Howard's 'day job' a good fit

From one high office to another, the former PM says he doesn't miss politics, but fiercely defends his government's record.

From one high office to another, the former PM is relaxed and says he doesn't miss the daily combat of politics, but fiercely defends his government's record

JOHN Howard wants to put one thing on the record at the outset. He harbours no ambition to launch a post-prime ministerial career as a political commentator. In fact, he told his family to pull him up if he ever felt tempted in that direction. But he has been driven to give this interview by his successor's inflammatory claims that the Howard years were defined by indolence.

Kevin Rudd's comments during a speech launching Paul Kelly's history of the Keating and Howard governments, The March of Patriots, praised the reforming credentials of Labor but accused Howard of "barely adding to that reform".

Sitting in his 53rd-floor office in the heart of Sydney, Howard explains the compact he made with himself to speak out "if there were unreasonable and unfair attacks on what my government had done". He adds: "I wasn't surprised by what he said when launching the book. He's not a person who, when he gets in a political debate, nuances things very well.

"I don't pretend to be an expert on him, but the reason his attacks did not entirely surprise me is because there had been a hint of (such attacks) previously. This has been the most egregious example of it."

Legacy defence is Howard's new day job, the task that underpins his daily routine. For the most part it entails writing his political memoirs, something he was in the middle of right when Rudd launched his most recent attack. "I still exercise every day, I play golf regularly, I read a lot. My writing of the memoirs is increasingly consuming a lot of my time," Howard says.

Despite being retired from the daily combat of politics, Howard maintains a regimented routine when not travelling abroad.

After his early morning exercise he heads into his office where he has the daily newspapers laid out on a reading bench overlooking the harbour, alongside magazines such as Time, Spectator and The Economist. A television in his office is tuned to Sky News so he can stay abreast of political developments as they happen.

The office layout is not dissimilar to his former prime ministerial office, with cricket memorabilia adorning the shelves and photographs of meetings with world leaders on the walls. Near his desk he has a portrait of Winston Churchill.

It has been nearly two years since Howard lost the prime ministership, but his love of politics and current affairs is undiminished. "I am an ex-prime minister of Australia, I had a fantastic run, I achieved a lot and I have adjusted. Part of adjustment is not to lose interest in what's happening. The idea that you can only adjust by shutting off from politics is ridiculous. How can you just shut off when it has been your life for almost 40 years? It still interests me.

"But the day-to-day combat I leave to other people. I am not consumed by regret. The really big things I wanted to do I did, or I tried to do. I don't have that sense of thinking, 'I wish I had done this' or 'I wish I had done that'."

The freedom to travel abroad without the pressures of public office is something Howard enjoys, especially when it gives him the chance to visit his youngest son, Richard, who has been living in Texas for a number of years. Howard frequently accepts speaking engagements overseas and even appears semi-regularly on TV chat shows during his tours. Perhaps it helps him get the political-commentator bug out of his system without violating his creed not to do so domestically. In a couple of weeks he is off to Brazil and at the end of October he will launch a new think tank in England. In some senses his international profile hasn't faded as much as his domestic profile.

Howard knows the importance of not letting your political opponents define history. He watched attempts by Paul Keating to denigrate the legacy of the Liberals' main founder and long-serving prime minister Robert Menzies when Labor was last in power. "You are not only entitled to defend your legacy but you should," Howard says. Keating would agree, having always staunchly defended his legacy, arguably growing in stature as a result. Unlike Howard, however, Keating regularly dips into the role of political commentator, perhaps a product of his relative youth when he lost office (Keating was in his early 50s, Howard his late 60s). Bob Hawke never really bothered with legacy defence, other than the release of his political memoirs. He has used his post-prime ministerial years to make money in the private sector.

Conservative leaders generally find it harder to defend their legacy because history often passes them by.

That was Malcolm Fraser's lot as his successor, Hawke, pursued economic reforms Fraser had shied away from while in office, at the same time as his party hardened its agenda on social policy issues.

In 1967 Menzies published Afternoon Light: Some Memoirs of Men and Events, which he described as a "patchwork quilt" of recollections rather than an overt attempt to influence the verdict of history.

Menzies, despite being verballed by Keating in the 1980s and 90s, benefited from retiring on his own terms in 1966, after which Liberal governments continued for a further six years. Unlike Howard, he did not have to contend with an immediate successor who was hell bent on undoing his legacy.

HOWARD is proud of his record in government. As prime minister he was always careful to avoid the appearance of hubris for fear it might turn off the electorate. Safely ensconced in retirement, he is freer with his rhetoric about the contribution he made.

"We left this country in the best fiscal shape of any country in the Western world. It is a very strong legacy," he says. "The two reasons more than anything why we have come out of this downturn in good shape is that we went into it in top flight condition: a strong surplus, no net debt, low inflation, low unemployment.

"The other reason is that our banks have been well regulated and they are well capitalised and they weren't as highly geared as the European and American banks."

Asked whether he has concerns that retrospection about his government is a distraction for the present crop of Liberals, Howard dismisses the suggestion. "The listening public can walk and chew gum at the same time," he says. "They fully understand that a former prime minister will defend his record, particularly when it is a very good economic record, a very good record all round. I think the public would be astonished if I didn't speak up for what we had done."

