Back in 2005 Peter Costello made a star appearance at the morning editorial meeting in the news room at The Daily Telegraph. He plonked himself down in what was the deputy editor’s chair. When his choice of seat was pointed out to him he roared with laughter and rolled his eyes, joking that it was his lot in life to forever be number two.

The photo that inspired the Sham Marriage headline. Photo: Jon Feder

The reason for the meeting was simple. The newspaper, of which I had just become editor, wanted to get to know him better. Not because we were trying to cause trouble – well, perhaps a little bit -  but more so because we thought our Sydney readers were curious about the guy and believed that at some stage he would become PM whether they liked it or not.

The reality in 2005 was that Labor was going nowhere under the leadership of the likeable but lacklustre Kim Beazley. It was our assessment back then that the only probable change of government during the 2004-2007 parliamentary term would be from a Howard Government to a Costello Government.

The readers of The Daily Telegraph had been overwhelmingly loyal to Mr Howard – if the newspaper has a spiritual home it is the seat of Lindsay, the seat which become synonymous with that group of people who came to be known as the Howard battlers. But nothing lasts forever in politics. On the day we met Costello, Howard had been PM for almost a decade, there were significant rumblings within his party about his shelf-life, and Mr Howard himself had invited discussion of the issue with his promise to review his tenure on the occasion of his 64th birthday.

We wanted to tell Costello that, on behalf of our readers, we were interested in him, interested in what he had to say, interested in what he thought of Sydney, what he liked to do when he was here. We told him that while a lot of our readers still adored Howard – and still regarded Costello as a bit aloof and one-dimensional, the perennial curse of the treasurer, especially a smirking one – we believed there was a sense of inevitability about his becoming PM.

We wanted him to know that we would play it straight and give him a fair hearing.

And we never heard from him again.

Our future meetings with Costello were infrequent, chance encounters, such as at the Federal Budget lock-up in 2006, the same day Todd and Brant emerged from the ground at the Beaconsfield mine, when the Treasurer showed a flimsy grasp of the media when he laughed uproariously thinking we were joking that the Budget coverage would be starting on page seven.

With the release of John Howard’s memoir, Lazarus Rising, the issue of the Howard-Costello leadership stand-off is being revisited again – and not for the first time from the wrong angle. The focus is on John Howard’s refusal to step down when it should properly be on Peter Costello’s inability to step up.

It was said famously of Yasser Arafat that “He never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity”. The line would make a fitting political epitaph for Peter Costello.

This is Howard’s book, Howard’s version of history, and there are sections where he has undoubtedly downplayed some details and expanded others to present himself in a more favourable light. There’s nothing sinister about that, it is human nature.

However Howard has crafted the narrative, the picture that emerges of Costello throughout the passages of the book that have been published so far is of a bloke who thought he was man enough to run the country but wasn’t man enough to demand or seize the prime ministership, even from someone who knew that his number was almost up.

You get the sense, especially after reading Howard’s account of the release of Ian McLachlan’s memo claiming a Kirribilli-style leadership pact, that Howard had concluded that Costello had a heart the size of a pea and simply didn’t deserve the job if he wasn’t prepared to take it.

Costello’s standing as a leadership figure within the Liberal Party is book-ended by two fairly spectacular moments of squibbing.

The first was in 1995 when, under the leadership of Alexander Downer, the party had become a daily sitcom. At that time Costello decided not to involve himself in the leadership wrangling for fear he would be seen as knocking off the incumbent. The second was the day after the 2007 election, when the party needed him most, but he decided not to put his name forward for the leadership.

Costello’s defence for failing ever to seize the leadership was that he was a party man who put the party first but on both those occasions his actions had the opposite result.

The same was true of his actions during Howard’s final term. He was like the shy girl standing in the corner of the school prom hoping someone would ask him to dance. He wanted the leadership issue to stay in the papers – best evidenced by the McLachlan leak – but he lacked the backbone to resolve it by forcing the issue himself.

