Politicians I admire
There aren’t many current politicians who impress me with their ideas. Some of today’s crop are canny political operators and media manipulators, but there are few who strike me as “ideas men” who want to make a difference.
The criteria I used in selecting the unlikely trio (pictured from left) of Brendon Grylls, Martin Ferguson and Tony Abbott included the fact I had to agree with them, at least most of the time.
These three stood out as men who have made a difference, with big picture aspirations that are achievable.
Tony Abbott (Liberal)
Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.
Studied briefly for the priesthood, attended Oxford University where he was a prominent boxer, opposed a republic during the referendum campaign, became Employment Minister and later Health Minister in the Howard Government.
He has previously accused some sections of the Australian public of “suffering self-imposed historical and cultural amnesia” in relation to Australia’s British heritage and acting like “teenagers blowing raspberries at their parents”.
In 1998, Abbott established a trust fund called “Australians for Honest Politics Trust” to help bankroll civil court cases against the One Nation Party and its leader Pauline Hanson.
His first girlfriend had a son who she put up for adoption. Abbott became aware of the boy’s identity in 2004, but later DNA testing confirmed he was not the father.
In his book Battlelines, to be released next week, Abbott warns that Liberal Party attitudes on federalism are obsolete, divorced from public opinion and make for policy failure.
He says a radical rethink is essential to deliver decent policies in education, health, public hospitals and water.
Martin Ferguson (Labor)
Minister for Resources and Energy.
Comes from a Catholic Labor family and was ACTU president from 1990-96. Entered parliament in 1996 and immediately became a shadow minister.
I met him while advocating for greater investment by superannuation funds in regional Australia. He was genuinely interested in the idea.
In 2005, Ferguson addressed an Australian Uranium Conference and said: “We as a community have to be part of the ever-complex question of how we clean up the world’s climate. And part of that debate is going to be nuclear power.”
He has never deviated from a pro-uranium stance and opposed the former WA Labor Government’s ban on uranium mining.
Ferguson is an old-school Labor politician who is pro-jobs, pro-mining and pro-development. He’s a level head in the cabinet on climate change.
Brendon Grylls (Nationals)
Minister for Regional Development (Western Australia).
Entered state parliament in November 2001 after winning a byelection for the seat of Merredin when Hendy Cowan retired.
In June 2005 Grylls challenged then leader Max Trenorden to become the new leader. He refused to consider a coalition with the Liberals and seriously contemplated joining with Labor if required to form government after the 2008 election.
Grylls single-mindedly pursued a “balance of power” strategy for the Nationals. I met him in February 2006 and thought he was heading in the right direction, but had little chance of success.
He persevered and achieved spectacular election results, especially in the Mining and Pastoral areas where the Nationals had never been represented.
He led the Nationals into an “alliance” with the Liberals, refusing to consider a formal “coalition” and reserving the right to vote against the government, which he has signalled doing on shop trading hours.
Tags: Australia, Grylls, politicians, politics
Great post Michael.
Your views of these men really sexed up my appalling ignorance of politics, to a level I actually enjoyed reading.
Thanks Ebony. Politics is dominated by “machine men” who place personal ambition above the greater good. These three stand out for me as people who pursue ideas, rather than ambition. Nevertheless, they are forceful and capable enough to persuade others they’re right.
A very good post.
I’ve never met Martin Ferguson, but I have met his older brother, Laurie Ferguson (Federal Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services), when he was in Mount Gambier in late 2008. Laurie is a very friendly and interesting person.
Both Ferguson brothers are considered the informal joint leaders of the Soft Left sub-faction of the ALP Left faction, at federal level. They are both generally known for combining progressive ideas with pragmatism and commonsense.
I was thinking about the politicians that I admire, and although I may be a young person (21yo) I can’t think of any current ones that I do admire.
Not that there are none worth admiring it’s just that my favourite politicians are non-current.
The 3 politicians I admire would be: Don Dunstan, Don Chipp and Bob Hawke, probably in that order too.
I admire Don Dunstan, SA Premier 1967-1968/1970-1979, as I support most of his progressive reforms. However, the main reason I admire him is to compare him with a political contemporary of his: Gough Whitlam.
Unlike many ALP supporters, I don’t engage in Gough worship. Dunstan, despite being considerably more left-wing and radical than Whitlam, didn’t have the destructive ‘crash or crash through’ mentality that led to the downfall of the Whitlam government. It is quite an achievement to be both radical and sensible at the same time, especially in an era when many in the ALP lacked commonsense and political nous.
I admire Don Chipp, both due to his progressive views and also for his establishment of the Australian Democrats. Disillusioned with the rightwards shift on the Liberal Party in the late 1970’s, Chipp and fellow small-l liberals formed the Democrats.
As I said earlier I am an ALP supporter, but there are many aspects of my views that are ’small-l’. Under Chipp and to a lesser extent Janine Haines the Democrats were a genuine sensible centre party, unlike the rabble they later became.
I admire Bob Hawke, as he was able to introduce wide-ranging reforms of the Australian economy in the 1980’s, which led to a more market-based and efficient nation.
However, he did so without much of the pain to low and middle-income earners and political divisiveness that Margaret Thather was producing in the United Kingdom at around the same time.