Rudd’s return a rather scary idea all round

POLITICS ... with Mungo MacCallum

Let’s be absolutely clear about why the opposition is currently obsessed with the prospect of a Kevin Rudd comeback: they – and especially Tony Abbott — are seriously scared that it might happen. Therefore logic dictates that they bring it to a climax, one way or another, before either the ALP or the general public is ready for it.

The ideal result would be to cut it off at the pass; by talking up Rudd’s chances before his supporters can get their act together, people like Barnaby Joyce and Nigel Scullion are hoping to ensure that Rudd’s opponents, led by the warlords who deposed him in the first place, will act pre-emptively to prevent the idea from gaining any serious momentum.
But if it does – if the members stuck in the ever-increasing number of seats which the polls are declaring marginal or worse become desperate enough to defy their factional bosses – then let it happen as soon as possible.
The worst thing that could possibly happen would be for Rudd to return to a second honeymoon with the voters just before an election. For various reasons, both technical and political, an election does not become a practical proposition until 2013.
Getting Rudd back now would at least give Abbott and his bully boys a solid year to work him over, or even, perhaps, for his own side once more to turn against him. But it would also give Rudd time to expose the manifest inadequacy of Abbott as an alternative Prime Minister and the Libs themselves have a potential saviour waiting in the wings in the form of Malcolm Turnbull.
Abbott would much rather not take the risk. Admittedly he nailed Rudd in 2010, with more than a little help from Rudd’s own side; but times have changed. As many of his own colleagues have unkindly pointed out, Julia Gillard is his best asset; a switch to anyone, but especially Rudd, would be a change for the worse.
Abbott is old enough to remember the way Gough Whitlam destroyed Billy Snedden, only to find himself facing Malcolm Fraser. And he will also recall Malcolm McGregor’s crack about the 1996 election: John Howard only won because his opponent was Paul Keating. If he had been standing unopposed, he would have lost. It is not that Abbott is ascendant in the polls – rather that Gillard is close to rock bottom. With enemies like that, who needs friends?
But simple arithmetic suggests that Gillard is fairly safe, at least for some time yet. Scullion says Rudd is within nine votes of making it, and Joyce says seven, but what would they know?
Graham Richardson estimates Rudd’s supporters at between 10 and 20, which sound a lot more realistic; given that he needs 52 in a caucus of 103, he’s still only looking at his hard core. There is no doubt that some rusted-on Ruddites are starting to make soundings, but in spite of the lazier commentators (who are always happy to fall back on a leadership challenge story – it’s so much easier than real journalism) there is no serious campaign – yet.
And if Abbott has his way, there never will be. For once, he and Gillard are in perfect harmony. And if Rudd were to make a comeback, he would still have to deal with the government’s ongoing problems – selling the carbon tax, dealing with the miners and devising a policy on the boat people.
But in the last case at least he would be an improvement, if only because he would not be as sickeningly sanctimonious and hypocritical as the present chorus. It’s not just the blame shifting, the abuse, the mindless sloganeering – they have become par for the course in the current parliament.
It’s the obscene pretence that both party leaders are really acting with the best interests of the asylum seekers in mind. It’s only by destroying their last chance of salvation, by condemning them to hell, we are told, that our caring parliament can save them from death at the hands of the people smugglers. We have to be cruel to be kind.
Leave aside for a moment the nonsense about the UN convention and protocols; Abbott didn’t worry about such niceties during the Pacific Solution and doesn’t now. Not only would he return the asylum seekers to a non-signatory (Indonesia) but he would reintroduce Temporary Protection Visas, which breach the protocol provisions on travel and family reunion, among others.
And ignore Gillard’s protestations that the Malaysians are really sweet and caring people who will always do the right thing by refugee applicants; they don’t and they wouldn’t. And even if they did, so what? She is still in breach of the spirit, if not the letter, of the UN convention herself, not to mention her own party’s platform.
Abbott and Gillard are lying: their immediate concern is not the welfare of the wretches who are so desperate that they deliberately and willingly risk the potentially fatal trip to Australia in the belief that nothing – not even the remote and overcrowded concentration camps run by mercenary goons who treat them like criminals – could be worse or more hopeless than their present conditions.
For Gillard and Abbott, this is not a human tragedy, to be met with decency and compassion. It’s a political problem, to be exploited in the most viciously partisan manner and to be solved with spin and gimmickry.
If ever there was a reason to change both leaders, and as quickly as possible, the last couple of weeks have provided it. Rudd and Turnbull both have their faults, but they could hardly fail to be an improvement.