A formidable trio

This is a leadership story about three Prime Ministers in three months. What it reveals is that today's rancorous conflicts over party and Government leadership are not new, or even more rancorous than in the past.

One of the most extraordinary conflicts was the nasty and bitter struggle fought out 70 years ago when Prime Minister Joe Lyons died in 1939. Lyons was leader of the UAP, which existed for only ten years-from 1932 to 1943. For nine of those years he was the unchallenged leader and Prime Minister. Yet, the party provided three Prime Ministers, a formidable trio of Joe Lyons, Earle Page and Bob Menzies. Page was of course from the CP but under the terms of the coalition he was Deputy Prime Minister under Lyons and so became Prime Minister on his death.

What were their leadership qualities, what made them leaders, what made the battle so bitter and are there similarities with today's leadership contests in both leading parties in Federal Government?

First up is Joe Lyons, the longest serving UAP Prime Minister and, at seven years and three months, Australia's longest serving Prime Minister at the time of his death. He just pipped Billy Hughes, who was prime minister for six years and three months from 14 November 1916 to 1923, and held the record until Menzies record run of sixteen years from 1949 to 1966.

Lyons name does not roll down the years, as does Bob Menzies' or Billy Hughes.' Yet, he was a very successful Prime Minister as described by Ann Henderson in her new biography of Lyons. He began his political life in Tasmania as a stalwart labour man and showed leadership early when he became Premier of Tasmania in 1923. He was persuaded to come to Canberra and join the ill-fated Scullin Government in 1929, but became involved in a bitter dispute about the Government's management of the economy in the dark days of the depression and finally deserted Labour to lead the newly formed, right wing United Australia Party in 1929.

The story of Lyons' defection from Labor is a complex story of intrigue and conspiracies managed by a sinister entity known as 'the Group' and which included such luminaries as Bob Menzies, Keith Murdoch and an eminent financier Staniforth Ricketson. That murky tale does not belong here except to say that it shows that both sides of politics recognized Lyon's leadership qualities.

Lyons was clearly the linchpin of party unity and stability. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the ugly struggle for leadership that followed his death, and the failure of the UAP to find a leader who could command enough party loyalty to replace him. From this distance it is difficult to assess why Lyons possessed such charismatic leadership quality when so many commentators dismissed him as mediocre.

Former Prime Minister Stanley Melbourne Bruce, thought that though Lyons was a delightful person he couldn't run a Government, but could win elections and his key characteristics were his eleven children, family man appeal and essential humanity. Then there was a more insightful remark by Keith Murdoch who thought that Lyons was a conciliator, a peace man, and, a born rail sitter, and the periodical Smith's Weekly considered him to have given Australia humdrum politics.

Lyons' major leadership quality then seems to have been immense personal charm combined with a desire to please and an ability to placate conflicting factions, rather than any visionary ideals. It is a speculation that reinforces the idea that he was kept in power by the party's financial backers, orchestrated by the 'Group' with the concurrence of the Country Party and its leader Earle Page.

He was amenable to their suggestions on policy, brought the Government a facade of national unity and was unlikely to rock the boat.

His untimely death fractured this symbiotic nexus and the much more forceful character of Menzies, who succeeded him, was much less acceptable to either the party's backers or to Earle Page. While Lyons' propitiatory and conciliatory leadership strategies maintained a veneer of party unity and stability, on another level, beyond personalities, it could be argued that the strategies undermined the party by rendering it ineffective

If the complex leadership style of the uncomplicated Joe Lyons was fundamental to the functioning of the UAP, it was a style that his successor, the complicated Mr Menzies, was neither able nor willing to emulate.

Menzies, who succeeded Lyons in 1939, led by command and demand. He was a successful Victorian lawyer who had served in both Houses of the Victorian Parliament and had been Acting Premier for three months. He was seen as a likely UAP leader from the beginning of his career in Federal Parliament, when in 1934 he won the seat of Kooyong and was appointed Attorney General and Deputy Party leader.

Menzies' entry into Federal Parliament was sponsored by the National Union, an organisation closely allied with the shadowy 'Group,' as a successor to Joe Lyons. Often described as vain, arrogant and impatient with those he considered inferior to himself, which was nearly everybody, Menzies had an unfortunate condescending air, which aroused prickly antagonism and he was regarded by many as conceited and ambitious.

But Menzies had many supporters who saw him as a strong, intelligent and a reliable leader. The Hobart Mercury described him in 1939, as a natural leader, a man of brilliant intellect, determined, and farseeing. This he may have been, but he was also tactless and, crucially, increased his unpopularity by resigning as Deputy Leader over the National Insurance Bill in 1939.

His resignation was interpreted by some as an attempt to destabilise Lyons and a bid for the leadership, rather than the matter of principle he claimed. It came on the heels of a speech he made in 1938, also interpreted as a bid for the leadership, in which he appealed for 'inspiring leadership' in the event of a war in Europe. These factors caused him to be blamed for hastening Lyons' death by adding to the strain of his office.