Howard’s response to the McLachlan leak was perfectly understandable. One of our Daily Telegraph front pages covering the affair was headed “One of these men is lying” and featured a photo of the PM and the Treasurer. We chose those words because, the day before, Peter Costello had observed that his parents had always taught him to tell the truth, when he was questioned about the veracity of the leadership “deal” with the PM. Had Howard made way for Costello at this point, he would have been acknowledging by his actions that Costello was right, that he had been shamed into departing the job, and that he was also a man who could not keep his word. Whatever you thought of Howard he did not deserve an exit like that – especially given that, at the time, Labor was still flailing about without a viable alternative PM.

Paul Keating and John Howard could not be any more different as human beings but as political operators they are remarkably similar. Both men understand the brutality of politics, they get that it is a numbers game, they both placed great store on dominating Question Time. It was Keating who said that political power is only ever seized, not given away, a position with which Howard concurs. When Keating launched the first leadership spill against Bob Hawke he did it knowing he didn’t have the numbers, but that he could still land a mortal blow on his boss.

Perversely, Howard would have respected Costello more if he had the decency to do something this indecent to him. 

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

Most commented

62 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Drew(Darlinghurst) says:

      05:50am | 26/10/10

      Its time the old 71 yr old former PM shut up and return to wollstonecraft.

      If only those shoes hit the Right Wing S.O.B.

    • Aitch B says:

      07:28am | 26/10/10

      And Keating and Hawke shouldn’t, Drew?

      They should all walk away from public comment.

    • TimB says:

      07:34am | 26/10/10

      Ah another lefty advocating violence against those he disagrees with.

      Charming.

    • Reg says:

      08:51am | 26/10/10

      No chaps, we know character defamation is more your thing. The Kawke Keating combination was far the most dynamic government Australia ever saw, where-as the Howard Costello was the most stagnant. Well except for the notorious WorkChoices of course.

    • Terry says:

      08:53am | 26/10/10

      Well, Drew… He’s where he is and you’re where you are… Which is where?

      At least JH is constructive and consistent in his opinions and reasons, not like many other pollies around

    • Woodsy says:

      09:43am | 26/10/10

      Reg, it seems Labor only need less than one term before their leadership becomes ‘stagnant’. Hawke and Keating may have been ‘dynamic’, but they also dragged us into a weak economical state and ultimately, after Keating took over, the “recession we had to have”. The Coalition’s massive surplus has now been turned into a massive debt, fanned by outrageous spending by a Labor government eager to simply buy votes rather than boast any actual governing credibility.

    • Nicole says:

      10:27am | 26/10/10

      @Drew, so throwing objects at someone, regardless of who they are, unprovoked, on national television, is ok by you? As TimB says, charming.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      06:45pm | 26/10/10

      Reg , at least you provided a good laugh ”  The Hawke/Keating combination was far the most dynamic government Australia ever saw. “

      Ha heh heh heh , were you in the institution at that time Reg or had you been discharged. ?

      The only thing that duo is renowned for is the huge debts they left for the Coalition Howard/Costello government to pay back.
      The vitriolic Keating still turns up now and then , muttering and mumbling curses against all and sundry .
      Really Reg , you should do comedy more often , keeps us all entertained.

    • Reg says:

      06:46am | 27/10/10

      Woodsy it’s quite understandable why a Liberal would interpret crucial public spending as buying votes, because that’s how the Howard government did things.  Taxpayer cash for favourable political comment?

      Clearly Waynie baby missed John Howard’s little tip of the hat to the Hawke-Keating Government. Do try and keep up Wayne.

    • Steve Turner says:

      06:59am | 26/10/10

      Major issues you fail to mention Penbo is that Costello did not have the numbers to challenge Howard, and that he always polled poorly.  MSM are hostile to Coalition who are reported in the negative always. Good work by Costello after finding a massive Keating black hole, quickly returning to surplus and setting Australia up was mostly ignored, instead ‘Pete the Smirk the story. No wonder he quit politics.

    • iansand says:

      07:29am | 26/10/10

      I think the problem is th\at Costello expected the numbers to come to him, instead of going out looking for them.  That is where the lack of ticker showed.

    • Reg says:

      08:25am | 26/10/10

      Body language counts for a lot in Australian politics and the Liberal National Coalition members project some very unsavory characters.

