Bill Shorten invokes his mother’s life story in connection with his own prime ministerial ambitions
It’s a strange thing when a laudatory profile of a politician’s mother is interpreted as an attack on her legacy, especially when it distracts from a politician’s impossible promises, writes Tim Blair.
- Shorten’s heartfelt story about his mum omits a vital fact
- Devine: Shorten should be proud of mum’s achievements
When a politician running for the highest office in the land bends the facts or omits certain details in order to suit his or her case, that is news.
This applies even if those facts and details relate to a family member.
Obviously, some grace is given in the instance of politicians invoking their families in a general sense. Nobody is going to alert the fact-checking unit if a politician says their kids are “the greatest” or their spouse is “my best asset”.
But suppose a politician offers seemingly detailed family claims and then links those claims to a policy, or at least to an overall political aim.
And then suppose there is something more to the story than the politician has revealed. At that point, yes, we have a news story.
If the politician’s family tale ties in with other campaign themes, then the story becomes more significant still.
On Monday night’s edition of the ABC’s Q&A program, Labor leader Bill Shorten invoked his late mother Ann’s life story in connection with his own prime ministerial ambitions.
“She was the first in our family to ever go to university,” Shorten began.
“She wanted to be a lawyer, but she was the eldest in the family and needed to take the teacher scholarship to look after the rest of the kids. My mum was a brilliant woman.”
That she definitely was, as Ann Shorten’s subsequent academic and legal careers reveal. Equally brilliant, too, was her evident devotion to family.
“She wasn’t bitter,” Shorten went on.
Again, further brilliance.
But why would bitterness even be a consideration here? Ann Shorten’s life was one of accomplishment piled upon accomplishment.
Interestingly, that teaching scholarship was previously understood to be a source of considerable Shorten pride rather than as a career-thwarting lesser option forced by family obligation.
The following is from a 2009 Sydney Morning Herald Bill Shorten profile:
“The former Ann McGrath had bent the conventions of the day by putting education and career ahead of marriage and motherhood until she was in her 30s.
“The daughter of a Ballarat-born printer — and union leader — and a cousin of Seamen’s Union leader Bert Nolan, she did not study law at Melbourne University in the 1950s as her barrister brother George would; instead, she took a teaching scholarship to do arts and an education diploma, the first of many academic milestones, including a doctorate.
“Law would come later: she won the Supreme Court prize in 1985.”
Good for her. We now return to Bill Shorten’s Monday night remarks:
“She worked (at Melbourne’s Monash University) for 35 years. But I know if she had other opportunities she could have done anything.”
Much to the contrary, it appears Ann Shorten made her own opportunities and then made the very most of them.
“I can’t make it right for my mum. And she wouldn’t want me to.”
More precisely, she didn’t need him to. Ann Shorten was already well-established in her academic career even before Bill was born.
“But my point is this, what motivates me, if you really want to know who Bill Shorten is, I can’t make it right for my mum but I can make it right for everyone else.”
At which point Shorten’s depiction of his mother as the put-upon victim of denied opportunities is linked to his campaign to become prime minister. This is why The Daily Telegraph yesterday published a front-page story covering the full background of Ann Shorten’s justifiably celebrated career.
Curiously, some critics of The Daily Telegraph’s story damned us for “attacking Bill Shorten’s deceased mum” and of digging up “dirt” on her.
In fact, The Daily Telegraph did exactly the opposite.
Anna Caldwell’s comprehensive piece contained no criticism at all of Ann Shorten, for the very good reason that she deserves none. What is there to criticise, much less attack?
And it’s a funny old dirt-digging operation that only reveals how talented and honoured a person was.
In any case, that final line from Shorten — “I can make it right for everyone else” — deserves further attention.
Unless you consider infinity to be a number and not a mathematical concept, Shorten’s opportunity-delivery-upon-demand pledge might be the ultimate uncosted policy.
How would it work, for example, in the case of law degrees?
Any number of Australians may wish to study law at the exact moment of their choosing — unencumbered by academic or intellectual limitations, financial capacity or family circumstances.
If Shorten genuinely believes he can “make it right for everyone”, he faces something of a test from prospective law students alone should he be elected on May 18.
They clearly deserve their shot at — what’s the phrase? — the top end of town. God forbid any of them should end up as mere teachers. Or even as gifted academics and eventual legal prizewinners.
Make it right, Bill. Make it right for everyone.
If you want to save democracy, then God save the King
A constitutional monarchy such as ours is ideally placed to make sure that power ultimately resides with the people, not the powerful, writes Susan Carter.
McDonald Trump has his foes in panic mode
Serving fries at McDonald’s and poking fun at Kamala Harris’s claims to have worked there is just one of the many ways Donald Trump continues to connect with regular people and defy his delusional critics, writes Tim Blair.