Some observers think that if the Morrison government were to fall apart over the next year, it would more likely be from bad luck, an own goal, or a resumption of internal Liberal bastardries than by a hostile act of the federal Labor Party.
This is a measure of their feeling that neither Labor nor its leader, Anthony Albanese have laid a glove on Morrison since the prime minister showed his cack hand with public empathy during the bushfires a year ago. Morrison took stock after these public relations disasters, absorbed some lessons and has not repeated his obvious mistakes. Moreover, his government responded quickly, and, by world comparisons, very effectively when the coronavirus began spreading. He and his Treasurer Josh Frydenberg junked years of Liberal ideology and dogma about government debt and deficits, borrowed close to a trillion dollars, and spent it fairly effectively in both assisting people displaced by the pandemic, and, later in providing unprecedented incentives to business to invest and employ workers once as the economy got going again. Who can argue against such success in Australia’s greatest social and economic crisis since World War II?
Many Labor folk wonder about the party’s leadership and its strategy in opposition, indeed whether it has a strategy at all. But the Morrison government has a majority in the House of Representatives of only two — and one of these two is a person absent from the house and given a pair by Labor for a reason that is no longer a good one. It seems unlikely that the absent minister, David Coleman, who was granted indefinite leave “for personal reasons” by parliament more than a year ago, will resume his duties. After so long away, it is time that he resigned or retired. It is certainly time Labor withdrew its pair. His marginal seat of Banks in south-west Sydney was traditionally Labor until, in 2013, Coleman won it from Daryl Melham. Morrison would find it a very difficult by-election to fight, not least because it contains unusual numbers of voters whose sense of economic security is not especially favoured by pandemic economic policies.
Labor is not, of course, in the bare minority, but the voting patterns of most independents now favour Labor, and Morrison has been reduced to his bare majority several times recently, in part because his style and arrogance, and unwillingness to respond to questions or criticism have thoroughly alienated them. And on some issues, there are a number of coalition supporters — for example members concerned with the starvation rates of unemployment benefits to which Morrison seems determined to return — who disagree with the PM’s approach, even if it seems doubtful that any would set out to bring the government down.
Yet, as one observer put it this week, both Morrison and many in the media act as though he had a substantial majority able to survive minor revolts. And they have misinterpreted Morrison’s “miracle” win against the odds, and against the predictions of many observers (including me) last year. The miracle was in just scraping home, contrary to expectations of a fairly comfortable Labor majority. That was a substantial achievement, unexpected by many of his colleagues, and one probably earning him the gratitude of folk expecting a period in opposition. But the majority is still very narrow, and the sense of gratitude to Morrison is muted, particularly given his character, personality and style. Morrison may fool some of the wider electorates with an aw-shucks daggy Dad marketing effort; that aura, if it is one, is rarely visible at close quarters.
With or without Albanese, the Labor vote indicated by polling (for what that is worth, still a matter in question) does not suggest any collapse in Labor support. Nor is there any evidence, as some coalition members seem to think, that most of the electorate, especially “outside the Canberra bubble” simply do not care about government integrity issues, consecutive administrative fiascos, including Robo-debt, actual action on climate change and a host of other issues other than the pandemic and the revival of the economy. State premiers rather than the prime minister received most of the political dividend for effective public health action against Covid. Morrison’s incapacity to direct, or even to lead them, emphasises that it will be by the economic response, and its success in reviving the economy by the time of an election, that the Morrison government would most be judged.
Here’s the Christmas break problem that Morrison must contemplate as he ponders ministerial changes, and shifts in political direction. He may well get — may well deserve — credit from the electorate for his overall management of the economy during an unprecedented crisis. Yet the further we move from the crisis, the more it becomes obvious that the responses were coloured by unnecessary but characteristic acts of spite and ideology, with very long lists of people who missed out for no good reason. It cannot be assumed, as some of the Liberal cultural warriors seem to think, that most of the losers were concentrated in inner-city seats, or that the logic of the government’s differential response was logical (or even explained to voters). Labor, under Albanese, is in with a lot more than a chance.
