Oh now I remember, as soon as I pressed 'post'.
It was about Peter Costello, but more broadly about Parliamentary ability. Costello had the reputation - fiercely pumped up over the last year before the election - of being a devastatingly effective performer in Parliament.
By comparison, the current received wisdom - received extremely quickly I should add - is that Wayne Swan is a dud.
But back to Costello. We were hearing all the time about his cutting invective and ability to dominate his opposing number. Yet when it came to staring down John Howard - maybe ringing him up and saying "game on", to use the current vernacular - he wasn't up to it.
So what is it about the nature of Parliamentary debate that enables what seems to have been a pretty ordinary performer (no 2 at Mac Bank? do me a favour...) to be seen as so good? The rules of Parliamentary Privilege certainly are a factor. But do they actually facilitate such a personality transmogrification?
Answers on the back of a Reserve Bank media release please.
Just before I go, I hear Turnbull accusing the Government of treating the Senate with contempt. Really. Stop wasting electrons, mate, you're wearing my TV out.