  I refer to Mark Latham's apparent dithering over the FTA.  What's he got up his sleeve?  So far he's kicked the issue to a Senate inquiry,  which will urlLink report soon,  maybe today.  Labor seems to be divided down the middle on the issue.
 urlLink Alan Ramsey in the SMH puts the numbers like this:  'While in theory it is supposed to be a matter for the entire Labor parliamentary caucus to decide,  it is Latham's decision that will determine what happens.  And that decision will be made in the shadow ministry,  not the full caucus.  Once Latham's front bench decides its recommendation,
 based on Latham's attitude,  that will lock in all 32 members of Labor's front bench to a collective decision.  This,  in turn,  will determine the formal caucus outcome,  whatever the vote of Labor's backbenchers.
 One count of the front bench,  on a notional free vote,  this week put the numbers at 16 in favour ( Stephen Conroy,  Kim Beazley,  Mark Bishop,
 Jacinta Collins,  David Cox,  Simon Crean,  Annette Ellis,  Joel Fitzgibbon,  Robert McClelland,
 Bob McMullan,  Nicola Roxon,  Kevin Rudd,  Nick Sherry,  Stephen Smith,  Wayne Swan and Kelvin Thomson)
 13 against ( Jenny Macklin,  John Faulkner,  Anthony Albanese,  Kim Carr,  Chris Evans,
 Martin Ferguson,  Laurie Ferguson,  Julia Gillard,  Alan Griffin,  Kate Lundy,  Daryl Melham,
 Kerry O'Brien and Lindsay Tanner)  and two uncertain:  ( Craig Emerson and Gavan O'Connor)  The 32nd vote,  of course,
 is the only one that really counts,  if he exercises his authority.  And that is Latham's vote. ' Many commentators are saying Labor will pass it -  they've got no choice but to.  Come again?
 You'd never know we're an independent democracy.  It's interesting to read this extract from Mr Latham sometime in 2002:  " I would also argue that the Minister for Employment [ Tony Abbott]  is more British than Australian.
 He is,  in his values and public statements,  born in Britain,  basically hanging out the backside of the British monarch whenever he can.  I stand up for Australian sovereignty,  and I say to the people in my electorate that it is the Labor Party that is the patriotic party in this country.
 We will not surrender our interests in the United States by entering into a free trade agreement that allows for enormous subsidies in the United States.  Big words.  How can he be sitting on the fence now?  And on February 9 he told ABC radio:  " Based on what we know at this stage,
 this [ FTA]  deal doesn't appear to be in Australia's national interest.  In fact,  this is not a free trade agreement,  not at all,
 it's a partial trade agreement.  And the same night,  on ABC television's 7. 30 Report,  when Howard pronounced:  "
It is an historic agreement.  It will add enormous long- term benefits to Australia,  Latham told the program:  " Quite frankly,
 our farmers have been dudded .  The Government should have been standing up for the interests of our farm sector,  not rolling over and defying [ our]  best interests .  "
 Talk about stuck in the bind.  Now will come the real test of his words.  Will he refuse to pass the FTA as it stands,  or do 'the inevitable',  seeing he has 'no choice'?  The best recent article on Mr Latham comes from the Age's urlLink Shaun Carney .
 He's basically saying that Latham is keeping all his cards close to his chest,  that's why no one can fathom his strategy.  Mr Carney is right on the money.
