EDITORIAL FRIDAY 27.08.10.
Day six of the never ending election, and perhaps the final result is looking a little clearer. At the time of writing it appeared that the Coalition would hold 73 seats, the Labor Party 72, the Greens 1, and the Independents 4. Of course, that counts the Western Australian non-aligned National as part of the Coalition, along with the indication already given that the Green member would support Labor, so depending on how you look at it you could say that it’s 73 seats each plus 4 others, or 72 seats each with 6 others. Either way, the balance could not be any more precarious. Of course, it is that very fact which raises the question of whether or not any minority government which might be formed can possibly maintain any kind of stability.
On balance, I suspect that the real winner of this election has been Tony Abbott. The increased support for the Greens speaks for itself, but it is Tony Abbott and the Coalition who have come back from the wilderness to be within a whisker of taking office. It is Tony Abbott who has been the catalyst to restore the fortunes of the Coalition, while being instrumental in the downfall of the government’s credibility over the past nine months. Even before the election, Tony Abbott was a winner simply because he had pulled off something very few people believed possible just by getting the Coalition back into the race. Now, whichever way the result finally goes, all the cards are likely to favour Tony Abbott in the weeks and months ahead.
If Labor manages to form a minority government it will do so from a position of weakness. It will be hamstrung by the need to negotiate everything, and it will be hampered by an apparent lack of legitimacy, both which will be failings that you can bet Tony Abbott will highlight at every opportunity. Even if such a minority government could manage to last a full term, Mr. Abbott will spend the whole period presenting himself and the Coalition as a safe and stable alternative. If, on the other hand the Coalition forms a minority government in the next few weeks, it could be seen as almost a provisional government which has stepped in to pick up the pieces after the implosion of the once popular Labor government. It would then have the opportunity to establish itself before returning to the polls at a later stage to seek to obtain a majority in its own right.
Either way, Tony Abbot is already in front, and all he really needs to do is not to stuff it up.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Keeping The Bastards Honest
EDITORIAL THURSDAY 26.08.10.
Day Five of the seemingly never ending election count, and the first signs of unrest are appearing. Despite the fact that the Electoral Commission won’t finish counting every last vote until the end of next week, some are already calling for a fresh election. Today, the Daily Telegraph has suggested that the $170 million required to send us all back to the polls would be a small price to pay in return for certainty and stability. David Penberthy has written that the three independents present an unacceptable risk of the country being hijacked, most particularly by the North Queensland representative Bob Katter. He accuses Mr. Katter of having an unfounded prejudice against city dwellers and suggests that such views should not be allowed to dictate the national agenda. Of course, the idea of reaching resolution by going back to a fresh election makes the assumption that the outcome would be different, and the fact is there is no guarantee of that.
In any event, a fresh election should be an option of last recourse. Every other avenue should be explored before such a course of action is pursued. It is only day five, and we already know that the process will take a couple of weeks, and possibly a little longer. Being impatient is not going to change that. The first step is to complete the count of every last vote to be clear on just how many seats each party has. The next step is for the Prime Minister to advise the Governor General whether or not she has the confidence of the House of Representatives and can form a government. If not, the Leader of the Opposition must advise whether or not he can command the numbers in the House. If not, then it will be necessary for the Governor General to call a fresh election. But by far the most sensible outcome is for one or other of the major parties to attempt to form a minority government.
Of course, the immediate concern would be whether any such minority government could function effectively, or indeed function at all. A secondary concern is whether the independent members, along with the Green member and the non aligned National from Western Australia would be in a position to wield undue influence and effectively hold that minority government hostage by making unreasonable or even irrational demands. But the reality is that it is in their own best interests, as well as the best interests of all concerned, that they don’t. Without the numbers of at least one of the major parties, the cross bench members have no power to do anything, only to prevent things from being done. Neither of the major parties will entertain any demands which are excessive, unreasonable, irrational, or against the national interest. If the independents cannot contain their expectations to a reasonable level, a fresh election would become inevitable, most likely leading to them losing whatever influence they might currently have.
So long as they hold the balance of power they hold the opportunity to (as the Democrats once promised) “keep the bastards honest”, but it would be utterly self defeating for them to become too precious.