      No doubt Howard was astute enough to realise that if he saddled Costello’s sneer with the most unpopular office available, he would kill dead any likelihood of his ever rising to the surface. Remember Costello’s sickly attempts at altering his image? A totally transparent display of insincerity.

      It took the sincere personality of Keating to break through that barrier, just one of the other things current Liberals are totally insensitive to. Yes even to his unfortunate attempt to guide the Queen with a damned Labor hand on hovering over her royal rump. smile

    • Fiona says:

      09:18am | 26/10/10

      I agree. I like Peter Costello and since he’s left politics, much of the tree-hugger, lefty lover media that scorned him, now inexplicably seem to like him. How does that work? I don’t think he’s changed one iota. He got shafted, I feel sorry for him. I’m not surprised he left politics, and I think it really diminishes Howard to run the rake over him.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      09:19am | 26/10/10

      Reg :    ” It took the sincere personality of Keating….........”  heh heh heh

      Remember the ” Lizard of Oz ”  and his LAW tax cuts.  Sincere ?

      ”  Australia will become a ” Banana Republic ” .  Now that was sincere. !

      One thing Keating lacked that JWH had as Prime Minister was the strength of his determination in dealing with the difficult issues.

    • pete n says:

      09:37am | 26/10/10

      @Fiona and now the closet lefty loving Howard is enjoying his fat socialist pension and car and driver? ;0

      Hypocrites the lot of them.

    • Reg says:

      07:01am | 27/10/10

      What’s this I see? Less than 24 hours since John Howard praised Labor’s achievements on Q&A and Fiona is attacking him for running a rake over someone? Oh how the mighty have fallen.

      Judging by John’s renewed effervescence all he needed was a good long-service break to clean out his tubes so he could get on with beating the s*** out of the unions who got it for him. I hope all you tight ar*** Liberals took note. Now get off your ar*** and follow his example.

      Oh but wait, his would have been taxpayer funded just like his pension is.

    • Pork says:

      07:12am | 26/10/10

      Nice Penbo.  When I was at the Gallery I remember liking Costello immensely as a bloke but realising he probably wasn’t going any further.  The most ruthless thing about him was Nikki Sava - just ask Peter Reith!

    • Billygus says:

      07:12am | 26/10/10

      Penbo - you nailed the Costello thing but I don’t think you realised how. The Liberal Party at its heart have a “Born to Rule” culture. Costello as you noted - expected the leadership to be presented to him. Tony Abbott expecetd the electorate to present him with the Prime Ministership. Neither fellow has yet got over the fact the neither thing happened. Much like Shane Warne and the Aussie captaincy. They all need to move on!

    • Tom says:

      03:31pm | 26/10/10

      @ Billygus, you poor old sausage. “Born to rule” is a pommie term used to describe aristocracy. You see old Billygus? They inherited a title at birth .... You see Billlygus? ... Costello was not born an aristocrat ... You see Billygus? ... pommie shop stewards ... chip on the shoulder stuff? ... living in a different age? ... Australia, not England? ... aw, forget it Billygus. Just trust the smart people and move on.

    • Vicki PS says:

      07:19pm | 26/10/10

      True, Billygus.  Silvertails is as silvertails does.  Howard never questioned that he was the Anointed One: nor did the Lady of the Manor. (The only thing the sheeplike Australian public ever seemed to expect from its Mrs. Prime Minister was a rotating wave a la Her Maj.  She sure as hell never contributed an iota to earning her cushy spot doing f.a.)
      @Tom: Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.  See, young Tom?  Bet you never listened in history class, did you Tom?  Ever heard of the Squattocracy, little Tom?  It lives on in the hearts and minds of the Liberal National caste, wee Tom.  They still bend low and low and kiss the quiet tootsies of Sir Pig-Iron Ming the Merciless Cinque Ports Blueblood every morning, didn’t you realise, Tommy lad?  Now why don’t you shut up and let the adults get on with their discussion, there’s a good little soldier.

    • acotrel says:

      09:15pm | 26/10/10

      What sort of mentality does it take to set up a group as poisonous as the H.R.Nicholls Society?  Costello is obviously a fascist ratbag! The vicious look on Howard’s face when Costello and Abbott got to whooping and hollering behind him when he was speaking in parliament, spoke volumes about the relationship.  I know he says he supports Abbott, I believe he’s telling porkies AGAIN!

