Senior government players are contesting a claim that Malcolm Turnbull gave Kevin Rudd an explicit undertaking of support during a meeting in December 2015 to discuss Rudd’s now thwarted ambition to be nominated by the Australian government for secretary-general of the United Nations.



Sources have told Guardian Australia Turnbull was accompanied at that particular meeting by his chief of staff, Drew Clarke, and Rudd was told with Clarke present that the decision about nomination would be a matter for the cabinet, not the prime minister and the foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop.

But Rudd is standing firm, reiterating his record of the meeting. He says on 23 December the prime minister stated his support for his candidature, told him the issue would go to cabinet, but reassured him the cabinet process would not change the outcome.

A spokesperson for Rudd on Sunday told Guardian Australia: “Mr Rudd stands by the account of the letters.”

The prime minister announced last Friday that Rudd would not be nominated for the plum post at the UN – a decision following strong public pushback by conservative forces within the government against Rudd’s appointment.

After failing to bridge internal divisions about the proposed nomination during a discussion last Thursday in Canberra, the cabinet gave Turnbull a “captain’s pick” on the decision.

Rudd made an attempt to get a face-to-face discussion with Turnbull before he made the final decision, making contact with Turnbull’s chief of staff when media reports surfaced about the lack of cabinet resolution.

Turnbull told Rudd he would be unable to see him, and then told him by telephone he would not be nominating him for the job. The prime minister then announced the decision publicly at lunch time on Friday.

Government sources said last Friday the decision should not have come as a shock to Rudd, because Turnbull told the former Labor prime minister in May – just before the budget and the calling of the election – that he did not support him for the role, and the majority of the cabinet would not support him either.

Notwithstanding that advice to Rudd, which government sources characterised as frank and unqualified, Turnbull subsequently asked Bishop to embark on a process that would see Rudd’s ambition to be UN secretary general considered by the full cabinet post-election.

In the lead-up to the cabinet consideration, which was a process initiated by Turnbull, Bishop argued publicly that Rudd was qualified for the post, in coordination with her own department and the prime minister’s office, apparently believing she had the support of the prime minister to make that case.

Rudd responded furiously to the events of last Friday. His office released three of his letters to the prime minister recording their contacts and discussions about the secretary general’s position.

The correspondence details numerous contacts in which Rudd says either Bishop or Turnbull gave him unqualified private expressions of support. This support occurred, according to Rudd, in the time after Turnbull took the leadership of the Liberal party from Tony Abbott last September.

Rudd records the contested December meeting as follows. “We continued this discussion further on Wednesday 23 December in your Sydney office.

“Once again you stated your support for my candidature. You added that when the time came to lodge my nomination, you now wanted to take it to cabinet to avoid the perception of a ‘captain’s pick’. You also said to me that the cabinet process would not change the outcome.”

In a television interview on Sunday, the shadow minister for employment services and workforce participation, Ed Husic, said Rudd had been treated shabbily by the government.

“The public will rightly draw the conclusion that this was vindictive partisan politics at play, it was not about appointing someone who could ably represent not only us, but do the job publicly,” Husic said.

A coalition of Indigenous leaders on Sunday afternoon also released a statement expressing disappointment that Rudd was not nominated.

Released during the Garma festival in north-east Arnhem Land, the statement, signed by Dr Jackie Huggins, Senator Pat Dodson, Professor Tom Calma, Gail Mabo, and Lowitja O’Donoghue among others, said Rudd was “a friend and champion of First Nations peoples”.

“The man who delivered the apology is a man who is suitable for the post of secretary general of the United Nations,” it said.

“Kevin Rudd has demonstrated his commitment to First Nations peoples. Under his leadership our stolen generations received an acknowledgement and apology for the hurt and trauma endured.”

The statement said under Rudd’s leadership “clear targets and accountability” on closing the gap were introduced for the first time and it was “a true disappointment” he had not been endorsed.

Huggins, who is the co-chair of National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples said the leaders all signed as individuals and not as representatives of their respective organisations. She told Guardian Australia the decision was “unAustralian” and “mean-spirited.”

She said the apology was the greatest moral achievement in Australia. “That would have been one of the most historical and significant acts from any prime minister in this country.

“Many Aboriginal people owe him a great debt for that. Many of us are very disappointed he didn’t get the chance to nominate for the UN, where we think he would have made a huge difference.”

Huggins said she had spoken with Rudd yesterday and told him a number of Indigenous people had approached her about putting together a statement.



On Sunday the special minister of state, Scott Ryan, said Turnbull had been frank about his rationale for the decision not to endorse Rudd. “He made the point that when Australia nominates someone it’s not just to put them in the race,” Ryan said during an interview on Sky News.



“We’re nominating them because we believe they’re the most suitable person for the role, and in this case, that wasn’t the case.

“The truth is the prime minister has shown more dignity towards Kevin Rudd than most of his Labor colleagues have over the last three years, in that he went out, took questions after making the announcement, but like all big decisions in government, these aren’t easy.”