Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's message that his government deserves its expected whacking in the opinion polls is perplexing some in his own party.

Labor MPs are having trouble trying to explain exactly what the Prime Minister meant to achieve by his extensive mea culpa.

Mr Rudd had taken to the media to stem the damage caused by the bungled home insulation scheme, which claimed the scalp of Environment Minister Peter Garrett.

The Prime Minister appeared on Thursday's 7.30 Report, in journalist Laurie Oakes' column in the Saturday papers and on ABC TV's Insiders on Sunday.

Mr Rudd's message was simple; he admits his government has disappointed people, not lived up to expectations and deserves a whacking in the polls.

And government ministers have not been prepared to publicly disagree with his three-day apology for everything.

"I do agree with the Prime Minister's assessment," Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard said.

"The Liberals are re-energised around Tony Abbott so I agree with what the Prime Minister said," Communications Minister Stephen Conroy added.

But when it came to individual failings, ministers were less outspoken.

Senator Conroy, when asked what mistakes he had made, told reporters "I'm not sure the Prime Minister was singling anybody out".

When asked "doesn't a collective boil down to individual performances though?", Mr Conroy replied: "The collective is collecting all of the individual performances together".

The Prime Minister himself was not willing to give a deeper explanation of his self-criticism.

"I think the bottom line is this: we need to do better, deliver more and get back to the basics," Mr Rudd said.

But opinion in Labor ranks, both inside and outside Parliament, is mixed about what Mr Rudd meant by his apology and whether he should have said it at all.

Some think the Prime Minister went way over the top, both in describing the scale of the problem and by effectively dismissing what the Government has managed to achieve.

Some say it is a sign Mr Rudd is losing touch - a view Opposition Leader Tony Abbott agrees with.

"This is the politics of seeking forgiveness that he's interested in," Mr Abbott said.

"It's not the substance of delivering better services. It's all about getting a headline.

"The problem is that the Prime Minister is rattled by intimations of political mortality. I think he's shocked by the scale of his government's own ineptitude."

Echoes of Beattie

Others in Labor agree the Prime Minister went too far, but say that is just Kevin - unpredictable and doing it his own way.

They point out that the Government is at the end of what has been an extended honeymoon.

They says his message was directed at the voters, who while not angry at the Government, do have some concerns and want to feel that they are being heard.

But Mr Rudd is now being compared unfavourably with famous serial apologiser, former Queensland premier Peter Beattie.

The Coalition's finance spokesman, Barnaby Joyce, thinks Mr Beattie did it better.

"No matter how hard I look at Mr Rudd I confuse him with Mr Beattie," he said.

"Mr Beattie made this an art form and there was actually a skerrick of authenticity about it when Mr Beattie said it."

But Labor MPs point out apologising did not hurt Mr Beattie, who won four elections.

One Labor insider warns not to underestimate the ability of the Prime Minister to change message when he needs to, saying he will readjust and not be a static target.

The theory that Mr Rudd was targeting his new message directly at the voters at a time when the electoral cycle is changing has been echoed by two senior ministers - Anthony Albanese and Stephen Smith.

"He's in touch with the Australian public. What he's indicated is that the Government has heard the message loud and clear; we need to lift our game," said Mr Albanese, the Minister for Infrastructure.

Mr Smith says Mr Rudd's comments are explained by the electoral cycle.

"We spent 12 months in our first year in office essentially finding our feet, 12 months governing and then, one of the regrettable features of Australian public life is that we have a three-year term," he said.

"So already now, after just over two years, we're back into an election cycle.

"So we've got to make the transition from governing to getting ourselves re-elected, and you always have transitional difficulties along the way.

"The Prime Minister's made the point we believe we've been a competent and assured government, but we haven't been perfect."

Whatever the rights or wrongs of Mr Rudd's public sackcloth and ashes tour, some commentators have started talking about what the Government has done, rather than what is left undone.

And Mr Garrett is not making the headlines any more.