    • Macca says:

      07:12am | 26/10/10

      JWH’s politics were dominated by what he thought was best. He was prepared to be hard on issues that he believed in; a rare conviction politician. Most of the time the Australian people agreed with him.

      Unfortunately, even the best get tired and make mistakes. 10 years is a long time to be in power and by 2004 the best of Howard’s Coalition had passed.

      In fact, the Coalition look a bit like the Australian Cricket team, putting all their eggs in one basket for successor to the captainship. Peter Costelle is Micahel Clarke

    • Bob H says:

      08:25am | 26/10/10

      Howard knew to keep weak people around him in order to survive long term while labour were destroying themselves, awful prime minister and not a leader but he was an astute party player.

    • Terry says:

      09:10am | 26/10/10

      Rubbish. The Libs were returned 4 times while Labor were floundering, but one could hardly say JH used weak people to keep himself strong. Costello is renowned as being one our BEST treasurers - Hardly a weakness. The fact is he didn’t have the numbers to contest against JH - Is that wekness of Costello or pure strength of the leadership abilities of JH?

    • Luce says:

      03:47pm | 26/10/10

      Bob H, I think you’re muddling up Howard and Rudd.. just an observation.

      p.s. it’s spelt Labor, not Labour

    • KH says:

      08:49am | 26/10/10

      I find it amusing how so many people like to have a go at Gillard for ‘backstabbing’ Rudd, and yet now say Costello was weak for not having a crack at the leadership - that he had no ‘ticker’ - while Howard was PM.  Is it because she is a woman, and so this kind of behaviour is somehow less palatable coming from her?!  Yet this is how it is done - all leaders in politics know that - it is a ‘numbers game’, a popularity contest - a real life ‘survivor’ - all rolled into one.  You really do have to be ruthless if you want to be in politics.

      Damned if you do, damned if you don’t, it seems…....

    • Woodsy says:

      09:36am | 26/10/10

      The difference here though is that there was to be an agreed leadership hand-over between Howard and Costello, however Howard was of the opinion that Costello did not have the ticker for the job. Whereas Gillard was adamant that there was to be no leadership coup, Rudd was safe, she would play in the Bulldogs forward line if she challenged etc etc, all the time shoring up her party support before challenging.

    • JulesG says:

      10:02am | 26/10/10

      Yes, it does seem like a double standard, especially when John Howard and Andrew Peacock did the soft shoe shuffle twice and then there was Brendan Nelson followed by Malcolm Turnbull who were both replaced in a fairly unceremonious way. I think that having a female PM is a plus for the country and a PM that is not steeped in religious BS is a further plus. Some fresh ideas and thinking will do us all good.
      All this backstabbing rhetoric from the Liberal Party is their pathetic attempt at opposition, being as they don’t have any substantive, alternative policies to oppose with. The Libs would be as ruthless with their leaders if required, even more so - they have proved that. My question is, why are they giving this conservative, ‘has been’ such an airing and why is JH news again? Why was he on Q&A last night? Has the media run out of material relating to the current incumbents? Is there something afoot that we don’t know about? Watch this space! For the record, I thought Howard’s performance last night was very thin and the emphasis was on economics, whilst he fairly well neglected other aspects of running the country; to our detriment.

    • Richard says:

      10:28am | 26/10/10

      You’re right KH, I condemn Gillard for backstabbing Rudd, but I think Costello’s loyalty and refusal to challenge a sitting Prime Minister somehow enobles him.

    • Nicole says:

      10:40am | 26/10/10

      Agree with you entirely Richard. He can walk with his head held high, knowing he was loyal.
      @JulesG, ‘fresh ideas and thinking will do us good’? Ha, when are you going to realise that someone else is doing the driving for Gillard?

    • TheRealDave says:

      10:43am | 26/10/10

      Ahh so in the Liberal Dictionary ‘Loyalty’ is now synonymous with ‘Gutless’ ??
      Love it wink

    • iansand says:

      10:44am | 26/10/10

      I read somewhere that Howard thought Gillard did the right thing by rolling Rudd.  The Weekend Oz, maybe?

