good things the Rudd gov is doing NOW for this country.
My Say: Apart from your spelling- concentrate-I would be delighted to know what the Rudd government IS doing lately. Because I voted for them and so far all they’ve done so far, is to break every promise they made.
Perhaps it’s in the phrase “… arrogance is a cover for insecurity”. A couple of sessions with Dale Carnegie may have ironed that out but something went wrong with Howard, wretched soul that he be, in the late nineties. You can hear the fireside chat from a Willoughby bunker this week as the Bonnie and Clyde of the Australian Liberal Party sip sherries and espouse their well-worn Christian values. “You know Janette I never got over Goodbye Jerusalem… emotional honesty repulses me…every time I looked at Peter my mind went back to us walking out of the Earlwood Orpheum on our engagement after getting refunds on the branch’s complimentary tickets to the sickening free love movie …Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice. One of those fork in the roads?
VENISE - I’m with you mate! On verything! I get angry with myself for believing that they would keep their word. Whether it’s work choices, whaling, aboriginal people and the horrific intervention etc, climate change or the disgraceful ABCC - I’m most disappointed and pissed off! We still have the shameful Anti-Terror Laws, and the nonsense over the last couple of days re the hypocritical response to the Iranian election just makes me mad. I haven’t heard them condemn water cannon use in NSW or the shocking abuse of rights and deaths caused by tazar guns etc.
Let’s join the bandwaggon and give Iran the business though for the political demonstrations that are treated with oppressive and awful responses including death? I’ve no love for the govt of Iran or the President, but where was the righteous indignation over the Bush ‘victory’ in 2000, or 2004 for that matter? The role the Court played - the Republican Campaign Director (Catherine??)gave the judicial decision not to allow the votes to be counted. George W’s brother was the governor of Florida?? The black people disenfranchised etc. The media in the US that gave the presidency to bush when there were votes still not counted?? The PATRIOT Act, ‘sneek and peek’ laws, renditions, torture on a grand scale causing death in some cases- it just goes on and on. From our govt(s)-not a hint of criticism, not from the media either? Hypocrisy is a health hazard!
I still couldn’t vote for that other lot though. Glad my first vote goes to the Greens. Now, they haven’t let me down?
I’ve got a shameful confession…I’ve voted Green for a while, but my prefs go to Labor. But I’m buggered if I’m going to continue doing so. Though that would invalidate my vote.
I’m a Greens supporter but have always admired Peter Costello. He stayed out of the Iraq War BS and was a great Treasurer. He is very quick witted and funny and, best of all, hates Howard. He is very unimpressed with the garbage remaining within the Liberal Party (and the garbage that deserted the Liberal Party) and will do extremely well in whatever venture he takes on next. He has my very best wishes for the future and I am greatly looking forward to reading about his next great achievements.