There should be some sort of prize for the sub-editor responsible for this headline in this morning’s Age: “Source behind Holt-to-China theory discredited“. Well really! As if anything further was needed to discredit him.

Younger readers might not remember that in 1983 Anthony Grey published
a book in which he claimed that Harold Holt did not drown off Cheviot
Beach in 1967 but was whisked away by a Chinese submarine, having been
for many years a Chinese spy. Michelle Grattan now reveals that the
source for this claim was a former British naval officer, Ronald
Titcombe, who (with some understatement) is described as “a
professional con man.”

The reason for revisiting this story is the publication of a biography, The Life and Death of Harold Holt,
by Tom Frame, which is being launched by Peter Costello next Friday. The lack
of good biographical works on our non-Labor politicians is a minor
scandal, so this is an event worth noting. A biography of McMahon is
apparently also on the way.

Frame’s argument, which he rehearses in today’s Australian,
is that Gough Whitlam unfairly received the credit for many of the
changes that were Holt’s doing, including such things as engagement
with south-east Asia, commonwealth involvement in Aboriginal affairs,
and the ending of the White Australia policy. It’s an interesting
case. For one thing, it helps to explain why the Fraser Government
(despite the expectations of many of its supporters) did so little to
reverse the social policies of the Whitlam government – they were
actually based on the work of Holt and his Liberal successors.

Watch to see if Costello has any lessons to draw from this for today’s Liberal Party.