Day Five of the seemingly never ending election count, and the first signs of unrest are appearing. Despite the fact that the Electoral Commission won’t finish counting every last vote until the end of next week, some are already calling for a fresh election. Today, the Daily Telegraph has suggested that the $170 million required to send us all back to the polls would be a small price to pay in return for certainty and stability. David Penberthy has written that the three independents present an unacceptable risk of the country being hijacked, most particularly by the North Queensland representative Bob Katter. He accuses Mr. Katter of having an unfounded prejudice against city dwellers and suggests that such views should not be allowed to dictate the national agenda. Of course, the idea of reaching resolution by going back to a fresh election makes the assumption that the outcome would be different, and the fact is there is no guarantee of that.
In any event, a fresh election should be an option of last recourse. Every other avenue should be explored before such a course of action is pursued. It is only day five, and we already know that the process will take a couple of weeks, and possibly a little longer. Being impatient is not going to change that. The first step is to complete the count of every last vote to be clear on just how many seats each party has. The next step is for the Prime Minister to advise the Governor General whether or not she has the confidence of the House of Representatives and can form a government. If not, the Leader of the Opposition must advise whether or not he can command the numbers in the House. If not, then it will be necessary for the Governor General to call a fresh election. But by far the most sensible outcome is for one or other of the major parties to attempt to form a minority government.
Of course, the immediate concern would be whether any such minority government could function effectively, or indeed function at all. A secondary concern is whether the independent members, along with the Green member and the non aligned National from Western Australia would be in a position to wield undue influence and effectively hold that minority government hostage by making unreasonable or even irrational demands. But the reality is that it is in their own best interests, as well as the best interests of all concerned, that they don’t. Without the numbers of at least one of the major parties, the cross bench members have no power to do anything, only to prevent things from being done. Neither of the major parties will entertain any demands which are excessive, unreasonable, irrational, or against the national interest. If the independents cannot contain their expectations to a reasonable level, a fresh election would become inevitable, most likely leading to them losing whatever influence they might currently have.
So long as they hold the balance of power they hold the opportunity to (as the Democrats once promised) “keep the bastards honest”, but it would be utterly self defeating for them to become too precious.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Guessing Game Continues
EDITORIAL WEDNESDAY 25.08.10.
While the guessing game continues as to just who will hold how many seats in the final make up of the new parliament, and the manoeuvring for the favour of the independents unfolds, it is probably a good idea to take a breath, calm down and be a little bit patient. The final count from the Australian Electoral Commission won’t be known for days yet, and possibly not until the end of next week. After all, there is a thirteen day period allowed for postal votes to arrive, so if the seats hanging in the balance come down to a handful of votes that’s how long we will have to wait. But this is a period of uncertainty, that’s not the same thing as a period of instability. While the final votes are counted, and the negotiations take place, the normal business of government goes on.
Pensions are still paid, taxes are still collected, and while the outcome is determined the old government continues on in a caretaker capacity. There is no disruption to normal process, there is no interruption to the chain of command, and there is minimum inconvenience to anyone other than the politicians themselves. Of course, some things are on hold such as future funding decisions, new policy implementation, and business investment decisions which might be influenced by the shape of future government policy. But even those decisions would have already been shaped by the election timetable, and so long as a resolution is reached in a week or two there should be no significant fall out. Anyone basing billion dollar decisions solely around the election outcome probably isn’t very good at long term planning anyway.
Rather than being anxious about the outcome, we should all relax and allow the process to unfold. The vast majority of Australians will feel no immediate impact on their lives one way or the other. Ultimately however, there is in fact a great opportunity for the political process to be reformed and improved as a result of the negotiations presently underway. It would be a pity if that opportunity was not fully explored to deliver a greater voice in public affairs for ordinary everyday Australians who might feel that in recent years they have been ignored more and more by the big parties. Of course it is always possible that after this period has passed and at some future time when one of the big parties once again has a clear majority any such reforms might be cast aside and forgotten. It is always possible that even after all that has happened this week that the big parties have not heard the message which I believe the Australian people have been sending to them. It is always possible, that the parties fail to learn the lesson that they cannot the voters for granted.
I hope that’s not the case, because if the current situation does not teach them that lesson then I suspect that nothing will.
