« Talkin' 'bout the Blue-blues: Watching Garden State & Prozac Nation | Main | Thinking About Richard Brautigan »
September 20, 2005
Latham's diaries

It’s difficult to know what to make of Mark Latham. The release of his diaries—400+ pages of a sort that may very well eviscerate the Labor party—has captured unfaltering levels of interest, and is now the biggest political story of the year. The release of the book was moved to yesterday, Monday the 19th, two days earlier as to utilize the super-inflated interest, and when News Ltd. took the ABC to the Supreme Court (for possibly breaching confidentiality between The Australian and Latham’s publishers), a very dirty bomb had been set-off by the former Labor leader.
So what to make of these diaries? They’re profane, ceaselessly vitriolic and paint a man who seems to have been very much on the outside of the Labor party. In fact, almost every senior Labor figure (Julia Gillard is the notable exception) is knifed by Latham’s diaries, either suggesting a deeply paranoid misanthrope, unfit for Prime Minister-ship, or of a Labor party defined by greasy subterfuge and Machiavellian ambition.
It is nice to side with Latham. His, well, grotesque picture of the Labor party conforms well to my cynicism of the party, of politics, but surely it can not be as simple as a man who just wanted to tell the truth. Latham’s diaries are problematic for many reasons:—For one, Latham compromises Paul Kelly, prominent political writer for The Australian, by publishing certain quotes which could seriously damage him professionally—no attempt is made by Latham to hide the source. Asked about this by Andrew Denton, Latham, an admirable intellect, teetered on the churlish in defending his position. “If the media can say whatever they like, then I will too…” was the essence of his reply. Denton seemed unimpressed. So was I.
Latham’s diaries sit unwell for me for this other reason, too: Latham has taken great pride in painting the diaries as the work of an honest whistle-blower, sickened by a party fueled by machine-men and blind-ambition. Surely this is only a partial truth—Latham champions candor when it suits him, but when questioned about his own history of shifting allegiances, he seems to button up. When asked, for example, about his relationship with once-mentor Gough Whitlam, Latham responds that they “were political friends, and nothing more. We’ll never see each other again.”
They were more than that. And everyone knows it. For one, Latham’s oldest child bears Gough as a middle name.
Latham’s diaries contain some heavy allegations, each made with a peculiarly ribald-Aussie tongue, and reading them I thought of a time when Latham really dropped the load when campaigning for the national election. It was the night before the Big Day (when Latham would lead the Labor party to one of their worst-ever defeats) and Latham and Howard had scheduled some radio time. Latham was exiting the studio as his opponent entered it, and Latham, a much larger man, shook his hand violently while standing over him in a classic position of intimidation. I swear there was even something… odd, in Mark’s eye. Happily, Denton picked up on this too, asking Mark just what the hell it was all about. Latham subsequently told a story of playground revenge—Latham believed Howard to have a pumped-up handshake to make up for his small stature and, apparently, had hurt Latham’s wife with one of its implementations. Latham never forgot.
Here is a man profoundly damaged—he has lost faith in a party which once defined him, and eventually placed him as leader. He has lost what were once father-son relationships, dismissing them as now-irrelevant symptoms of a political career. We have a man who at every chance defends his book as the work of noble candor, and yet struggles to defend, or even talk about, a swarm of issues, including his violent mood swings, his reticence at the time of the Boxing Day tsunami, and what, in fact, Labor had given him.
Here is a very angry man—a very interesting man, no doubt, but one smart enough to realize the deep, deep effect this will have on his old party. Short of answering every question, the publication of Latham’s diaries seems to have encouraged a swathe more. And, what’s more, may well have further augmented the Lib’s indomitable position.
Posted by Marty at September 20, 2005 12:13 PM



