Leopards, spots & Tony Abbott

Tony Abbott yesterday spoke publicly about his attitudes on homosexuality, leadership and religion. In a fifteen minute interview on '60 Minutes' he expressed contrition that on previous occasions he had expressed opinions characteristic of bigotry and religious zealotry. Such public humility augurs well for the emotional maturity of the man predicted to be the next Prime Minister of Australia.

Unless it's a stunt.

Abbott's message of change was clearly framed as both a break from his past and an indicator of his potential as a leader. '60 Minutes' interviewer Liz Hayes described him as a "twenty-first century man who can admit the mistakes of his past". These views contrast favorably with his hardline image but as the unofficial campaign for election 2013 heats up the timing might be considered suspicious.

The interview addressed comments Abbott had made in 2010 stating he was "threatened" by homosexuality. The public now knows that Tony Abbott's sister is gay and had come out to him in 2010. He reflected that the comments made in 2010 were a reaction to what he perceived as a threat to the "cohesion" of his family. Having us believe that his deeply offensive comments were motivated more by personal confusion than any deeply held belief; Abbott said "I've changed and I'd like to think I've grown" adding "I've said some things then that I don't believe now", describing these comments as "throwaway lines".

The personal, confronting nature of the interview with both Abbott and his sister Christine jarred with the measured responses given by Abbott. The interplay between head-shots and scenes of a cosy family dinner felt to me like a carefully crafted message, but on what?

Public confession has become something of a cottage industry in the media of late. Lance Armstrong being the most recent in a string of public figures to fall on their proverbial swords, presumably hoping to rehabilitate their public persona. Australian politics has it's own precedent with former Labor Prime Minister Bob Hawke establishing a tradition of public confession that included alcoholism, infidelity and family drug problems. Hawke's mea culpa did little to harm him politically and arguably endeared him to the public as an honest, 'real' character.

Does Abbott then seek approval as the 'everyman', just a knockabout bloke? Scenes from the interview showing him in the surf and cooking a barbeque scream yes and the increasingly populist, presidential nature of our federal election campaigns accords with this strategy. Is this enough though to erase memories of past indiscretions?

There is of course the problem of Abbott's staunch derision of public changes of mind. Frequently on record condemning the Labor government for what he saw as lies over the carbon pricing scheme. He would have us believe these revisions, directed at the cohesion of the Labor/Independent/Green government, were unforgivable but that we should see his own revisions in a more favorable light. Such contradictions should sit uneasily with voters wanting to believe in the integrity of the 'new' man.

One question the voting public must ask is whether these softened attitudes are enough for a potential national leader? When Tony Abbott uses his considerable public profile to make comments against a woman's right to choose or the right of gay Australians to marry he lends credence to discrimination on all levels of society. His public change of heart does not undo the wrongs his public statements have contributed to. It is important to consider that Abbott has not signaled a policy shift on issues such as gay marriage in the wake of this interview. A true reflection of his changed perspective should include public advocacy of issues such as marriage equality and a woman's right to choose.

Ultimately it is up to the public to judge Tony Abbott's attempt to make amends. Describing his challenge to become Prime Minister as the "supreme challenge of my life" may acknowledge his sincerity or simply his ambition. I am not convinced and would prefer to hear 'sincerity' at a time when it is not also politically advantageous.