You can't be right all the time!

John Howard's announcement that he's staying on to contest the next election torpedoed the Sty's bold prediction that he'd bail by the end of the year. Being churlish, I reckon he would have but for Peter's whinge about broken promises.

At least this revelation will end the tedious line of questions regarding Howard's immediate intentions, only to be replaced by the inevitable questioning about his retirement intentions if he wins in 2007.

Labor is going to push Howard hard on this, putting him under a lot of pressure to commit to staying for the entire next term of government if he wins. I can't wait to see Costello's reaction if this happens.

Peter Costello was a trusting lad to believe John Howard's 12 year old promise to vacate the leadership after one and a half terms. Trusting, and blind to history. Surely the (then) recent memory of Bob Hawk's reluctance to leave after a similar promise to Paul Keating would have sounded an alarm?

Political leaders rarely leave on their own accord, but perhaps Howard will be one of the few. After all, the party's polling is down as a result of "No Work Choices," his Benelong electoral seat will become more marginal after the distribution, and, the clincher, the Howards are spending money on their home which has been vacant for 10 years. He had a difficult path to power, and I suspect he considers losing an election as unacceptable. He'll go, and soon.

Costello hasn't emulated Keating and caused a leadership spill. I'd like to think this indicates a lack of 'ticker,' but I suspect Costello also believes that Howard will quit.