While the guessing game continues as to just who will hold how many seats in the final make up of the new parliament, and the manoeuvring for the favour of the independents unfolds, it is probably a good idea to take a breath, calm down and be a little bit patient. The final count from the Australian Electoral Commission won’t be known for days yet, and possibly not until the end of next week. After all, there is a thirteen day period allowed for postal votes to arrive, so if the seats hanging in the balance come down to a handful of votes that’s how long we will have to wait. But this is a period of uncertainty, that’s not the same thing as a period of instability. While the final votes are counted, and the negotiations take place, the normal business of government goes on.
Pensions are still paid, taxes are still collected, and while the outcome is determined the old government continues on in a caretaker capacity. There is no disruption to normal process, there is no interruption to the chain of command, and there is minimum inconvenience to anyone other than the politicians themselves. Of course, some things are on hold such as future funding decisions, new policy implementation, and business investment decisions which might be influenced by the shape of future government policy. But even those decisions would have already been shaped by the election timetable, and so long as a resolution is reached in a week or two there should be no significant fall out. Anyone basing billion dollar decisions solely around the election outcome probably isn’t very good at long term planning anyway.
Rather than being anxious about the outcome, we should all relax and allow the process to unfold. The vast majority of Australians will feel no immediate impact on their lives one way or the other. Ultimately however, there is in fact a great opportunity for the political process to be reformed and improved as a result of the negotiations presently underway. It would be a pity if that opportunity was not fully explored to deliver a greater voice in public affairs for ordinary everyday Australians who might feel that in recent years they have been ignored more and more by the big parties. Of course it is always possible that after this period has passed and at some future time when one of the big parties once again has a clear majority any such reforms might be cast aside and forgotten. It is always possible that even after all that has happened this week that the big parties have not heard the message which I believe the Australian people have been sending to them. It is always possible, that the parties fail to learn the lesson that they cannot the voters for granted.
I hope that’s not the case, because if the current situation does not teach them that lesson then I suspect that nothing will.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The Real People’s Assembly
EDITORIAL TUESDAY 24.08.10.
While some might be tiring of the ongoing federal election saga, the fact remains that this is an almost unique situation. It is so long since there has been a hung parliament in Canberra that to all intents and purposes the situation is unprecedented. While some have suggested that the campaign has been boring and that the outcome a reflection of that, the fact is that there is drama and irony to be seen at every turn. While many might be concerned that this period of political uncertainty may be harmful to business and community confidence, the fact is that the outcome of Saturday’s election also provides a unique opportunity for political parties to re-examine the way thewy conduct themselves, and to consider how to improve the parliamentary process.
One of the reasons that Kevin Rudd fell out of favour with his own party was that he somehow managed to lose touch with his own colleagues. It has been widely reported that Mr. Rudd effectively ran the entire government as part of a gang of four including himself, Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan, and Lindsay Tanner. Apparently, when things started to go wrong, he found himself with a shortage of friends within his own party. This could be seen as indicative of the broader political process where politicians generally have been seen to be out of touch with their constituents, and the executive out of touch with the parliament. In effect, so much power has been concentrated at the top that the lines of communication through the cabinet, through the parliament, and out into the community, have been cut off.
In the wake of the election result, it would seem that it has now become necessary for all the politicians to actually talk to each other again. It has become necessary for the politicians to actually listen to the concerns of the constituents of independents and minor parties. It has become necessary for the process to become collaborative rather than combative. It presents an opportunity to reform the parliamentary process to permanently encompass the role of parliamentarians as representatives of the people by removing some of the power from the executive and restoring it to the floor of the parliament. Before the election Tony Abbott criticised the Government’s proposal for a “People’s Assembly” because we already have such an assembly and it is called the Parliament.
This election seems to be offering us the opportunity for that to actually be the case.
While some might be tiring of the ongoing federal election saga, the fact remains that this is an almost unique situation. It is so long since there has been a hung parliament in Canberra that to all intents and purposes the situation is unprecedented. While some have suggested that the campaign has been boring and that the outcome a reflection of that, the fact is that there is drama and irony to be seen at every turn. While many might be concerned that this period of political uncertainty may be harmful to business and community confidence, the fact is that the outcome of Saturday’s election also provides a unique opportunity for political parties to re-examine the way thewy conduct themselves, and to consider how to improve the parliamentary process.
