Now Is The Time To Come To The Aid Of The Party
The Age
Saturday April 5, 2008
Peter Costello's continuing presence in Parliament would add knowledge and experience - but ambition is inevitable.
THE well-bolstered Opposition back benches in Federal Parliament, present home to some well-upholstered ex-ministers of the former Howard government, are shortly to be minus one of their number. Former agriculture minister Peter McGauran announced on Thursday that he is leaving federal politics to work in the private sector; a byelection for his Nationals seat of Gippsland will be held in June. This departure raises again the question of the role of former ministers in opposition, and whether they should stand down in favour of fresher, younger talent. This question has, in particular, been asked of such senior politicians as former foreign minister Alexander Downer, former attorney-general Philip Ruddock and former Nationals leader Mark Vaile, whose parliamentary involvements have somewhat lessened since last November's election.Then there is the matter of former treasurer Peter Costello. The irony, of course, is that of all his former cabinet colleagues, Mr Costello was the one who appeared the likeliest to leave Parliament: "I will be looking to build a career post-politics in the commercial world," he announced on November 25, the day after the election, when he said he would not seek the Liberal leadership. Meanwhile, he said, he would stay on the back benches and act as mentor to younger MPs. It must be said that Mr Costello has remained true to his word: he has not missed a question time or division in the House since it first sat in February; in fact, his advisory role has been so successful that, as The Age reports today, a number of his Liberal colleagues have mounted a campaign to persuade Mr Costello to stay in Parliament. At the same time, influential figures in the party are urging him to reconsider standing for the leadership.These two issues, while not entirely isolated from each other, are deserving of separate consideration. On the first, Mr Costello is clearly seen as being of good influence to younger MPs - as this newspaper said post-election, "If (he) can pass on the knowledge and experience of his years of public service it will be no bad thing". This is also a time when the Liberal Party can ill afford to be without someone like Mr Costello, whose wisdom, allied with many years as a strong parliamentary performer, could have the capacity to inspire and perhaps re-ignite passions extinguished by electoral defeat. He might at present be wary of continuing such performances, but he obviously remains capable of delivering them. One of the precipitating reasons for the let's-keep-Costello campaign was his contribution to a "robust debate" in the party room on Labor's plan to deregulate wheat exports, in which Mr Costello argued the need for the Coalition to adopt a united position. On the second issue, of leadership, it should be remembered that the Liberal Party has one: Brendan Nelson, who may be struggling in the opinion polls, has not had enough time to prove his capacities and skills. His first real test will be his response to next month's federal budget - and that is still a long way from the next election. In the meantime, Dr Nelson should be given the chance to continue to consolidate the party's public image rather than face further damaging internal dissension. His party should know that, too. The underlying problems with both issues are to do with questions of motivation. Not so much on the part of Peter Costello - he has yet to indicate anything regarding his future in Parliament other than his original intention to leave it - as the intentions of those of his colleagues who want to him to stay. There is the pure motivation of retaining Mr Costello's political experience and expertise; but there is also the inevitable political motivation of seeing him as leader, and who stands to be affected or disaffected were this to happen. Central to this is shadow treasurer Malcolm Turnbull, who narrowly lost to Dr Nelson in the leadership ballot and whose ambitions for the post remain unalloyed. It would be quite within Mr Turnbull's rights to see a push for a Costello leadership as thwarting his own efforts, thereby creating further party disunity at a time it needs just the opposite. As for Peter Costello, whose own ambitions were so frequently thwarted by John Howard, at least he can now afford to contemplate at leisure and on his own terms: after all, but for his change of heart on November 25, he would be Opposition leader. Even so, if Mr Costello decides to stay on, there are certain practicalities and sensitivities to consider. For example, how long could he remain on the back benches without making useful contributions - as a former treasurer with 12 budgets to his credit - to the debate on the deteriorating economy? It would make greater sense for Mr Costello to be on the front bench - but in what capacity and at what competitive cost to Mr Turnbull and Dr Nelson? Certainly, the Liberals need all the strengths they have, and Mr Costello's strengths are considerable. But these should not be at the expense of the present leadership. The utmost care and discretion will be required.
© 2008 The Age
