Eunuchs and their Pharaoh

Michael Cooney was the speech-writer for Julia Gillard and he was launching his personal memoir about his time in her office, but the discussion was strangely light on Gillard herself. It seems a common aspect of our recent PM, perhaps as a reserved woman, perhaps as the subject of immense attacks from both sides. MC was interviewed by Katherine Murphy, the Guardian's Parliament House reporter and, although the numbers weren't large, there were ex- or perhaps current-political staffers in the room. Maybe that's why the talk veered onto life in a PM's office. But early, MC agreed that he was, at least in some way, seeking to elevate the memory of JG and the "pantheon of Labor heroes" was mentioned. He suggested JG bore comparisons to Chifley. Why's this needed? Because she suffered so much attack from Rudd and Abbott, because she had won the 2010 election (which seems to have been forgotten) and because she was actually PM for longer than Whitlam. I was surprised at that last revelation. But it's clear she was more successful than her enemies allowed her to be. Time will tell [when the destruction of carbon pricing will be seen as the dumb and dangerous action that it clearly was and hopefully current proto-police-state legislation - metadata, citizenship and the rest - is removed]. As a role, the PM is different, is treated differently and changes people. MC recounted the story of Mr Rabbit: in the endlessly disrepectful way that JG was treated, she was questioned on her pronunciation of Mr Abbott as if she'd said Mr Rabbit. What??? This to a PM? This in the context of her miserable and even pornographic treatment as a woman? It's demeaning and should turn every woman voter, but it didn't seem to. The life of a political staffer is a "strange existence" too, being both influential, demanding and responsible but self-effacing and without influence or authority. Why did MC do it? He joked because of an "unsuccessful preselection". He recounted a Bondi party of ministerial office staff. He inevitably spoke of the very recent ABC doco, "The Killing Season", saying it was well structured, revealing of personalities, complex but well balanced, although totally on personalities and ignoring the policy. He spoke of the tensions in political offices as between short- and long-term rather than ideologies and the rest. And of JG's shyness but ambition and her great bravery in the context of misogyny and leaks and slogans. Also that her friends were outside politics and that she lacked a "Press Gallery champion". He warned of the heavy demands from the media for the PM's time and compared offices and PR functions in UK and US. There was a short discussion on that early election announcement in 2013. [I always thought that was brave and generous, but noone was giving JG any leeway: she was never going to gain anything from announcing the election date so early and in the end she lost markedly]. There was talk of other revealing political TV, especially Veep (about a fictional US female vice president) and The thick of it (BBC UK). There were some interesting quotes, although here they are out of context: "They bury the eunuchs with the Pharaoh" (political staffers as eunuchs) and "Flight recorder before the crash" (Don Watson, although I missed the context). Also some chat about social media and how it's changing things, making every individual into a minor broadcast celebrity. Finally some thoughts on Rudd's office and Killing Fields as an irresistible opportunity for pollies to work on their legacy. So, Gillard was strangely absent here and perhaps the individual broadcast celebrities of her political office took some limelight. But I haven't worked there, despite being fairly close living here in Canberra and hearing the occasional goss, so it was interesting nonetheless.

Michael Cooney (author) was interviewed by Katherine Murphy (Press Gallery journalist) at the Canberra launch of his new book, The Gillard Project : My thousand days of despair and hope, at Paperchain Bookshop in Manuka.

Looking better every day

Julia Gillard didn't speak so there's little to report here. But I like the pic and it's not often I meet a PM, even an ex-PM, so here it is. Julia was signing her book at Paperchain and there was a queue outside the door for it. Only in Canberra, perhaps, but she's looking better with every day of her replacements. I think of the lost carbon price and mining tax and the rest, of the heavier cost of fixing this all down the track, of our international reputation as the only country to remove carbon pricing, lots lots more. We've had a tragic time in politics of late, to some degree from both sides of politics, and it's not just us. Princeton researchers have recently concluded that the US is an oligopoly, no longer a democracy. "The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. / So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page." (Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy, BBC News Echo Chambers, http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746, viewed 4 Jan 2015). Feel free to weep for lost opportunities, express your (informed) concerns and vote accordingly when you have the chance. But then I'd expect nothing less from people who appreciate the fine arts, not least jazz. And if you're interested, Christmas has passed and given the short shelf live of political memoirs, I expect it's now a cheaper read.

Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens / Martin Gilens, Benjamin I. Page

It does not explain everything, nor does it explain nothing

At Julia Gillard's first speech after losing the Labor leadership and the Prime Ministership, I was particularly taken by these words: "... the reaction to being the first female prime minister does not explain everything about my prime ministership, nor does it explain nothing". I think we will think much more highly of Gillard in future than we did a year or so ago. I didn't agree with all her policies (she was often too conservative for me) but she did good work and instigated decent legislation from well founded policy in an incredibly difficult situation, dealing with two oppositions (one within her own party) along the way. I fretted about her communication and it seemed to me that she failed as PM for that is perhaps the key skill, to bring the Australian public with her. But I recognise how strong and brave she was, and how difficult were her circumstances. So with this in mind and intrigued by other views, I attended a book launch of Gravity by Mary Delahunty in conversation with Chris Uhlmann at Paperchain Bookshop.

Mary worked in Gillard's office for a year and has been a politician (State, Labor, Victoria) and journalist. She first talked of Gillard's last day, and how, even on her last day, she had asked of Joan Kirner, who then had serious health issues. Also, how the tone of her office, calm, working, told of her leadership. She considered how, as Deputy PM, she was seen as the most effective in Parliament, but how this had so quickly changed with her accession to PM, so she lost legitimacy and was reviled ("nice girls don't wield knives"). She recognised mistakes, but noted Gillard's strength and competence despite the personal attacks. She observed that "Australians are comfortable with the notion of female power" (think early female suffrage) but Gillard experienced a breakdown of decency (Ju-liar, Bob Brown's bitch, etc) that left the field open for the "nutters". Think Alan Jones' notorious remark that her father "died of shame" (not to forget the "Chaff bag", carbon tax "borders on the treasonous" and "Bring back the guillotine!" comments). Mary observed that Malcolm Turnbull was one of the few who came out against this "vicious and destructive public discourse". Mary thinks this all got to Gillard (not surprisingly; she is human) and at Joan Child's funeral, a few weeks after her father's death, Gillard appeared to be "shrinking". Then that famous Misogyny speech. The strength of that, and the meek response from Abbott and crew were one point of real, emotive, informed communication with the Australia people, and internationally with women. I'd forgotten this, but Mary recounted that it followed a line from Abbott making veiled reference to Jones, that "This Government should have died of shame". I just wonder how Keating would have responded over time to the bitter personal attacks that Gillard received. Mary suggested the three requirements for a good politician are Policy, Purpose and PR. There was talk of that lovely photo of Gillard, taken by 12 year old Sophie with new camera and Down Syndrome, and how it showed her humanity. And talk of more viciousness. Apparently there have still been no apologies over the obnoxious Quail menu. And of the tweets on her 50th birthday, where some rugby league player (Robbie Farah, who's he?) suggested "a noose" for a birthday present and later tweeted that he was not talking of suicide and that people should "lighten up". Again, think licence to nutters. At least he has apologised. Then discussion of the effectiveness of some policy implementation (education as "sector blind / needs based"; I also think climate policy). But also of some failures, like Conway and his media reforms and the State of Palestine vote. Mary reminded us of Gillard's quip that there are 3 people in this marriage (meaning Gillard, Abbott and Rudd). Mary again, that Rudd was "pretty shocking" (and more that I won't quote here) and that Abbott was the most "pugilist" opposition leader in recent history. Questions were about whether the 9 month announcement of the election was wise: "No, I don't think so". Why did her communication change so spectacularly when she became PM: a "great tragedy" but that's not to deny some political errors. Is there less respect for PMs here (vs USA, UK, etc) and what's the role of media and Australian culture: amongst discussion, Mary noted that Gillard "parked her gender" but that her opponents used it. In this gender context, Mary said Julie Bishop has done an excellent job recently on MH-17 but that she is a "protected species" as the one woman in Cabinet: a Liberal members told her "we can't touch her, she's a shiela". Caringly, the last question was about how Gillard is faring now: she's heavily involved in a Global Education project and frequently in Washington DC and Geneva; she has "ups and downs", is sensitive to writings about her and misses policy work and colleagues (there was some mirth and incredulity following the mention of missing colleagues).