    • Sven Gali says:

      01:26pm | 26/10/10

      He’s got a book to flog, JulesG. The shoe throwing was probably his publisher’s idea.

    • stephen says:

      01:35pm | 26/10/10

      Iansand…Michael Kroger may have said that about 2 months ago. I don’t think Mr. Howard did.

    • JulesG says:

      01:45pm | 26/10/10

      @ Nicole. Just who is driving Gillard? I’d love to know! Is it anyone we know?

    • Nicole says:

      02:16pm | 26/10/10

      @JulesG, they’re faceless.

    • Reg says:

      06:48pm | 26/10/10

      Speaking of the faceless men Nicole, ...Michael Kroger.

    • Babs says:

      09:00am | 26/10/10

      Just out of interest why does everyone keep banging on about Julia Gillard’s treachery in ‘stepping up’ - isn’t that what any red-blooded aspirational PM is expected to do?

    • Bruce says:

      09:16am | 26/10/10

      Babs: By that logic, the leadership of a political party may as well change every month or so, as every ‘pretenter’ to the thrown, thinks its their turn to lead !

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:46am | 26/10/10

      @Bruce -  guess you must have missed that period in Liberal politics when Hawke/Keating was in,  the Labor party during the Howard regime and the Libs since 07??

    • Sven Gali says:

      09:24am | 26/10/10

      Keating was not only inimitably accurate with his observation that political power is only ever seized, not given away, but also with his characterisation of Costello as “all tip and no iceberg”.

      And you’re quite right, Penbo; Howard didn’t deserve “an exit like that”. He deserved the historic exit he was given by the good burghers of Bennelong.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      02:05pm | 26/10/10

      Sven Gali :  Hmmm ,  So how do you gauge Kevin Rudd’s departure. ?
      Maybe he could see what was coming at the election , which would explain his little smile every now and then.
      The good burghers of Bennelong did not take long to right their wrong either , or maybe you don’t want to talk about that.
      You have entered the danger zone in quoting Keating on accuracy . His only quote of any accuracy was Australia becoming a ” banana republic ”  under his leadership.

    • Sven Gali says:

      02:42pm | 26/10/10

      Kevin Rudd is still the Member for Griffith, Wayne. John Howard didn’t even contest the seat of Bennelong.

      Speaking of accuracy, or more precisely your constant lack of it, this is what Paul Keating said on 2UE to John Laws on May 14, 1986 ...

      “If this Government cannot get the adjustment, get manufacturing going again, and keep moderate wage outcomes and a sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done for. We will end up being a third rate economy… a banana republic.”

      Obviously, his Government did.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      06:56pm | 26/10/10

      Sven Gali :  Ah ! short memory syndrome Sven , maybe Keating did but i don’t think so .  You see , the rest of us were struggling with the “recession we had to have ” .  hmmm ?
      But then , thankfully , the electorate tossed him out on his bony arse .
      Took the Coalition six years to pay the debt that the useless twit had run up.

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:28am | 26/10/10

      Sooo…we rightly lambast Costello for having no balls whatsoever for not jumping in when their ailing on the nose leader is leading the party into a doomed election and in the same breath criticise Gillard for jumping in and having the balls to depose the ailing and on the nose leader that was leading the party into a doomed election?

      Gotta love it don’t you??

      wink

    • TimB says:

      10:47am | 26/10/10

      We blast Gillard because she didn’t change anything. The fact that she knifed Rudd proves there was something seriously wrong with Labor Party policy.
      Yet the second she took over it was business as usual. Same broken policies, same incompetent governing team. The knifing was nothing more than a smoke and mirrors act designed to distract from the failings of the Labor party and shift the blame squarely onto the shoulders of Kevin Rudd.

      I don’t care about the fact that knifings happen. I care about why they happen.

