View From Canberra: End of a short era | ADM Aug 2010

John Faulkner was a champion of accountability and openness in government but one who maintained what appeared to be a marked disdain for journalists.

A Special Correspondent | Canberra

The minister seldom did much media, staging the occasional full press conference, usually in the context of a significant event such as a death in Afghanistan.

Only very occasionally did he do what are termed doorstops, media jargon for informal press events usually staged on departure from an organised function.

This was all in marked contrast to his ever-chatty predecessor who managed to talk on the record to numerous individual reporters, often calling in (by arrangement) after attending major foreign events such as meeting the US defense secretary.

Your correspondent fruitlessly persisted in requests for one-on-one time, even a few minutes, with Faulkner.

In that he was entirely even-handed – no-one else did any better – and so the journalists of the Canberra press gallery accepted that this was the way it was to be.

It did tend to mean that Faulkner speeches gained fair attention from the usually attention-deficit prone press gallery, especially his detailed updates on Afghanistan.

The minister wasn’t always thus.

In his days as a minister under Paul Keating, Faulkner did talk to the media and therein perhaps lies a clue to his subsequent conduct.

A colleague from the Fairfax organisation recalled interviewing the new and earnest environment minister for a long profile article and asking: What is your vision for the environment?

The minister responded with words to the effect of: I have no vision for the environment.

Surely you do, the reporter insisted.

No, he responded.

Unsurprisingly the minister was well done over in the ensuing story.

In the long run this did him no harm at all as he went on to far greater achievements.

Your correspondent never held any sense that he was to be defence minister for the long haul and so it turned out.

In his press conference, he revealed he had needed serious persuasion to take any ministry in the Rudd government and even planned to quit politics entirely at this election.

For a left-leaning minister, John Faulkner certainly produced some moving and heartfelt tributes.

Neil James of the Australia Defence Association summed up some reasons for his success beyond his well-regarded integrity – a carefully selected and professional staff, refusal to politicize defence issues in public debate, hard work plus being a good listener and a shrewd questioner.

Will he see out the full six years of his next term?

Who knows?

He will remain defence minister until either Labor loses the election, which on current polling appears unlikely, or when a new defence minister is sworn in.

And that’s sparked the usual speculation about possible successors, of which there appear to be a limited number of contenders.

First on the shortlist would have to be Greg Combet and it’s no great secret he would prefer to have a greater role in defence and less to do with environmental stuff with which he keeps getting lumbered because he has proved so adept at fixing other people’s problems.

Combet has impressed a great many people in and out of defence, particularly in dealing with troublesome procurement projects.

It’s worth commending Kevin Rudd’s judgment in recognizing that this was an area warranting special attention and that newcomer Greg Combet was the person for this task.

Alas, the big hindrance to Combet taking defence could be the environment.

In her next term, Julia Gillard will have an emissions trading scheme to sell and Combet could well be viewed as the ideal man for this difficult job.

Then there’s Attorney-General Robert McClelland, viewed as entirely competent and with a background in defence as a shadow minister.

Labor has no shortage of capable lawyers who could be Attorney General.

Joe Ludwig, who took over as special minister of state when Faulkner became defence minister, is that rarity in politics – a minister with actual defence experience, as an Army Reserve officer.

He has impeccable political lineage (his dad Bill is a Queensland Labor powerbroker) and he has proved capable while maintaining a low profile.

Foreign minister Stephen Smith would appear to be an outside chance at best.

Alexander Downer remained foreign minister for the entire 11 years of the Howard government and there appears to be significant merit in not swapping foreign ministers too frequently.

There are a couple of other more remote possibilities.

As minister for veterans affairs Alan Griffin has actually gained more defence-related responsibilities, taking personnel matters from Greg Combet when he became increasingly loaded up with environmental problems to fix.

Veterans affairs has traditionally been viewed as the entry-level portfolio (it was John Faulkner’s first ministry) used to reward loyal MPs in an area where they can demonstrate ability and perhaps go on to greater challenges or, if not particularly competent, at least not cause too much damage.

Some have gone on, some proved wholly competent but gone no further while have failed to sparkle.

The agreeable Griffin has displayed no ministerial shortcomings but there’s no sense he’s defence minister material at this stage.

The same applies to Mike Kelly, a former military lawyer and star candidate for Labor in 2007, winning the difficult seat of Eden-Monaro.

As a parliamentary secretary to the defence minister, he has stayed well out of the spotlight but is clearly deserving of a shot at a ministry of some description.

So what of Kevin Rudd?

He’s been promised a slot but the obvious job foreign affairs is taken while Gillard is hardly about to bump Kim Beazley from the ambassador job in Washington.

Making Rudd minister for disabled services would inevitably be interpreted as stunning slap down designed solely to make him quit politics and take his talents elsewhere.

That could mean defence, a prospect which leaves most everyone in Russell with a deep sense of foreboding.

At best this remains a very long shot.

This is of course is all a matter for Julia Gillard who would certainly take advice from various people including John Faulkner but who in the end might have a view on the best candidate quite different from the learned defence pundits.