Opinion 
 Blogs 
 National Comment 
 ANALYSIS: Master of all but people 

ANALYSIS: Master of all but people

KEVIN RUDD'S rise to power was a peculiar triumph over the party's opposition. Caucus didn't like him but the public did. He led no faction and won few friends in Parliament but appealed directly to the Australian people. Rudd rose on the polls and the polls destroyed him.

At the shabby end of the Howard years he seemed exactly what Australia needed: a conviction politician of rare courage. As he rose through the ranks he presented himself as a truth-teller, soft-hearted, hard-headed, a fighter, a man of vision out to reshape the future. The public loved him.

Rudd looked different close up. So many who worked around him came to loathe the man. His energy and resilience were phenomenal. So were his temper and relentless self-belief. Caucus colleagues felt belittled. Ministers were frustrated. Staff fled. Camaraderie was never the man's style.

Mark Latham aimed one of his cruellest barbs at Rudd, saying after the 2004 elections: "He only holds his frontbench position because of his media profile and public standing among people who have never actually met him." Two years later he had Latham's job as leader of the opposition.

He proved the party's greatest electoral asset since Bob Hawke and did what only half a dozen Labor leaders have done since Federation: he brought the party in from opposition to government. And the party rewarded him with unprecedented powers. This was emphatically - until yesterday - the Rudd Labor government.

It was always personal. His politics were driven by a decent ambition to make Australia a better place for families like his. He was only a kid when his father died after a car crash. The Rudds were thrown off their farm and he was parked in a grim boarding school. His efforts to escape these terrible years marked him for life.

Safe back at Nambour High he began to work. Doing his homework better than anyone else in the school was the template of every success that came his way. This was more than swatting: his aim was to make himself unassailable. "I just got determined to make sure that I could look after myself in life and do something about what I saw to be wrong things happening in the world."

The idea of going into politics hit him when he was still a schoolboy. For Rudd, politics was always about leadership. Ultimate power. Though a couple of uncles were Country Party mayors in the deep north, he opted for Labor. But he was a long time joining the party and didn't lift a finger to help Labor in the turbulent late 1970s.

At that time, Rudd was leading a troupe of evangelical Christians at the Australian National University. He was a campaigning wowser in the company of Therese Rein, the woman who would become his wife. She too supported his long-term goal of pursuing politics. She waited for this, Rein says, from their "very first meeting".

Rudd believes he can master anything. The tougher the task, the better. He mastered Mandarin and was a promising young diplomat before taking time out to become chief bureaucrat to the reforming Labor premier of Queensland, Wayne Goss.

But here the problems began to show. Though super bright and determined, young Rudd made enemies everywhere. Something was missing. The subject he never mastered was people. Politics is all about people.

Everything else he mastered on his long climb to the top. He learnt to sidestep the factions and won pre-selection for his Brisbane seat . But when he arrived in Canberra, Rudd was written off by his colleagues as a strangely ambitious nerd. They underestimated him. Eventually he "nagged" the party into giving him the leadership, says Bob Carr.

Australians saw him every week for seven years on Seven's Sunrise. They saw him endlessly busy as Labor's spokesman on foreign affairs through the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. They saw him batter the government over the AWB "wheat for weapons" scandal. But they didn't see the chaos behind the scenes.

He had to do everything himself. He couldn't trust and didn't delegate. He worked his staff ruthlessly. His temper was formidable. The office operated in a strange atmosphere of rush and delay. Everything happened at the last minute, more often than not to suit the next media hit. This didn't change when he became PM. While he rode high in the polls it hardly mattered. His party accepted Rudd's demands for near absolute control. Cabinet was reduced to a shadow of itself.

Part of the problem was Rudd's old ambition to find decent solutions to the nation's problems. Decency is personal, intuitive, hard to delegate. Marry that to a sense of indispensability that is right off the Richter scale, and you had a recipe for ruin. Once again, Rudd had enemies everywhere.

When the polls turned after Copenhagen - and plunged once Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan persuaded Rudd to dump the emissions trading scheme - the prime minister found he had few friends where it mattered: in caucus. Factions are there for the hard times, supporting leaders when they mess up. They weren't there for Rudd.