    • Wok says:

      11:26pm | 26/10/10

      Only the piss poor wankers on the left bag Costello for not having balls. Nobody else does.  She hasn’t got balls, or courage or decency.  She had the numbers.  End of story.  The tossers who read everything into polls pulled the pin on Rudd.  She was the puppet.  Howard had crap polls and kept going.  Costello didn’t and stuck with his leader despite the polls.  How hard is that to work out.  Figure this - the labor party hasn’t got the balls to stick with the mission when the polls are bad.  TheRealDave - GrowUpMoron

    • Reg says:

      07:14am | 27/10/10

      Actually it wasn’t only Costello who lacked the drive to replace an ego driven maniac, it was the whole Liberal Party. A collective of old school ties who put their party before the Nation. And Wok was obviously one of them.

    • Richard says:

      10:35am | 26/10/10

      The salient point that struck me from last night’s Q&A viewing was the deep respeect Howard has for Costello as a treasurer. He even referred to his legacy on numerous times as “the Howard and Costello Prime Minister-Treasurer combo” (don’t you love it when people refer to themselves in the 3rd person?). He, again similarly to Keating’s recent attitude re: Hawke, believes that their legacy is enhanced if they stick together and share the glory.

    • Amber says:

      10:44am | 26/10/10

      To iansand -
      Too bad Costello didn’t hang around - the numbers would finally have come to HIM!  ..and we wouldn’t have the political debacle we now have.

    • Jicks says:

      12:11pm | 26/10/10

      What’s all this nonsense? Why would Costello’s epitaph be about his not becoming PM? Do you really think there is nothing more to governance than who is PM?

      Costello set down eleven budgets. He brought Australia into surplus, with the help of his colleagues. He saved us from the fate that befell European nations after the GFC. It is only in journo la-la land that he is only measured by party politics of being PM.

    • Frank De Nile says:

      01:48pm | 26/10/10

      I cannot understand the folk who praise Costello for economic genius,even the drover,s dog would have managed to save a buck on the back of a monstrous mining boom,throw in a tax on a tax G,S,T and spend nought on infrastructure.Why even the A.L.P.  would have a few bob in the bank.

    • MarK says:

      07:06pm | 26/10/10

      “Why even the A.L.P.  would have a few bob in the bank. “

      No they would not.

      Name me all the surplus budgets Labor has brought sown. Not wet dream we will be in surplus later crap.

      Actual numbers that are measurable.

    • Jay says:

      02:23pm | 26/10/10

      Howard was a radical compared to Costello and I am glad we never found out.That smirk did Costello no favours.

    • Poseidon Burke says:

      02:47pm | 26/10/10

      Its admittedly a minor thing but I recall him calling for his then advisor Mitch Fifield now the Senator. Peter was walking off and he called “Mitchell” in an imperious kind of way suggesting come along minion. He gave the impression of being not very respectful to his advisor. I think the “born to rule” descriptor is plenty rich for all Liberals and Costello is from pretty solid middle class stock but he certainly didnt have the common touch.

    • Eton Mills says:

      05:47pm | 26/10/10

      The Howard Costello saga is only again symptomatic of a political malaise in the Australian body politic. Costello is a man of rare decency. I do not wish my children to grow up thinking it’s heroic to do a Julia or a Paul Keating or that somehow or other is it is the Australian Way. As for the Liberal Party, they are incomprehensible. Costello is Australia’s loss. Howard was selfish and a party has crashed. Aussies, you relish it or you wouldn’t perpetuate it. Is it a matter of the DNA?

    • Dan says:

      06:28pm | 26/10/10

      “Perversely, Howard would have respected Costello more if he had the decency to do something this indecent to him. “

      It’s the same for most politicians. Hawke himself wasn’t particularly impressed that Costello never challenged Howard. d

    • MarK says:

      07:09pm | 26/10/10

      It actually saddens me to see people happy that that idiot threw something at an ex PM of this nation.

      Why does the left always resort to physical violence? It is disgusting and worryingly atypical.

      And why did Qanda put up the tweet about someone should throw a shoe. that was reckless, inflammatory and ridiculous.

    • acotrel says:

      04:11am | 27/10/10

      How mant billions of taxpayers dollars did Costello lose by gambling on the money market that time?

    • MargD says:

      06:48pm | 29/06/11

      What’s all the hoohaa about???? It’s all anciant history. Let’s focus on NOW and the repercussions of having the Greens take power in the Senate. Now that’s scarey!!!!!!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter