Few familiar with Rudd are shocked by his exit

In the rush to kick out John Howard, to denigrate his abilities as a person and the achievements of his government, Rudd's fatal flaws and his record were not just overlooked but deliberately ignored.

As argued by some analysts before he became prime minister, we had no experience of Rudd as a minister in government and, just as importantly, neither did he.

This was not just an error by the electorate but a real mistake by the Labor Party.

His work and life experiences were not typical for the Labor Party, where negotiation rather than commands, compromise rather than stubbornness, personalities and friendships rather than utility and value, are what count. And the way the Labor Party deserted him this week shows this.

Rudd never really understood the Labor Party nor the Labor Party him. Look at the way he sent a staff member as recently as this week to talk to the back bench about his prospects.

Similarly, we should not have been surprised by the Rudd government's policy failures. These were not just ones of implementation, as most suggest.

They were failures to be innovative, to bring fresh ideas and leadership. Rudd had never been big on new policy ideas, despite expansive rhetoric such as the “education revolution” that was low on content. Where has he ever shown any policy innovation in relation to foreign affairs?

His proposals in that area floundered just a couple of weeks ago. He was even a born-again fiscal conservative, though not practised in office.

He did not have an original idea in his platform. The tax reform was exaggerated and turned only on class politics. Compare this with others such as Gough Whitlam, Paul Keating, Bob Hawke and even Howard who often led debate on so many issues.

Just what will the Rudd government be remembered for? Nothing but policy failure and a failure to exercise appropriate personal and political skills to develop an agenda for real policy change.