One of the reasons that Kevin Rudd fell out of favour with his own party was that he somehow managed to lose touch with his own colleagues. It has been widely reported that Mr. Rudd effectively ran the entire government as part of a gang of four including himself, Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan, and Lindsay Tanner. Apparently, when things started to go wrong, he found himself with a shortage of friends within his own party. This could be seen as indicative of the broader political process where politicians generally have been seen to be out of touch with their constituents, and the executive out of touch with the parliament. In effect, so much power has been concentrated at the top that the lines of communication through the cabinet, through the parliament, and out into the community, have been cut off.
In the wake of the election result, it would seem that it has now become necessary for all the politicians to actually talk to each other again. It has become necessary for the politicians to actually listen to the concerns of the constituents of independents and minor parties. It has become necessary for the process to become collaborative rather than combative. It presents an opportunity to reform the parliamentary process to permanently encompass the role of parliamentarians as representatives of the people by removing some of the power from the executive and restoring it to the floor of the parliament. Before the election Tony Abbott criticised the Government’s proposal for a “People’s Assembly” because we already have such an assembly and it is called the Parliament.
This election seems to be offering us the opportunity for that to actually be the case.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Disappointment And Disgust
EDITORIAL MONDAY 23.08.10.
After months of suggesting that if there was a box for “none of the above” on the ballot paper then it would be likely to win, it seems that is exactly what has happened. At the time of writing, the latest count is showing a likely outcome of 73 seats each for Labor and the Coalition, plus the three existing independents and one Green. Although it appeared that there might be another independent elected in Tasmania, the latest adjudication from the Australian Electoral Commission has awarded the seat of Dennison to Labor. The end result is that it could not possibly be any closer than it is. Although all the polls indicated a tight result, very few people believed that Labor would fail to scrape back in with a slim majority. But that hasn’t happened and instead Labor has seen its grip on government evaporate right before its eyes.
Presumably, the leading lights of Labor will be dissecting this massive failure for years to come, but at this early stage it appears that at least some of them are still in denial. Part strategist Senator Mark Arbib and Campaign Director Karl Bitar are still blaming anybody but themselves. They are still saying that the campaign suffered as a result of the cabinet leaks, and that if Kevin Rudd had remained as Prime Minister the vote against Labor would have been even worse. Of course, these are matters which will be open for debate as there is no way to ever know for sure what might have been. But I believe that they are missing the point.
It is clear that the people of Australia have sent all politicians a very loud message, but many of them are still not hearing it clearly. That message is simply that we expect all of them to do better, and that they cannot take the support of the Australian people for granted or treat us with disdain and contempt. People are still angry about home insulation and school halls, their still worried about immigration and asylum seekers, and they are still angry about what happened to Kevin Rudd. That’s not because of any deep affection for Mr. Rudd, but because dumping him was a blatant attempt to con us all into believing that a new ringmaster would make a difference while still surrounded by the same old clowns. The people of New South Wales especially have seen it all before with a succession of Premiers installed to patch up ailing opinion polls, but delivering nothing more than a series of ex-Premiers.
While Tony Abbott has done an outstanding job of bringing the Coalition to the brink of victory, against all expectations, he too has been sent a message by the people of Australia. While a significant number of voters have turned away from Labor, either in disappointment or disgust, not quite enough of them are prepared to accept Mr. Abbott as a genuine alternative. If the Coalition had been able to offer more than simple slogans based on derogatory attacks against a government which had by its own admission lost its way, perhaps people might have found something to vote FOR, and not just AGAINST. As it is, both the Labor Party and the Coalition still have a long way to go before either of them truly regains the trust of the people.
After months of suggesting that if there was a box for “none of the above” on the ballot paper then it would be likely to win, it seems that is exactly what has happened. At the time of writing, the latest count is showing a likely outcome of 73 seats each for Labor and the Coalition, plus the three existing independents and one Green. Although it appeared that there might be another independent elected in Tasmania, the latest adjudication from the Australian Electoral Commission has awarded the seat of Dennison to Labor. The end result is that it could not possibly be any closer than it is. Although all the polls indicated a tight result, very few people believed that Labor would fail to scrape back in with a slim majority. But that hasn’t happened and instead Labor has seen its grip on government evaporate right before its eyes.
