You're stirring them up Bruce - a good thing.

But I wouln't knock Keelty's AFP. Its organised. Its leader is dynamic and it may well increase in influence under Labor.

Rumours that ASIO may be absorbed into the AFP to form an Australian FBI may, or may not, come to pass.

Pete

So bruce, who is the Sir Humphrey you could pinpoint?

Ah Bruce, your credentials describe you as “a retired Australian diplomat.”

You doubtless know your way aroud the corridors of power and have obviously supped handsomely from the public trough.

Regarding Howard, your assertion that “his consuming passion to remain at the centre of power and his innate mendaciousness, in my opinion, made him evil.”

Is obviously as illusory as it is, itself “mendacious”.

Howard” is clearly, not “at the centre of Power” and he appears to be dealing with his electoral defeat with an air of public “diplomacy” which you could learn from, instead of writing vindictive articles and “kicking the man" now he is, obviously, down.

As for the "politics" of the civil service,

one does not require membership of either Mensa or some “society of arts” to deduce the “hue” of the bureaucracy which Howard inherited from years of socialists government (who would have pandered and elevated those of a particular “collectivist” bent (maybe that was Bruce's highway up the "diplomatic" corp, it would not be for his reasoning or "diplomatic" skills).

All in all this article shows the author to be unworthy of being called a “diplomat”.

I would suggest he rant and spew his venom in a paddock somewhere.

With that in mind, he seems to have chosen well, olive trees are regarded as an extremely hardy shrub, well able to endure the harshest of environments and atmospheres.

Ah yes, Col. Without actually addressing the secrecy of the Minister's Indonesian visit, you somehow manage to give an appraisal of Mr Haigh's diplomatic skills, without actually referring to, well, anything related to his diplomatic background.

As for ranting and spewing venom in a paddock somewhere... careful Mr Rouge, lest someone give you similar advice.

It takes a long time to change the culture of an organisation, especially a bureaucracy, and if this article is anything to go by:

http://www.newmatilda.com/2008/01/18/new-minister%2C-old-department

It's going to be very difficult getting a new attitude accepted in DFAT.

Whoops, wrong link - that was another version of this article. The one I meant to link to is here - "What DFAT needs is a scalpel, not an axe."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,23067836-7583,00.html?from=public_rss

I have the general low opinion of politicians most Australians do. But, to refer to as “evil” anyone who has ever been elected by the mainly sensible Australian electorate, is inane. Haigh has deemed Howard evil after he has seen him in operation as PM for 12 years. While I’m sure Rudd is not evil either, Haigh hasn’t waited to see what a man who has been in politics a mere 8 years and who has never been PM turns out like before saying that he “does not appear to be evil”.

If a child made such a stupid comment, we would ignore it. But, this man is a retired diplomat; a person who should also know that the Government did not need to give the public warning of Senator Evans’s trip to Indonesia – even if they gave a toss.

It’s a good thing for Australia that Haigh is no longer a diplomat.

The rest of his article clearly indicates that he is just another simple fool who thought that, because the Coalition was ‘no good’ and got its come-uppance, the ALP was going to do everything he had envisaged it would