Howard wants Rudd to know that if the incumbent attempts to "rewrite history", the former prime minister won't sit idly by and let it happen. Without going so far as to suggest last week was a turning point in Rudd's popularity, Howard notes that the court of public opinion is largely critical of Rudd's foray into the history wars of economic reform credentials, so much so that Rudd would do well not to go there again.

"I have been struck by the near universal condemnation in the media, at a time when the media is very sympathetic to Kevin Rudd, of what he said at the launch of Kelly's book. Rudd's getting a good run from the media because he is way ahead in the polls and he can do no wrong at the moment. But I think the reaction to his comments has been quite strong," Howard says.

Rudd was criticised for his remarks last week for three main reasons, and Howard agrees with each of them. They were unfair to the reforming record of Howard's government, certainly in its first two terms. The comments seemed inconsistent with Rudd's previous narrative about rampant neo-liberalism under Howard.

Labor in opposition opposed the reforms Howard did pursue, in contrast to the approach of the Liberals in opposition in the 80s and 90s, when Labor had a reform agenda in government.

These are the points Howard keeps returning to during the interview. "(Rudd's) attacks have been so misplaced," Howard insists. "For a while we had the inflation genie out of the bottle. Now they are trying to run this line about a structural deficit. Peter Costello and I were never told about a structural deficit by the Treasury. The governor of the Reserve bank said we had a fiscal position that was the envy of the world. Well, if we had a structural deficit it wouldn't have been the envy of the world. You have had all these sorts of minor skirmishes, low-grade attempts to denigrate our economic record," he says.

Howard doesn't just reject Rudd's latest attack that he was a slothful reformer; he also refutes the "intellectually inconsistent" proposition from Rudd's The Monthly essay that he was a rampant neo-liberal. "Most governments try and get a good balance and come to rest somewhat right or left of centre. I came to rest somewhat right of centre," Howard suggests. He is happy to heap praise on the reforming credentials of the Hawke and Keating governments: deregulating the economy, reducing tariffs, and the beginnings of labour market reforms.

But he is quick to remind people that Labor was able to achieve what it did only because of the support the Liberals provided from opposition. It would have been easy for the opposition to take a populist line and oppose reforms, especially tariff reductions. "What really counts in our favour is that when we were in opposition, we made life easy for Hawke and Keating on some of the big reforms," Howard says.

The contrast with Labor in opposition during the Howard government years is stark. "On every single big reform we introduced in my government, Labor opposed us." The list includes the introduction of the GST (Rudd at the time described its passage as fundamental injustice day), waterfront reform, mutual obligation in the welfare system and industrial relations reforms. Howard government initiatives, especially in the first half of its 12 years in office, were not reflective of indolence.

A more sustainable criticism of Howard's reform agenda is that it slowed in the second half of his period in power, with the obvious exception of the ill-fated and ideologically contested Work Choices legislation.

HISTORY wars, including over economic management credentials, can be tedious. But they are important. Not just because understanding what actually happened in the past is of value, but because for the political combatants of today, success is often built on the success of previous ideological warriors with the same party stripes. Howard knows this but worries future Liberals could lose sight of it, as modern Labor did in the wake of the Keating government's defeat.

That is why he and many of his former senior ministers have worked hard to ensure Liberals remain proud of the Coalition's record in government. Rudd is no doubt launching the assault against Howard's legacy to play to the Labor faithful, who need to hear it after enduring four straight election defeats at the hands of a man they detested for so long. But Rudd's main purpose is to drive a hole through the Coalition's credibility when it comes to economic management. The Prime Minister feels that if he can damage the legacy of Howard, he can cut deeper with arguments that the present bunch of Liberals are economic vandals opposed to stimulus spending required to ward off recession. Rudd also wants to take credit for any economic recovery rather than let it go to Howard because the latter handed over a well-oiled economy.

An early post-election call for refashioning the Liberal Party in the post-Howard era came from shadow attorney-general George Brandis when he called for a return to the principles of early prime minister Alfred Deakin in his chapter for Liberals and Power: The Road Ahead.

This raises the issue of how involved Howard will remain inside the Liberal Party now that he is no longer a parliamentary player. Had his former chief of staff Arthur Sinodinos chosen to contest the Bradfield by-election, Howard was quite open about his intention to strongly back him. But Sinodinos withdrew from the race and Howard has refused to write a reference for anyone else in the contest. It is perhaps a sign he doesn't want to dirty his hands with such matters. A role Howard will happily play is in fundraising and political campaigning come election time: as much or as little as the party would like.

Labor is very good at rolling out its former leaders at campaign launches. If the Liberals look to emulate that approach, Howard will oblige. "I have only one secular political ambition and that is to see the Liberal Party return to power as soon as possible, because I think that is what's best for the country," Howard says. The way the polls are at the moment, he may have to wait a while.

Peter van Onselen is co-author, with Wayne Errington, of John Winston Howard: The Biography (Melbourne University Press).