The economic measures were possible because of the government’s abandonment of classic conservative debt and deficit rhetoric, and massive public borrowing. It is argued, quite rightly, that one could not strain too much about a trillion in government debt, particularly because of the historically low price of money. The government judged, probably rightly, that it would have to give enormous incentives to business to encourage them to invest, to go into new forms of business and to employ labour. The handouts are enormous, much of it going to key donors and cronies of the Liberals. But the checks and balances, and public assurance about the probity, transparency and integrity with which that money will be spent are almost completely absent. That would be concerning even in normal circumstances.
But the circumstances were not normal even before the pandemic. This is a government with form over the abuse of public money for partisan purposes, for improper purposes and the transfer of public goods into private hands. The prime minister, in particular, and the Attorney-General who ought to stand for good process, good stewardship and accountability, seem to openly deride the concepts. They show no remorse or embarrassment.
Some opposition figures have been chipping away at such issues, without any great signs of an impact on public opinion, yet. But the chipping away is at reputation. At character. At integrity. About an impression not only of the complete corruption of approach to public money but of a government that doesn’t care about standards, about decency, even about consequences for getting caught out when the music stops. This is a long-term campaign with a lot of potential bites.
It is in this context that some of the running sores of bad government, many bearing the fingerprint of Morrison himself, will add to the weight dragging the government down. The Robo-debt fiasco has neither produced scalps nor even anything in the way of contrition. The idea that the essential scheme was cockeyed and probably illegal was there at the beginning. Contrary to the assertions of Stuart Roberts, the minister standing when the music stopped, the disaster was not a logical development from data matching schemes of previous governments going back to Bob Hawke. It was the extra leavening of bias, malice, inverted onus of proof, major jump of logic and administrative and bureaucratic arrogance that sheets the conception home to Morrison himself.
John Waterford AM, better known as Jack Waterford, is an Australian journalist and commentator.
Comments
15 responses to “Labor could beat Morrison with a bit more mongrel”
I know this has been featured in P&I a few times but I believe the ALP should also focus a bit more on taking some skin off the coalition regarding their status as “superior economic managers”. Using this status as a default position at the start of any election cycle means the ALP are already facing stiff headwinds. Far more knowledgable people than I have provided the comparisons over alternate governments clearly showing the ALP have performed better as stewards of the economy. However I think it is worth updating to include the current government’s waste of taxpayers money. My rough guide of their top hits include:
1) Incalculable $Billions delaying action on climate change.
2) $90B on submarines that for perhaps half of this we could have got a better result in a shorter timeframe
3) At least $20 – $30B wasted on NBN multi tech mix which now has to be removed to get closer to the original plan
4) $1.5B Robo debt fiasco
5) $150M Sports roots
5) $30M Sydney airport land deal
For each of these fiascos some large donors and mates of the coalition have walked away with large piles of taxpayers money and as far as I can see only the sports minister lost her job. Although this was for something unrelated to financial mis management. Given the coalition launched two, or was it three royal commissions into the Pink Bats rollout to try and smear and re affirm in the voters minds that the ALP could not be trusted with public money, it is time to call them out for the profligate and wasteful way they spray money around to please their supporters but with no actual plan on how to improve the economy.
They need to completely adopt a different economic ideology outside neoliberalism along with being more mongrel
It was Paul Keating’s mongrel that gave Australia neoliberalism. That was Bill Shorten’s cross to bear in the 2019 campaign. I respect Albanese’s judgement here. It is not a good time for mongrel.
A fascinating and penetrating article. The Coalition has two and only two choices available to it. And they both involve IR!
1. Be a puppet to Big Business and their IR policies – especially overseas Big Business and Big Banking / Big Finance . . . and lose the next election in thumping landslide.
2. Make peace with the ACTU and effectively “steal” it from the ALP – adopting ACTU IR policies – and win the next election in thumping landslide, reducing both the ALP an the Greens to a derisory irrelevance in Parliament..
“1. Be a puppet to Big Business and their IR policies – especially overseas Big Business and Big Banking / Big Finance . . . and lose the next election in thumping landslide.”
MaryJoy333, we are already there! It’s called Plutocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy and that has been facilitated via Education.
I can recall a CEDA meeting in Melbourne where several business organisations (Coalition funders) and RMIT were openly discussing subject matters they wanted included in semesters, and that was late 1999.
