ALP caucus plaque for Mark Latham opens Pandora’s box of historical reckoning

Labor's move to condemn Mark Latham with a caucus plaque next to his portrait ignores a century of controversial leaders, opens a Pandora’s box of reckoning and sets a silly precedent.

If Mark Latham, right, and his caucus portrait, top middle, are post-facto "airbrushed", will other politicians such as Barnaby Joyce, top left, Billy Hughes, bottom left or John Gorton, bottom centre, be similarly condemned? Pictures: News Corp

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

Mark Latham has long been an utterly disgusting and despicable person, who has betrayed friends and allies, changed his policy views many times, and has not an ounce of loyalty to any of the many political parties he has joined.

He is an ongoing reminder of how wrong it was for Labor to make him its leader in 2003.

But the decision by the Labor caucus to affix a plaque next to his portrait in the government partyroom distancing itself from his actions is among the silliest of motions passed by the caucus. Because why stop at Latham? He is not the only leader expelled in that rogue’s gallery. Where does the revisionism and post-facto airbrushing end?

The motion endorsed unanimously by the caucus last week is: “In 2017, Mark Latham was expelled by the Australian Labor Party and banned for life. His actions do not accord with Labor values and fail to meet the standards we demand and expect.” This will now be etched into a plaque and affixed to the wall alongside the Latham portrait.

Mark Latham's portrait hanging in the Labor Caucus room at Parliament House in Canberra. Mark Latham served as the leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP) from 2003 to 2005. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

But hang on a minute. Labor is supposed to be the party of equality and fairness.

So, the next meeting should pass a motion condemning the very first leader of the party, Chris Watson. He was also the party’s first prime minister in 1904. Watson was later expelled from the party for supporting conscription in World War I. He should not be allowed to escape sans plaque.

That brings us to another Labor rat – of which Latham is the exemplar – Billy Hughes.

The Labor prime minister who took over from Andrew Fisher in 1916 was also expelled the following year because he advocated conscription.

He dramatically walked out of the caucus room and formed a new party with other Labor rats. Surely, he deserves a note too?

The next two Labor leaders, Frank Tudor and Matthew Charlton, steered the party for the next decade. They were serial losers, like Latham, but that is not enough to earn them an addendum among an arcade of election losers. But they supported the reprehensible and racist White Australia policy, a founding plank of the party, so let’s condemn them too with adjoining statements.

Former Prime Minister Billy Hughes discusses prospects with the federal Attorney-General, Robert Menzies, at the Derby at Flemington in the 1930s. Picture: News Corp

In fact, let’s add the next four decades of leaders because they too supported racially exclusionary policies and much else that “do not accord with Labor values today”. So ready the plaques for Jim Scullin, John Curtin, Frank Forde, Ben Chifley, HV Evatt and Arthur Calwell.

Now, if the threshold for a photo descriptor is “actions” that no longer reflect the party’s “values” we should run the ruler over Gough Whitlam. He told Suharto that East Timor should be part of Indonesia, recognised the Soviet Union’s sovereignty over the Baltic States and limited the number of Vietnamese refugees granted asylum in 1975. None of this looks good today.

The popular Bob Hawke fundamentally changed Australia’s economic, social and environmental policies, and had an outsized role on the world stage. But he was once a terrible drunk and his womanising was appalling. He had multiple affairs, including while prime minister, and this included his secretary. This also doesn’t “meet the standards we demand and expect”, the caucus should resolve.

Paul Keating was a dynamic, innovative and groundbreaking treasurer and prime minister. His legacy is large and lasting. But Keating has lashed the government’s foreign policy and described AUKUS as the worst decision of any government. He has harsh words about mooted superannuation changes. Sorry, but he needs a plaque because his “actions do not accord” with Labor solidarity on policy.

Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke on the steps of Parliament House in 1986. Picture: News Corp

The Liberal Party has portraits of leaders in the opposition partyroom. It better put a note under Robert Menzies because he too supported the White Australia policy until the day he died in 1978. He opposed the 1967 Indigenous referendum and said appalling things about Aboriginal Australians. And he took Australia into the disastrous Vietnam War.

His successors also need plaques of their own. John Gorton left the party in 1975, sat as an independent in the House and ran for the Senate from the ACT. He opposed the blocking of supply. (Gorton was later readmitted.) Malcolm Fraser also quit the party in 2009 after a long period of estrangement, and was a harsh critic of John Howard. This dual disloyalty must be recorded with notes to their photos.

Two other Liberals need their post-leadership comments scrutinised: John Hewson and Malcolm Turnbull. They have both been critical of decisions taken by their party over many years. It is not clear whether they are still party members or even if they vote Liberal anymore. But a note under their portraits for not upholding “standards we demand and expect” of Liberals is probably necessary.

Barnaby Joyce in that Canberra Street: Picture: Daily Mail Australia

Venture over to the Nationals partyroom where I am sure John “Black Jack” McEwen, Doug Anthony and Tim Fischer are appalled to be alongside the moronic scandal-prone embarrassment that is Barnaby Joyce.

He needs a very long note that should mention lying on your back in a Canberra street mumbling obscenities into a phone does not meet the party’s acceptable “standards”.

Labor has had portraits of past leaders adorn the partyroom wall since its earliest days. They have been updated and repositioned. In 1968, the former leaders were appropriately reframed. No notes were needed. In 1978, they were updated so all leaders were displayed. Keating, tongue-in-cheek, interjected: “Is it proposed to hang all previous Labor leaders?”

Only Latham is now being, figuratively, hung.

It should be all or nothing; ideally nothing.

Because why stop at just one leader you don’t agree with? The Latham postscript is unnecessary because everybody knows he is discredited.

It may make some Labor MPs feel good. But attaching a note does not absolve Labor of its grave error of judgment in making him leader in the first place.