Presumably, the leading lights of Labor will be dissecting this massive failure for years to come, but at this early stage it appears that at least some of them are still in denial. Part strategist Senator Mark Arbib and Campaign Director Karl Bitar are still blaming anybody but themselves. They are still saying that the campaign suffered as a result of the cabinet leaks, and that if Kevin Rudd had remained as Prime Minister the vote against Labor would have been even worse. Of course, these are matters which will be open for debate as there is no way to ever know for sure what might have been. But I believe that they are missing the point.
It is clear that the people of Australia have sent all politicians a very loud message, but many of them are still not hearing it clearly. That message is simply that we expect all of them to do better, and that they cannot take the support of the Australian people for granted or treat us with disdain and contempt. People are still angry about home insulation and school halls, their still worried about immigration and asylum seekers, and they are still angry about what happened to Kevin Rudd. That’s not because of any deep affection for Mr. Rudd, but because dumping him was a blatant attempt to con us all into believing that a new ringmaster would make a difference while still surrounded by the same old clowns. The people of New South Wales especially have seen it all before with a succession of Premiers installed to patch up ailing opinion polls, but delivering nothing more than a series of ex-Premiers.
While Tony Abbott has done an outstanding job of bringing the Coalition to the brink of victory, against all expectations, he too has been sent a message by the people of Australia. While a significant number of voters have turned away from Labor, either in disappointment or disgust, not quite enough of them are prepared to accept Mr. Abbott as a genuine alternative. If the Coalition had been able to offer more than simple slogans based on derogatory attacks against a government which had by its own admission lost its way, perhaps people might have found something to vote FOR, and not just AGAINST. As it is, both the Labor Party and the Coalition still have a long way to go before either of them truly regains the trust of the people.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Contempt Does Not Pay
EDITORIAL FRIDAY 20.08.10.
Today’s opinion polling shows a late surge of support for Tony Abbott and the Coalition for tomorrow’s Federal election. Support for the coalition is also evident in late money placed with the bookies, although that might have something to do with how attractive the odds have been for people looking to cash in on an outside chance. Editorials in the News Limited papers have predominantly supported Tony Abbott, while the editorials in the Fairfax papers have favoured Julia Gillard. It is literally too close to call as we approach polling day tomorrow. But if the Labor Government does lose tomorrow, I suspect that it will largely be due to the lingering sentiment expressed exceptionally well by the Telegraph editorial written by Garry Linnell. The Daily Telegraph says, “If ever there was a blatant admission by a party of its own failings… the South American-style coup that ended Rudd’s prime ministership… was it.”
While I support the plan for a National Broadband Network, I want public hospital reform to be delivered, and I believe that a Mineral Resources Rent Tax is fair and reasonable, I share with many Australians the disappointment that when the opinion polls began to reflect that the government had some problems the Labor Party tried to fix the polls instead of fixing the problems. I share with many Australians the disappointment that instead of changing the policies, the Party chose to simply change its leader, apparently expecting us all to fall for a pea and thimble trick without actually doing anything about the underlying problems which had prompted the Party’s decline in popularity in the first place. While many people feel a great unease about the way Kevin Rudd was betrayed by his own colleagues, the greater resentment stems from the sense that the rest of us have been treated with contempt by a handful of powerbrokers who have been perceived as putting Party before principle.
The decline in popularity experienced by the Rudd government was the direct manifestation of the people of Australia sending the government a message. The response of the Labor Party indicates that they did not get the message, and that’s why the polls today are still at the same level they were when Kevin Rudd was dumped. Our message to the government was quite simply that we were unhappy with the mismanagement of government programs like the Building The Education Revolution and the Home Insulation Program, the hamfisted attempts to introduce the mining tax, and the perceived abandonment of any credible climate change policy.
But the message sent by the Australian people was not a call for a change of leader, it was a call for an improvement in the government’s performance. But this is the core of the problem. We measure the performance of a government by the outcomes that are delivered in hospitals and highways, infrastructure and services. The powerbrokers measure performance by opinion polls. What they have failed to understand is that good opinion polls are not the goal. It’s good government that is the goal, and the best way to achieve the former is to deliver the latter. It is the same lesson that the New South Wales Labor Government has consistently failed to learn, and could well be enough to see this government lose office tomorrow.