This is a complex story and much more will be written of it all and it's too early to see what views the historians take in the end. It's just one policy, but I can only imagine that Gillard's climate policies will be praised and Abbott's removal will be pilloried. As it should be. She had her weaknesses and made mistakes, but, as happens with many women, she was quietly capable beyond many men of her times, but too quietly.

Mary Delahunty was in conversation with Chris Uhlmann at Paperchain for the launch of her new book: Gravity : Inside the PM's office during her last year and final days / Mary Delahunty. Richmond, Vic. : Hardie Grant Books, 2014.

A political indulgence

Julia Gillard was more personable than I’d expected given that she seems so strained and wooden on TV. But she was amongst admirers, or at least amongst fellow travellers for a price on carbon. We were at an event organised by GetUp! In case you are living under a mushroom, GetUp! is Australia’s centre-left new-style online Web-generation political movement. It’s got a membership of several hundred thousand. Membership is not demanding, just receipt of a few emails each week, but you can take it further and be involved: attend demonstrations, write to pollies, do handouts, lump up some cash for whatever cause, even attend sessions with the PM. So there we were. The main speaker was Julia Gillard, with a retinue of press, taking questions for 30 minutes from GetUp!’s founder, Simon Sheikh. She was interesting and quite pleasant in person: not particularly au fait with the science, a little better on the economics, but her job is not the detail, it’s the politics and negotiations and persuasion. Certainly, her fellow speakers were on-side with the effectiveness of the plan (carbon tax moving rapidly to a market in carbon). Will Steffen, head of the ANU Climate Change Institute, gave a potted summary of climate change science and its implications, and it’s not a comfortable and relaxed story. Ben McNeil of UNSW spoke on the opportunities in the green economy. I was particularly impressed by Will S, but science and rationality are things I hold dearly. Ben M had me heartened and unexpectedly optimistic. His line was that the green revolution is as significant as the industrial revolution or our recent information revolution and there are great opportunities in it (and great dangers for countries that hold to the old path). This accords with what I’ve been thinking recently. Getting in early enough (perhaps not first and we’re not the first) is an advantage, although there are transition costs (and thus winners and noisy losers). Climate change is a big and difficult issue. We’ve known of the physics for over a century but we’ve only known of our own climate change for 25 years or so. It will take a mammoth change in our technologies and we have to make the change over only a few decades and in the context of the GFC, peak oil, Fukushima, crises with water and food and the rest. It’s never a good time to make massive change that will have an effect on entrenched wealth, but we gotta do it. Megan and I felt oddly positive when we left. As for the party politics, I do wonder what Abbott would do if he got in, and it’s possible he will in a few years. I can’t really believe the Liberal Party would allow him to dismantle carbon pricing. I guess he’d make some changes and claim he’d done what he promised, especially given that his market-free alternative goes against party philosophy and market economics (being essentially socialist: climate change paid for by the tax-payer through payments to industry). He’d have to believe the science is bunkum, which he may do and a few others (eg, Minchin, Pell) obviously do, but despite the polls, it’s clearly a losing bet that would take Australia’s economy with it and civilisation as we know it if the rest of the world followed suit. How would you like that on your conscience? Not to say anything of his negativity and Tea-Party-style emotionalism (but then the Labor Party is hardly politically angelic, either). Pricing carbon is the future; carbon as an economic externality is clearly the past. Accept that one and we have a chance of a liveable future. Good on ya, Julia: win or lose, your conscience is clear, and all else is forgiven if you pull this one off.