Another man might have changed his ways. Had the party any confidence that was possible, Rudd might have survived. But the verdict of his colleagues, and the polls, was that changing Kevin Rudd was not a possibility. The problems were deep and personal. The brutal conclusion was he had to go.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1




comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
It is interesting that the former PM referred to being elected PM by the people of Australia. Additionally that the new PM will not move into the Lodge until she has been elected by the people. Members of the public interviewed on TV news have made the same mistake thinking that only they should be able to change the person in the position. This illustrated the lack of understanding of the political system we have. We do not have an election for PM, we elect local members and the person who can achieve the confidence of the parliament (normally the leader of the majority party) is asked to form a government by the Governor General. Therefore, whomever the majority party believes should lead them is put forward to the Governor General as PM. You may as well say that we elect the leader of the opposition - and look how many of them we've had recently. Indeed, the position of PM is not even mentioned in the constitution. If people think they can elect their national leader directly then we need a presidential form of government and need to change the constitution! At minimum the public need to be educated about our political system.
Posted by Chris McNicol, 25/06/2010 11:04:21 AM
The Grim boarding school offered K. Rudd free board and education while his mother trained as a nurse to support the family.He apparently forgot that Christian act of kindness for a political position. He was the same when he was a kid! Bye Kruddy
Posted by get it right, 25/06/2010 12:05:24 PM
Chris is right. We alected local members who in turn choose between them whom the trust and follow. If that person fails in their duties then we should expect nothing less that what as happen now. And I did not even vote for this government.
Posted by carmatt, 25/06/2010 6:59:42 PM
Chris (McNicol) You have hit the nail right the head. I would love to be able to vote for the PM directly - however we don't intend moving to Brisbane. I think we Australians should be curious why the polls slid so quickly against the current government (I notice the later one's were coming back positive) it seems the caucus may have been a bit over-reactive, but time was a problem for them (panic). How do you think I/we feel living in an electorate where the ALP did not even have a candidate last election? Fortunately we have a good independent in the seat of "Lynne" (NSW North coast) What a shame that this could not have all been resolved by "consultation and negotiation" within the ALP (this includes the unions) It looks like the "media" is the only avenue to educate the people (with no government advertising permitted) - I hope that they are not biased!
Posted by peewee, 25/06/2010 8:40:57 PM
Chris M ... been reading constitutional law, have we? I wonder how much of an inkling you had about our political system before you were required to read for that (compulsory) unit? Now, all of a sudden, you knew it all along and you have the arrogance to insist that everyone must also do what you have done, or else not speak ... yawn. You sound a little like Rudd, youself (in the context of this article), and that's not a compliment.
Posted by Bored reader, 26/06/2010 6:33:02 PM
It seems that Rudd is a type of people of personal excellence, but not even qualifying for an ordinary teamworker. That type of personal quality or attribute defines both his sucesses and failures we have seen. If all the matters could be mastered by a person, then he would always prevail. But if the matter needs others cooperation and supports, he may struggle and possibly fail.
Posted by Mr Lincoln, 26/06/2010 8:39:59 PM
There was no throwing off the farm. A huge lie. Don't call this ANALYSIS until you start to use facts.
Posted by Keith, 28/06/2010 1:17:50 PM
Perhaps what Australia couldn't cope with was Rudd's superior intelligence and his stand against the mining giants. The tall poppy syndrome appears again as a welcome bedmate to our preoccupation with paranoia and witchhunt hysteria about anything we don't understand. I wonder how long Julia will last once the honeymoon is over. Don't pin your hopes on anything lasting.
Posted by Marie Jacqueline Lee, 28/06/2010 10:26:54 PM
Chris McNicol - read your comment. The Governor-General's daughter is going out with Bill Shorten, ex-AWU Secretary, now, Parliamentary Secretary for Disability & Children's services whom Rudd promoted. The Governor General should of sacked Gillard and those factions bullying Rudd. The NSW state government is corrupt and from now with what we have witnessed, it seems the Federal Government is going to be the same with those union bullies ruling who should and shouldn't be our PM.
Posted by Eunice, 30/06/2010 11:18:14 AM
Marie Jacqueline Lee, you just placed the tail on the donkey - so right, Australian's have a Tall Poppy syndrome. I actually read the book in 1986, great book too. In America it is so different, to become President of America, one of the requirements are, you have to be born there. When OBama went for Presidency, the nasty's were out there trying to prove he wasn't born there. Hawaii, still USA homeland so he was lucky. It should be the same for Australia and Gillard would have not have passed as she was born in Wales and came here when she was 4 years of age. Kevin Rudd worked hard to where he got, he apparently joined the Labor Party when he was only aged 15. He was the top of his High School in honours and was School Captain. This guy is naturally gifted and which I believed was going to change Australia. He really wanted to help the underprivilledge which Howard pushed aside and tried to create jobs in areas but he didn't realise it would become corrupted. Not his fault there. Think of the heart of the matter, why he did it. Not to get votes but to improve schools for students and help with the environment. Coalition is against the tax on polluters.
Posted by Eunice, 30/06/2010 11:30:06 AM
National Comment
Here is the place for you to vent on any national or world news and lifestyle stories on the YourGuide websites. If there is anything you see or hear that you like or don't like, tell us. Don't keep it to yourself!

Most popular articles




The Examiner Newspaper







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...