Perhaps then they will finally understand that it does not pay to treat the voters with such contempt.
Today’s opinion polling shows a late surge of support for Tony Abbott and the Coalition for tomorrow’s Federal election. Support for the coalition is also evident in late money placed with the bookies, although that might have something to do with how attractive the odds have been for people looking to cash in on an outside chance. Editorials in the News Limited papers have predominantly supported Tony Abbott, while the editorials in the Fairfax papers have favoured Julia Gillard. It is literally too close to call as we approach polling day tomorrow. But if the Labor Government does lose tomorrow, I suspect that it will largely be due to the lingering sentiment expressed exceptionally well by the Telegraph editorial written by Garry Linnell. The Daily Telegraph says, “If ever there was a blatant admission by a party of its own failings… the South American-style coup that ended Rudd’s prime ministership… was it.”
While I support the plan for a National Broadband Network, I want public hospital reform to be delivered, and I believe that a Mineral Resources Rent Tax is fair and reasonable, I share with many Australians the disappointment that when the opinion polls began to reflect that the government had some problems the Labor Party tried to fix the polls instead of fixing the problems. I share with many Australians the disappointment that instead of changing the policies, the Party chose to simply change its leader, apparently expecting us all to fall for a pea and thimble trick without actually doing anything about the underlying problems which had prompted the Party’s decline in popularity in the first place. While many people feel a great unease about the way Kevin Rudd was betrayed by his own colleagues, the greater resentment stems from the sense that the rest of us have been treated with contempt by a handful of powerbrokers who have been perceived as putting Party before principle.
The decline in popularity experienced by the Rudd government was the direct manifestation of the people of Australia sending the government a message. The response of the Labor Party indicates that they did not get the message, and that’s why the polls today are still at the same level they were when Kevin Rudd was dumped. Our message to the government was quite simply that we were unhappy with the mismanagement of government programs like the Building The Education Revolution and the Home Insulation Program, the hamfisted attempts to introduce the mining tax, and the perceived abandonment of any credible climate change policy.
But the message sent by the Australian people was not a call for a change of leader, it was a call for an improvement in the government’s performance. But this is the core of the problem. We measure the performance of a government by the outcomes that are delivered in hospitals and highways, infrastructure and services. The powerbrokers measure performance by opinion polls. What they have failed to understand is that good opinion polls are not the goal. It’s good government that is the goal, and the best way to achieve the former is to deliver the latter. It is the same lesson that the New South Wales Labor Government has consistently failed to learn, and could well be enough to see this government lose office tomorrow.
Perhaps then they will finally understand that it does not pay to treat the voters with such contempt.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Only Two More Sleeps…
EDITORIAL THURSDAY 19.08.10.
Two days out from the federal election and it’s still too close to call. If we are to believe the opinion polls then the Labor Government is just slightly ahead on the two party preferred basis. But even if that accurately reflects the outcome of the popular vote, it doesn’t guarantee that Labor would win sufficient seats to hold government. Kim Beazley and Andrew Peacock both lost elections while winning more than 50% of the votes because they didn’t win enough seats in the Parliament. The bookies have the Labor Party holding onto power with a slender majority, perhaps as slim as just one seat, and even they can be wrong sometimes. The truly amazing thing is that twelve months ago it was a very different story. This time last year, Kevin Rudd enjoyed phenomenal popularity, the government was basking in the warm glow of approval, Malcolm Turnbull was leading the Liberal Party to nowhere in particular, and the Copenhagen Climate Conference was yet to occur.
They say that a week is a long time in politics, and in that case twelve months is a geological age. Two significant shifts have occurred over that period of time. One is that the government lost its reputation as being competent, despite the success of navigating the global financial crisis without falling into recession, while the other is that Tony Abbott has transformed the Liberal National Coalition into a viable alternative. Love him or loathe him, the truth is that Tony Abbott has been remarkably successful at getting the coalition back into the race. There has been a most remarkable role reversal where the government is no longer trusted, but the opposition is now seen to be both stable and pursuing a clear direction. Win, lose or draw, Tony Abbott is already a winner in that sense, and will continue to lead the Liberal Party after the election regardless of the outcome.
