(2 of 2)
Last week one of Reith's former advisers, Mike Scrafton, wrote to the Australian newspaper saying he wanted to insert a "small footnote" into the "children overboard" narrative as part of the wider debate about truth in government. Scrafton, now retired from the federal public service, set out his version of a series of conversations he had with the P.M. three days before the election about the photographic and video evidence on the SIEV 4 incident. According to Scrafton, he told Howard that no one at the top of the Defence department who was involved in the issue still believed any children were thrown overboard. Howard immediately denied that Scrafton had told him the report was false. Scrafton took a polygraph test on television and passed; Howard hit the talkback radio circuit. "The Australian people are the great lie detectors of Australian politics," he told announcer John Laws, "and collectively they will decide in the fullness of time, in their wisdom, who to believe on this and many other matters."
The first small jury on this question was convened by pollster Gary Morgan, who found that 60% of voters surveyed believe Howard deliberately misled the public on the children overboard affair. Still, only 26% said the P.M. should resign over the issue. It may be that Australians aren't that harsh on political Pinocchios; they'd prefer honesty in their leaders but will settle for someone who delivers the mail on time and keeps the trains running. For coming clean, two-timing Cameron will be mocked as a hypocrite until election day - and will probably be unemployed after it. Such is the hapless truth teller's punishment. As for Howard, whether he's told the truth or not, he has decided that what matters is the public's judgment. His political fate, reputation and the way history sees him will soon be decided by the democratic polygraph. It's a huge wager, especially for a safe player like Howard. If voters still think he's Honest John, he'll win the election. If they see him as a liar, he'll lose.
