Howard and Costello - The 'Deal' (1 Viewer)

[Chrispy]

No, I mean, what's their motivation to be anti-Liberal? To cause controversy?

 

[Raginsheep]

Im pretty sure the media is anti-labour in regards to state politics. Its a story, a big one although many may disagree.

What this is though, as far as I can see, is that its the effective end of the Howard-Costello government. The question is where do we go from here now? Costello doesn't appear to have the support to mount a credible challenge although I've gathered Keating was in a similar position before he became PM.

 

[Chrispy]

What this is though, as far as I can see, is that its the effective end of the Howard-Costello government.

Why? It hardly seems as though Costello's mounting a challenge, or that relations between the two men have deteriorated. To be, he's just confirming previous statements that an informal leadership deal existed between Howard and Costello back in 1994.

 

[Raginsheep]

From what I understand, Costello considers the deal to be more formal. From my perspective, he's basically called John Howard a lair only without using such words. How can you run a country effectively when the top two guys are casting doubts about each other's creditbility?

 

[poloktim]

On costello's comments today, i was somewhat suprised that he confirmed the speculation. I would understand this if he were about to challenge, however i just dont see him doing that.

Though I'm being highly speculative, perhaps he did it as a way to correct the PM. As in the PM's comments saying that no leadership deal was made could be taken by some (and maybe was taken by Costello) to mean that he is calling McLachlan a liar. If, without taking into account Howard's semantics that Generator mentioned, Costello thought that Howard was calling somebody a liar who isn't lying, maybe he decided to let the nation know that McLachlan was not lying.

Perhaps, since the Liberal Party is conservative, and holds conservative values, some things are considered more important than party politics.

As I said, that is highly speculative. It also appeared to me that Costello was rather upset when confirming McLachlan's claims.

 

[withoutaface]

No, I mean, what's their motivation to be anti-Liberal? To cause controversy?

To bleed the story dry and make money in the process.

 

[frog12986]

One of the key issues that is eluding both the media's attention, and that of Mr Costello, is a a minor detail that McLachlan noted. He did in fact say that whilst Howard had said that he would hand over the leadership at that particular time, it was NOT a guarantee, nor was it a confirmed, formal deal. In the news on Sunday night, when the story was relatively new, the reader only brushed over this fact and continued with the rest.

If one takes what McLachlan says, regarding it not being a guarantee, and looks further at the political climate following the 1998 election, it does give Howard some reasoning.

Why would any politician stand down following a tight election, that was fought on issues such as the implementation of the GST, issues that he strongly believed in and promised to the electorate. It would have been remiss of any leader to 'hand-over' leadership at such a volatile point, a time which could have provided Labor with the 'oomph' it needed to win an election. Subsequent to that, why would any political party want to break down a formula that won two, and eventually four straight elections?

Words may have been said, no guarantees were given, and at the end of the day, it was obviously not party consensus.

 

[Rafy]

Indeed, to quote McLachlan, quoting Howard:

"I can’t guarantee this to you Peter, but my intention is not to hang around forever…”

 

[Captain Obvious 1]

No, I mean, what's their motivation to be anti-Liberal? To cause controversy?

You have 11 posts and you're in the big blogger competition?
What kind of criteria does BOS use to accept people into the comp

 

[Chrispy]

Not forum participation, apparently.

 

[Captain Obvious 1]

Then after Howard wins the election he'll announce his retirement and hand over to Costello.

Bronwyn Bishop on ABC just had a good point; you can't hand over the office. John Howard cannot hand the reigns to costello, the members of the liberal party must in a vote.

 

[Generator]

PMs, Mathmite, especially when your query is in no way related to the topic at hand.

Back on topic -

Howard, Costello at odds over leadership 'deal'
Leadership deal discussion 'ancient history': Downer

 

[Raginsheep]

Bronwyn Bishop on ABC just had a good point; you can't hand over the office. John Howard cannot hand the reigns to costello, the members of the liberal party must in a vote.

Yes but given the respect his party memebers have for him, he can pretty much anoint his successor.

 

[Generator]

Yes but given the respect his party memebers have for him, he can pretty much anoint his successor.

Respect and support aren't one and the same, Raginsheep. Still, given that the other contenders are still working their way up, it's likely that any changeover that takes place soon will not be contested.

 

[Rafy]

7.30 Report - Deal or no deal?

7.30 Report - Howard-Costello: what the journalists hear (Insighful interview with Peter Hartcher, Glenn Milne, and Micheal Brissenden)

 

[withoutaface]

If the options were Costello or someone else who wasn't Howard then the Liberal party would be very inclined to vote for Costello because he unifies the party my than any of the other ministers.

 

[Rafy]

Deal didn't happen, PM insists

Costello claims white hat in morality play

Power marriage on the rocks

Forget the deal, win over the people instead

Hard to imagine how the pair can continue to work together

Take a note: it won't help Costello at all

Treasurer braves the chill in the name of truth

John Howard version 5.0

Costello: PM broke pact

End of an era as alliance shatters

A pack emerges, ready for shuffling

Partnership is over and one of them must go: Labor

Howard must end succession fight

The secret in a minister's hip pocket

Nothing further to say: PM

Costello: I'm not making allegations

Costello's camp turns on Howard

Stoush they had to have

John Hewson: Howard will stay

Winning relationship in a tail spin

PM's side quick to accuse Costello

Shall be an interesting cabinet meeting today. Pity we wont get to see what exactly happens in it for another 30 years.

 

[The Brucemaster]

Ok I didnt mean literally just say 'OK im done here ya go Pete have the job' obviously when i said Howard would stand down he would do so legitimately.

 

[Generator]

Howard, Costello still a team

Prime Minister John Howard says he and Treasurer Peter Costello will continue to work together in their current roles despite a dispute over whether a deal was done to hand over the leadership.

Mr Howard continues to deny that in 1994 he promised to hand over the leadership to Mr Costello after serving two terms as Prime Minister.

 

[withoutaface]

(Bob) Hawke's pointed out what the sensationalist media has missed, that is that they're putting up a strawman by saying the two directly contradict each other.