Oz Politics Blog

I am shocking with names. So I have some sympathy with Beazley’s latest slip: expressing condolences for the wrong Rove. Of course it was atrocious, embarrassing, badly timed and as we all know not the first slip of this kind.

Still, it was hardly a hanging offence … surely not?

It all depends on the paper you read. In the Fairfax press, it was not so . But in the Murdoch press … perhaps it was. According to Dennis Shanahan,

… the high-profile gaffe and its timing could turn it into a Labor epiphany. This could have the effect of unleashing the dogs of war, venting the frustration so many of his supporters feel and convincing waverers that things could be better under a different leader.

It could also drive Beazley’s supporters to try to draw leadership contenders into premature moves and have it all out and over before a Christmas deadline. Since Beazley was drawn into a premature challenge against Simon Crean, which he lost, there is an acute awareness among Beazley’s key supporters of pushing contenders into challenges too early, and they are keen to get any uncertainty cleared away by Christmas.

Shanahan identified Kevin Rudd as the leadership plotter most feared by the Beazley camp. Not surprisingly, Rudd denied scheming to remove Beazley and defended his leader.

Frankly, I would be surprised if Rudd is seriously considering a pre-Christmas challenge for the leadership of the Labor Party. As I see it, the no challenge option is win-win. If Beazley is elected, Rudd becomes a senior minister in the next Labor government. If Beazley loses the next election, Rudd is well placed to be the next Leader of the Opposition. A challenge, on the other hand, could easily become lose-lose. If the challenge fails, it would see Rudd consigned to the backbench. If he wins, there will be a honeymoon but, as Latham discovered, no guarantee of ascension.

While this slip was a purple moment for Beazley, I doubt that his leadership is on the line.

As an aside, Matt Price’s observations on politicians and messages of condolence was instructive.

Remember, too, that Beazley’s self-inflicted wound was the result of a common, yet cynical political tactic. Nobody should be in any doubt that the Opposition Leader, like everybody else, feels genuine sympathy for McManus over the death of his brave wife, Belinda Emmett.

But by opening yesterday’s media conference with a proclamation of this sympathy, Beazley was also positioning himself to be involved in blanket news coverage of the funeral.

This happens all the time; the Prime Minister is a maestro at engineering an apposite comment to accompany the story du jour. Which, if often effective, is still cynical and opportunistic. And, when you voluntarily venture into unfamiliar territory and get things wrong, perilous, too.

Update 19 November: Perhaps we have enetered the purple zone. The Age has joined the Australian.

FEDERAL Labor leader Kim Beazley is under mounting pressure to resign and make way for a “dream team” ticket of frontbenchers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

Several key Labor figures, including the ALP’s national secretary, Tim Gartrell, are believed to have admitted privately that Mr Beazley cannot win the next election on his current performance.

If Beazley is entering the purple zone of a potential leadership challenge (and it is a big ‘if’), I suspect one or both of these observations follow:

• a significant number of Labor insiders think Beazley absolutely cannot win the next election (presumably based on a much harsher assessment of their chances than my recent assessment), and/or
• a significant number of Labor insiders think that that someone else (presumably Rudd) has a substantially better chance than Beazley of winning the next election

However, I am not sure that I would agree with either observation.

Update 20 November: Today’s press just burbled with the bonhomie of faithful commitments from Rudd and Gillard to see Beazley lead Labor to the next election (eg. Telegraph, SMH, and the Age).

Over at the Oz, Shanahan had this explanation for the lack of a leadership challenge.

This is not a normal leadership challenge - it is an expression of deep dissatisfaction that lacks concerted organisation and common aims, which could mean it does not come to a head. That is why defensive moves to shore up Beazley’s position are proving difficult and poorly executed.

But it is not sunshine everywhere. At the SMH, Ross Gittens argued that Beazley is light on economic policy. The Courier Mail had another bad poll for Labor.