Bob Carr’s
imperial delusions: “There was only one Roman emperor between 27 BC and 476 to
have retired. Do you know his name? Diocletian. The only one,” Bob Carr told
David Marr last week.
In the interests of politeness, we’ll overlook the similarity of his comments to
Enoch Powell’s remark of quarter of a century ago: “I can’t forgive Harold
Wilson for spoiling my opinion of the Emperor Diocletian,” and instead focus on
Labor thinker Peter Botsman’s summary of the succession in NSW. “Augustus had
unwittingly cleared the way for grandsons Nero and Caligula,” he writes on his
website.

Kiwi campaign
capers: American organisation PR Watch is
keeping an eye on the New Zealand election campaign and the National Party’s
plans to overturn the country’s nuclear ship visits ban. PR Watch has jumped on
this story from The New Zealand Herald.
“The prospects of the conservative New Zealand National Party opposition in the
September 17 election may be doomed after revelations that it floated the idea
of a US think tank helping undermine support for the country’s 1985 ban on
nuclear armed and powered warships. In January 2004 the Leader of the New
Zealand National Party, Don Brash, and
its spokesman on Foreign Affairs and
Trade, Lockwood Smith, met with the then Republican Senator for Oklahoma, Don Nickles. Brash allegedly told
US officials that the ban would be ‘gone by lunchtime’ the day after he was
elected. A record of the meeting with Nickles states ‘Dr Smith asked whether it
would be worthwhile for a US think-tank to assist with the public campaign in
New Zealand, following the National Party study/review?’ Nickles deflected the
request stating that it “should be left up to a New Zealand think-tank.”

IR case study: What’s that about moves towards a US style industrial relations system? Have a
look at this one: The US National Labor Relations Board has ruled that employers
can ban out-of-work employee fraternisation (including but not only dating) at
their discretion. This is a horrendous blow to workers’ rights to free assembly,
free speech and the right to organise – although the NLRB claims that these
rights still stand and workers will be able to tell the difference. More details here.

Harold Holt
did just swimmingly: So it’s time for some Whitlam revisionism, is it?
“Politics is unkind and unfair. Politicians are blamed for others’ mistakes as
often as the wrong people get the credit,” Tom Frame, the author of a new
biography of Harold Holt writes in The Australian today. “The notion that Gough
Whitlam’s government from 1972 to 1975 initiated a social, economic, diplomatic
and cultural transformation after years of Coalition reactionary policy and
indolent administration has become folkloric in Australian political history.
But examining the short period in which Harold Holt served as prime minister –
from January 1966 to December 1967 – shows that Whitlam has been praised for
many of Holt’s initiatives.”

Sweet deal?: Central American nations seem to have done a lot better out of their free trade
deals with the United States on sugar than Australia. Not that you hear about
it. The Fin carried a small World Trade Organisation angled piece on the matter
yonks ago. Ken Davidson mentioned it in The Age yesterday. So much for the special relationship and our
much-vaunted free trade agreement. Meanwhile, where are the Nats in all this? And why haven’t more journos followed the story
up?

Brass
hats, brass balls: A nice little snippet from the Australian Defence
Association newsletter The
Defender: “A press release in late July trumpeted the participation by the Hon
Danna Vale in the excellent ADF Parliamentary Program. The release noted that Ms
Vale ‘is spending an intensive five days … gaining in-depth knowledge of the
processes involved in planning for the operations that our dedicated [ADF] men
and women are called upon to participate in’. The release went on to point out
‘It’s [sic] programs such as these that give Parliamentarians a more informed
perspective to debate on Defence and National Security issues.’ It does though
seem a great pity to many that Ms Vale could not have sought to acquire such
in-depth knowledge, and informed perspectives, before or during her previous
sojourn as the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence.”