This leaves Australians with a difficult choice. There are plenty of reasons to vote AGAINST both major parties. Tony Abbott supported Work Choices, he failed to advance hospital reform when he had the chance, he has big ears. Julia Gillard stabbed Kevin Rudd in the back, she wasted money on expensive school halls, she has red hair and isn’t married. But when it comes to policy, there’s not as many reasons to vote FOR either major party. On asylum seekers both sides are trying to be tough, on the budget deficit both sides promise to return to surplus by 2013, and on industrial relations both sides are promising to keep things as they are. Both sides want hospital reform, but have a different approach, and both sides want a broadband network, but at different speeds.
That’s one of the reasons why much of the political advertising has been so personal, each side attacking the other for their perceived shortcomings. Both sides are calling the other incompetent. Both sides are calling the other untrustworthy. Both sides are calling the other fools. Wouldn’t it be terrifying if both sides were right? That’s why the polls are so close, and why it’s so difficult to pick a clear winner. There’s a significant number of people who are equally disenchanted with both sides, and bemoan the lack of an alternative. But on Saturday when the crunch comes and pencil is put to paper, most people will make a choice. If the opinion polls are right, it means that Julia Gillard will be returned to office, but even if she is, both sides of politics need to recognise that we expect them all to lift their game.
Two days out from the federal election and it’s still too close to call. If we are to believe the opinion polls then the Labor Government is just slightly ahead on the two party preferred basis. But even if that accurately reflects the outcome of the popular vote, it doesn’t guarantee that Labor would win sufficient seats to hold government. Kim Beazley and Andrew Peacock both lost elections while winning more than 50% of the votes because they didn’t win enough seats in the Parliament. The bookies have the Labor Party holding onto power with a slender majority, perhaps as slim as just one seat, and even they can be wrong sometimes. The truly amazing thing is that twelve months ago it was a very different story. This time last year, Kevin Rudd enjoyed phenomenal popularity, the government was basking in the warm glow of approval, Malcolm Turnbull was leading the Liberal Party to nowhere in particular, and the Copenhagen Climate Conference was yet to occur.
They say that a week is a long time in politics, and in that case twelve months is a geological age. Two significant shifts have occurred over that period of time. One is that the government lost its reputation as being competent, despite the success of navigating the global financial crisis without falling into recession, while the other is that Tony Abbott has transformed the Liberal National Coalition into a viable alternative. Love him or loathe him, the truth is that Tony Abbott has been remarkably successful at getting the coalition back into the race. There has been a most remarkable role reversal where the government is no longer trusted, but the opposition is now seen to be both stable and pursuing a clear direction. Win, lose or draw, Tony Abbott is already a winner in that sense, and will continue to lead the Liberal Party after the election regardless of the outcome.
This leaves Australians with a difficult choice. There are plenty of reasons to vote AGAINST both major parties. Tony Abbott supported Work Choices, he failed to advance hospital reform when he had the chance, he has big ears. Julia Gillard stabbed Kevin Rudd in the back, she wasted money on expensive school halls, she has red hair and isn’t married. But when it comes to policy, there’s not as many reasons to vote FOR either major party. On asylum seekers both sides are trying to be tough, on the budget deficit both sides promise to return to surplus by 2013, and on industrial relations both sides are promising to keep things as they are. Both sides want hospital reform, but have a different approach, and both sides want a broadband network, but at different speeds.
That’s one of the reasons why much of the political advertising has been so personal, each side attacking the other for their perceived shortcomings. Both sides are calling the other incompetent. Both sides are calling the other untrustworthy. Both sides are calling the other fools. Wouldn’t it be terrifying if both sides were right? That’s why the polls are so close, and why it’s so difficult to pick a clear winner. There’s a significant number of people who are equally disenchanted with both sides, and bemoan the lack of an alternative. But on Saturday when the crunch comes and pencil is put to paper, most people will make a choice. If the opinion polls are right, it means that Julia Gillard will be returned to office, but even if she is, both sides of politics need to recognise that we expect them all to lift their game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
