2010 was one of the more interesting years in Australian politics as one prime minister was removed and the successor failed to seal her legitimacy in the subsequent general election.
The beginning of the end of the Kevin Rudd era was deciding not to create either a tax or market mechanism to regulate carbon emissions (or call a double dissolution election to create a ‘mandate’ to do so) to deal with the ‘greatest moral, economic and environmental challenge of our generation’ following the failure of international talks in Copenhagen the previous December.
Kicking the ‘greatest moral challenge’ into the long grass established a meme of a government that overpromised and underdelivered, something exacerbated by problems with rolling out the ‘Building the Education’ revolution school building programme and the ‘pink batts’ debacle.
The Government’s problems were heightened by the proposed imposition of a tax on mining profits without following the usual protocols of fully informing affected taxpayers of the proposed change prior to announcing the proposed change.
This led to a highly aggressive attack on the Government by the mining industry and a broad view of a government in panic mode adopting populist policies without a full assessment of outcomes.
When all this was coupled with increasing discontent about a dictatorial Prime Ministerial style and a dysfunctional office, ‘the faceless men’ of the ALP backrooms moved to replace Rudd with Julia Gillard to improve a government that had ‘lost its way’.
An early election intended to cash in on the ‘honeymoon’ of Australia’s first woman prime minister was called. But there was no honeymoon.
The legitimacy of Gillard’s ascension weighed heavily on the campaign.
Moreover, the ALP always had an ‘upside down’ coalition of inner urban progressives who were increasingly supporting the Australian Greens.
They were challenged by an Opposition who had reduced their campaign to bite size slogans, such as: ‘we’ll end the waste. Pay back the debt. Stop new taxes. Help families. Stop the boats. Do the right thing’.
This led to a string of two bob each way policies that appeared to be designed by focus group – yes to an ETS….but only after input from a ‘citizens assembly’; offshore processing of refugees……but in East Timor and not Nauru; immigration was not about numbers coming into the country………..but merely where they lived. And so on.
Labor were finally buffeted by unprecedented leaks about Gillard’s position on issues such as paid parental leave.
Ultimately, the ALP steadied but the damage was done. It became a minority government reliant on the support of country and regional independents as well as the first Australian Green elected to the House of Representatives.
Having got to Christmas, the Government has tried to frame the debate by nominating that 2011 is the year of delivery and decision.
Labor hopes to deliver on broadband and health reform and make decisions on issues such as fiscal consolidation (bringing the budget into balance) building capacity on the supply side with tax, superannuation, infrastructure and skills initiatives and extending market-based reforms to health and education, carbon (despite promising not to during the election) and water.
It will be the ALP’s burden to ensure that ‘moving forward’ with this agenda will lead to policy and electoral success.
The Liberals had a reasonably good 2010. Largely through implosion of the opponent, it was able to get within touching distance of government on the basis of stringent opposition of government proposals and making its own pitch at a (very) high level.
It will be interesting to see how much policy meat is added to the slogan like bones offered up in the election.
The final point of interest was the Liberal Party (as part of a coalition with the National Party) winning its first state or territory election in 27 attempts when it won in Victoria.
The result appeared largely to be an ‘it’s time’ result. However, there were two federal lessons to be learnt.
The first was that in deciding not to provide the Greens any preferences, the Victorian Libs proved that you can take on the Greens without being seen as anti-environmentalist and suffer an electoral backlash.
The second lesson was that suburbia is feeling the pinch of high utility prices. This will be an increasing factor to take into account when ‘putting a price on carbon’ is ultimately unambiguously translated as being ‘increasing electricity costs’ as the carbon debate comes to a climax during 2011.
Something for the Feds to consider during the year of decision and delivery.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment