The over-turning of the orthodoxies of the Howard period during 2008-2009 has been forgotten as much as the reason for the popularity for the man who brought them about.
The Oakeshott Bill removed even further protections for asylum seekers in what is already one of the most anti-immigrant pieces of legislation in the developed world.
9/11 and the War on Terror didn’t mark the start of Labor’s problems, it marked the temporary suspension, for about five or six years, of the Coalition’s.
Megalogenis may lament the passing of reform, and the privileged role the media had in it, even if he cannot quite put his finger on what it was.
So who won the ideological war exactly?
There was a time when reform didn’t used to be such a fashionable word.
Karl Bitar says that Howard’s agenda has little relevance to the electorate today. He should know.
At least referring back to Howard gives Abbott an appearance of stability that he otherwise doesn’t have. The return of Rudd has exactly the opposite effect for Labor.
Like One Nation, Abbott’s accession to the leadership is being confused with another phenomenon – the revival of the right.
If Howard couldn’t sustain a distinctive agenda in the run up to the 2007 election, why should Abbott after 2010?