Nevertheless, Menzies was elected by a very small margin. But only after an extraordinary, unwise and ill-fated attempt by Page and Treasurer Dick Casey (also a likely candidate) to persuade a reluctant Stanley Melbourne Bruce, now High Commissioner in London, to return to Australia and contest the election for UAP leader.

Menzies' reign however proved to be very short and not very sweet. He was forced to resign as leader and Prime Minister in August 1941, after only 26 months in office, due to unceasing hostility to his leadership by the party members. Although a competent Prime Minister, he failed to win the confidence and trust of his party colleagues mainly because they didn't like him. The office of Prime Minister then passed, again by default and for lack of any suitable candidates from the UAP, to Arthur Fadden, now Country Party leader after Page's resignation. Of course Menzies was to make a spectacular return to power and success in later years.

The third character in this discussion is leader of the CP Earle Page. The UAP governed in Coalition with the Country Party (CP) from 1934 until 1939 with Joe Lyons as Prime Minister and Page as his deputy. Page loomed large in Australian politics from his assumption of the CP leadership in 1921 until his electoral defeat in December 1961. And there is no doubt that he exerted a strong influence, perhaps out of proportion to his mandate, on the Lyons' Government.

He was a strong and inflexible politician and a tough, persuasive and tenacious campaigner with clear ideas on his political objectives and a determination to get his own way. It is clear that he was a formidable opponent and a belligerent leader, not easily swayed by an alternative point of view. He has also been presented as a 'redneck' character and a poor public speaker - a curious mixture.

It was no secret there was deep hostility between Page and Menzies. Menzies despised the CP's sectional bias, considered Page to be a boor and thought he had too much influence on Lyons. Much of the dislike was on a personal level and is difficult to identify clearly in the records, except for Page's remarkable outburst in Parliament on his resignation of the Prime Ministership in April 1939, when he accused Menzies of cowardice.

Menzies' dislike of Page has been ascribed to Page's tough bargaining or, more likely demands, on Lyons over the Coalition, and his CP parochialism. But there was more than politics involved in the hostile relationship between the two men; personalities were also involved. Menzies apparently was not averse to openly expressing his contempt for Page even to comparative strangers, and he was given to mimicking Page's characteristic 'giggle' for the amusement of his friends.

It is quite likely that Page was aware of this and felt insulted. Page also resented the fact that when the two were together on trade talks in London in 1938, Menzies was generally regarded as the 'real' head of the delegation-a sure sign of leadership qualities-and Page, probably envious of Menzies' talents and successes, also considered him to be treacherous and ambitious, and thought his behaviour, especially his resignation from the Government, to have contributed to Lyons' death

In the leadership struggle after the death of Joe Lyons, Page went to extraordinary lengths to prevent Bob Menzies from becoming Prime Minister, even though he was the most suitable candidate. Page, as Deputy Prime Minister under the terms of the coalition, was appointed PM on the death of Joe Lyons until the election of a leader of the UAP, who would then become Prime Minister. As soon as he was appointed Page publicly declared that if Menzies was elected leader of the UAP neither he nor the CP would serve under him, a clear attempt to destabilise the Menzies bid.

There were also strong suspicions that Page might not resign on the election of a new UAP leader, but perhaps the most extraordinary action was his failed attempt with Richard Casey (then Treasurer and a likely candidate himself) to persuade Bruce, to return to Australia to contest the Prime ministerial election. And that was not all, the final shocking and public showdown came in Parliament on 20 April1939 when, before relinquishing his commission, Page made a dramatic, bitter and unnecessary personal attack on Menzies with harsh accusations of cowardice and disloyalty, an attack to which Menzies replied with statesmanlike restraint. The speech shocked parliamentarians and did Page more damage than it did Menzies, forcing Page to relinquish his treasured leadership of the Country Party.

These three characters represent three styles of leadership and all were successful party leaders. Prime Ministership is different though and the transition from party leadership is clearly a difficult one.

Joe Lyons, who led the UAP for over 10 years, was clearly a natural leader and his leadership was never challenged.

Page led the Country Party from 1921 until 1939, but when it came to high office, he was clearly unfitted for it.

Menzies was also a natural leader, but could not handle the weight of responsibility thrust upon him, or gain the support of his colleagues when first appointed Prime Minister. Famously he recovered from the humiliation of 1941 to serve an unprecedented and unrepeated Prime Ministerial term of sixteen years.

Has this story any lessons for today? Probably, as we watch in wonder at rapidly unfolding events testing our first female Prime Minister. She seems to have the backbone to withstand the personal attacks on her, but would any of them be as hard to deal with as those of Bob Menzies in his first Prime Ministership?