It was just as well that the treasurer, Peter Costello, was in Washington when the memo from the Federal President of the Liberal Party, Shane Stone, to Prime Minister John Howard came to light. If Mr Costello had been in Australia, it would have been easier for the Liberal Party to have closed ranks and for the Australian public to have been denied an insight into the state of dissension that plagues the ruling party in this country.
Faced with reporters’ questions in Washington, Mr Costello expressed surprise and innocence at the existence and contents of the memo. He even questioned whether it was authentic. He told reporters that they should seek answers from the author of the memo. He did his best to be as the least damaging as possible to his party. But it was apparent that Mr Costello was unaware of when that the memorandum had been written and when it had been delivered to it Mr Howard. If he had been, his reaction would have been differently constructed. As it happened, his display of innocence exposed poor communication and a critical lack of trust within various elements of the party.
It is now apparent that Mr Stone wrote the memorandum shortly after the February 17 Queensland state election and at that it had been delivered to it Mr Howard very shortly thereafter. The gist of that the memorandum was that the Queensland members of the federal parliamentary Liberal Party thought that the Government was mean and out of touch and that Mr Costello was the main offender in that regard. It means that Mr Howard had been aware of the criticism of his deputy, Mr Costello, for more than two months and yet he had it not communicated the source of that criticism or the and nature of it to Mr Costello. Moreover, without this leak Mr Howard might never have told his deputy about the memo.
To date, there has been much baying for blood within the Liberal Party directed at Mr Stone. ever, that the paint has been misdirected.. Mr Stone wasn’t really doing his job at as any one would expect the Federal President of the party to do. He it diligently recorded the criticisms are of backbench members in Queensland and it transmitted them that to his prime minister. To do anything less would have been negligent. The real culprit here is the prime minister. surely, Mr Howard should have communicated the contents of the memorandum to Mr Costello immediately. That would have given Mr Costello a chance to respond to the allegations or a chance to change his conduct to make it more acceptable to backbenchers and the community at large. But no, the Prime Minister kept at the knowledge of these criticisms of his deputy to himself.
And so it the Australian people became or witness to it the deputy prime minister in Washington behaving like a rabbit with the spot light in his eyes. his protestations of or ignorance in other circumstances might well have enabled him and his party to gain at some time with which they could have marshalled a credible response. However, Mr Costello could hardly have imagined a that his leader would have kept the details of this and memorandum so close to his chest for so long.
The fact that Mr Howard did so indicates at best a lack of appreciation of the seriousness of the situation out that the memo outlined and at worse a distrust of his deputy.
That the memo was written in that the first place and then leaked of our are of little moment compared to the insight and that to the Australian people now have into the mean this, trickiness and lack of openness that tar manifest in the relationship between the Prime Minister and his deputy. far from calling a for Mr Stone to fall on his sword for doing his job, members of the Liberal Party and the Australian public enlarge should be calling for an end to the apparently poisonous relationship between Mr Howard and Mr Costello. surely, after this, they cannot credibly both seat in their current positions.