Rudd's long cold shower heats up as leadership stress grows - The Age

Illustration: Andrew Dyson

WHAT'S Kevin up to? It's the perennial question for those Labor MPs who voted for Julia Gillard in last year's leadership ballot, and for her advisers, but now it's being asked by some of Rudd's own supporters, too. What purpose is served, they ask, by being seen to destabilise the government when its back is against the wall?

A week after telling everyone to take ''a long cold shower'' Rudd, it seems, is everywhere: taking a guarded swipe at Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan over the incredible shrinking mining tax; pushing new policy ideas on Aboriginal education; appearing on Ten Network's popular The Project; and being an almost 24/7 photo opportunity.

The result, intended or not, is to fan speculation of a leadership change, deepen the already palpable sense of despair within the Labor caucus, and give credence to Tony Abbott's assertions of ''chaos and shambolic government in Canberra''. And to what end?

If the aim is to spook Gillard and Swan, it may have had some success. While Gillard is as determined as ever to stay the course, the pressure is showing. The same goes for Swan, who has just endured what one senior colleague described as an ''absolute shocker'' of a week.

But, if the intention is to unnerve the caucus colleagues, Rudd's antics appear to have backfired. There are a number of MPs who know their chances of holding their seats would be better if Rudd were leader but who would rather end their parliamentary careers than assist his return or, in their words, reward his treachery. ''If people think there's a rush to take Gillard out, they're wrong,'' is how one MP expressed it.

And, in the unlikely event that he did return to the job that was cruelly taken from him, there are still ministers who would walk rather than serve under him … and maybe public servants, too. And, yes, there is no certainty that he would do better than Gillard.

There is, of course, the possibility that there is no aim, no strategy, no grand design, behind Rudd's actions this week - that it was mere happenstance that saw his profile lift, just as voters were being canvassed for the Age/Nielsen poll that will be published on Monday.

In pointing out that Gillard and Swan were responsible for the changes that produced a mining tax that ''has not collected any real revenue of any significance so far'', Rudd can say he was simply stating the facts (and protecting his legacy in the process). The irony is that he didn't need to do anything on this score to damage Gillard and Swan. The facts spoke for themselves.

In, for the second week in a row, challenging the government to be bolder on indigenous education (last week he called for a summit; this week he proposed including university enrolments in the official Closing the Gap targets), Rudd was only voicing the concern that he is entitled to express from the backbench on an issue close to his heart.

In choosing to be in Adelaide, not Canberra, when Parliament passed the legislation designed to generate momentum for constitutional recognition of the first Australians, on the fifth anniversary of his apology to the stolen generations, he was simply honouring a long-standing commitment to attend a commemoration in that city.

And, in being out and about and available to the media (strictly on his terms), he was just being, well, Kevin. It is the cumulative impact that undermines Gillard.

Certainly, Rudd can't be held responsible for the government's nightmare start to this election year. That honour is shared: those among Rudd's supporters (and others) who backgrounded against Gillard over her decisions to secure Aboriginal Olympian Nova Peris a seat in the Senate, nominate the election date and then reshuffle her cabinet; the Prime Minister, for her handling of each of these issues; the unfortunate timing (for Labor) of Craig Thomson's arrest; the Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald ICAC show in Sydney; a Newspoll showing Labor's primary vote at 32 per cent; and the discipline of those on the other side.

But what turned a rocky start into more perilous territory was confirmation a week ago that the mining tax that was forecast to raise $2 billion in a year had raised just $126 million in its first six months, and evidence that the shortfall had much to do with the way the tax was designed.

Coming after Swan conceded what had long been apparent - that the promised surplus would not be delivered in the May budget - this news tarnished what should be the government's trump card: economic credibility, based on the state of the Australian economy when compared with other developed countries.

More than that, it raised doubts about how Gillard will be able to deliver on her two signature policies for the election - a national disability insurance scheme and school funding reform - without inflicting pain on those whose votes Labor desperately needs.

So, after the last Age/Nielsen poll of 2012 showed Labor within reach of the Coalition, with a two-party preferred vote of 48-52, Gillard with a 10-point lead as preferred PM and Abbott with a record disapproval rating of 63 per cent, the poll to be published in The Age on Monday is expected to paint a different picture.

This is why some MPs, including ministers, who thought the leadership of the Labor Party was settled last year now say it is impossible to predict whether Gillard will lead the government into the campaign for the September 14 election.

And it is why a poll due to be published on March 18, the start of the last sitting week of Parliament before the May 14 budget, will be keenly anticipated.

Once again, Gillard's task is to find some clear air to prosecute her agenda and restore a degree of confidence that she can be competitive come September. Once again, the onus is on Rudd and his supporters to give her this opportunity in the expectation that, should it become clear that the Labor cause is hopeless under Gillard, the party will have no choice but to change leaders.

The problem for Gillard is that the degree of difficulty - and the challenge of funding the big-ticket policies - has suddenly increased, even though she retains majority support and the backing of Bill Shorten. The problem for Labor is that there is no reason to believe Gillard would step down and allow Rudd to be drafted if the judgment is made by those around her that this is in the government's best interests.

And the problem for Rudd is that he can't help himself. He still obsesses about what was done to him. He still wants what was taken away.

Self-belief is an important strength in a politician, but in the case of Gillard and Rudd too much of it is a bad thing. As one insider expressed it: ''They both have the same flaw - they think the party's best asset is them.''

In the meantime, the test that should be applied to Rudd's public appearances is a simple one: do they add value to the Labor brand? Campaigning in marginal seats with Labor candidates ticks this box. So does offering policy advice that supports the government's policy objectives in indigenous education.

Giving Gillard and Swan a touch-up on the mining tax, or anything else, will be construed as out of bounds.

There have been times in Labor history that have been as challenging and fraught as this, but what distinguishes this situation is the lack of confidence that there is a way out, notwithstanding Abbott's unpopularity.

It is as if Labor has written itself into a Shakespearean tragedy, one that began on June 23, 2010, the night Kevin Rudd was removed as leader - and one that can only end in tears.

Michael Gordon is national editor of The Age.