There has been a long standing ‘Philanthropic’ drive towards these ‘educational’ institutions. https://theconversation.com/five-australian-universities-get-the-bulk-of-philanthropic-donations-104001
The greatest risk for the LNP/BCA/IPA idelogues is that anyone can use their brain in the pursuit of study, why else would Tehan et al defund the Humanities? https://theconversation.com/defunding-arts-degrees-is-the-latest-battle-in-a-40-year-culture-war-141689
They did not start well by the ham-fisted attempt to abandon the BOOT by keeping any mention of it off the table during the long drawn out negotiations.
Surveys have shown that the majority of Australians are in favour of action on climate change. Prior to the next election, Labor should go all out with a comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gas and environmental pollution. This would gain widespread public approval as well as cause consternation in the coalition party room as the deniers try to defend their ludicrous fossil fuel led recovery.
Thanks Jack. A little glimmer of hope with which I agree. But oh where are we? War crimes, emissions, refugees, climate, even should Labor win power it doesn’t deserve it.
Coleman is indeed the phantom MP. Installed as the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention at Scotty’s recent reshuffle of the deckchairs. Coleman’s last appearance in Parliament was on 14th October, 2019, and he hasn’t been seen since.
His position is newly created, and has provided Scotty with an opportunity to beat his drum about the importance of mental health and suicide prevention. However, Coleman has still not been sighted.
Elected in 2013, fresh out of Ninemsn as Chairman, a position Peter Costello now holds, Coleman still has a few months to run before he reaches eight years as an MP, at which time, he becomes eligible for all sorts of goodies should he survive the next election.
It is about time that Labor showed some mongrel, and none more so than to withdraw the pair against this charlatan of an MP, because we are all being taken for fools by Morrison and his failed fake government.
Am I one of the few “observers” who gives thanks that Albanese has credited the electorate with the ability to think for itself about the manifest failings of the Morrison government and in particular its leader? We do not need another Mitch McConnell who opposes everything to be seen as obnoxiously negative. Albo deserves the top job alone for his role in convincing the government to change its previously fixated mind on JobKeeper and more generally on causing the government to roll over on its hostility to debt and deficit.
Having changed his mind on this issue, Albo need only stand by and see how falling demand for coal will leave Morrison with no clothes as he continues to insist that Australia can make its own responses to market developments which affect it and we do need to fear the dead-end that continued reliance on coal is taking us down. Australians are supposed to pick a phoney at a great distance. Have they not seen through Bob Hawke lite already on their own?
Richard, I think Albo only standing by will not cut the mustard. He needs to be much more pervasive and come out with clearly defined targets/policies. I understand that after the last election when Labor did announce many excellent policies and didn’t quite make it, Labor is reluctant to go the same path. But sitting on the fence and hoping for Morrison to make another mistake would be to grossly underestimate Morrison’s canniness. For instance, I would not be surprised is Morrison made a complete flip on the climate issue to cut off Labor, whether or not forced by the USA. Labor can’t be all things to all people. It needs to stand out, now.
If this doesn’t happen Labor will lose many votes to the Greens, who want much stronger action. Unfortunately the right Labor’s right wing (which is hardly left of the LNP) would try to prevent this. Ideally, Labor and the Greens would sit together and agree on common policy areas, and go into an election together. Germany, for example, is just one perfect example of how this could work very successfully.
To me it is infuriating how the LNP has made Australia into a backward country in terms of climate policy, human rights and social policy. Not what I envisaged 46 years ago when I entered Australia full of optimism and idealism.
Hasn’t the government made enough blunders already or broken the rules or “guidelines” sufficiently to deserve defeat at the next election? What of the view that governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them? Why are those who despair of the government’s stewardship so ready to gloss over its failings?
In my view there is no reason at all for this government to be here. It is inept, dishonest and amoral. But it matters little what I think. It is the unending spin and obfuscation that Labor seems unable to expose that gets this government elected as most people seem not to able or willing to see that they are being conned.
“But the circumstances were not normal even before the pandemic. This is a
government with form over the abuse of public money for partisan
purposes, for improper purposes and the transfer of public goods into
private hands. The prime minister, in particular, and the
Attorney-General who ought to stand for good process, good stewardship
and accountability, seem to openly deride the concepts. They show no
remorse or embarrassment.”
Yes, Yes and Yes. And these artful dodgers have been at it since the 1970’s ‘Bottom of the Harbour Schemes’.
Good article. But where on earth is the Labor Party? Should they not shouting it from the roof tops in stead of quietly supporting declared climate deniers/sceptics for the OECD?
No strong principles it seems.