Guy Beres

There was of course another interest rate rise today, which is bad news for a lot of ordinary, hard-working Australians. The rate increase also curiously, as a product of our current position in the electoral cycle, helps the Rudd Government in political terms and inflicts just that little bit more pain upon the Coalition. The Opposition, of course, has been collectively left smarting in the knowledge that this latest rate rise represents just another refutation of their economic credentials and legacy. I am sure that senior members of the Coalition sleep well knowing that just as the Coalition terrorised Federal Labor for a decade in relation to their economic legacy during the Keating era, it appears that the Rudd Labor Government will have the pleasure of returning the favour ad nauseum with respect to the Howard years.

It is quite clear from Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson’s comments that he does not know quite how to tackle the twin peril of his own poll ratings, already deep in relegation territory, and this latest rate rise:

The Coalition has also lost further ground on a two-party preferred basis, down 6 points to 37 per cent, while the Government has a 63 per cent share of the vote.

Dr Nelson downplayed the poll as he arrived to chair a shadow cabinet meeting in Sydney this morning.

“I’m firmly locked in the underdog status, but the most important thing today is that the Reserve Bank of Australia will be delivering the report card, for the next 30 days and beyond,” he said.

The underdog reference is of course an understatement, if the polls are anything to go by, and Nelson’s reference to the Reserve Bank delivering a “report card for the next 30 days” does not really make a great deal of sense. If the Reserve Bank really has delivered a “report card” on government policy, which I don’t think anybody sensible believes it has, the report card would certainly provide an F grade to the previous Howard Government, and at minimum, a C grade to the government for the minimal tangible impact it has had on the national economy since assuming office. After the seemingly unstoppable barrage of interest rises over the last six months, I think most Australians with an interest in the matter would recognise that the country has a systemic problem on its hands with regards to inflation; one that is going to take a sustained and concerted effort from the government over a reasonable duration, if any relief is to be provided at all.

But let’s consider Doctor Nelson’s position as Opposition Leader for just a moment. To be honest, he seriously does have a severe case of the “Simon Creans”; in fact even worse than the current Minister for Trade had it five years or so back. Although he is not doing a particularly good job, I don’t personally believe that the job he is doing warrants the abysmal poll ratings he is receiving. Nelson’s leadership ratings are no doubt being impacted by the policy inertia that the Coalition has exhibited of late, and also the extended honeymoon that the Rudd Government has enjoyed since the election. Let’s be frank; the Rudd Government has, in political terms, been kicking arse and chewing bubble-gum since November 2007. Not many beats have been skipped - at least not any of enough significance to slow the government’s momentum.

So while, just to re-iterate, I think a transition of the leadership to Malcolm Turnbull is inevitable and the right solution for the Coalition, the situation is a bit more complicated than that politically. If Doctor Nelson feels that he has not yet been given a fair roll of the dice in the leadership, I think he has every reason to feel vindicated on that point. Of course, Simon Crean had every right to feel the same way, and yet the right decision for his party was definitely for him to step aside in 2003, if not even earlier. Like Labor back then, it seems that the Coalition’s political fortunes may be forced into decline for an extended period, substantially but not entirely as a result of a poor collective choice made regarding the party leadership.

The Coalition’s enthusiasm for pursuing nuclear power solutions for Australia apparently dropped off quite rapidly after the departure of the former Prime Minister; although we have only started to hear about it now. Despite no associated media statement being released at the time, Chris Hammer reports in The Age today that the decision to junk the Coalition’s approach to nuclear power was made at a shadow cabinet meeting in December last year. Shadow Environment spokesperson Greg Hunt now suggests that there is “zero chance” of a nuclear power industry emerging in Australia within the next 40 years. Needless to say, it is very interesting that an election result apparently has the capacity to change a partyroom’s mind on a policy so profoundly. Particularly one which the election was not widely perceived to be a referendum on.

Unfortunately for the Opposition, its new “stance” on nuclear power appears riddled with ambiguity and is ripe for attack from the government. Consider this thoroughly non-sensical sentence attributed to a spokesperson for Doctor Nelson, attempting to summarise the Coalition’s revised approach to nuclear power issues:

Yesterday a spokesman for Dr Nelson said: “Coalition policy is to investigate the possibility of nuclear energy, but it is not part of our policy. If it were to occur, it would only occur in a bipartisan way.”

A translation would seem to be required. The message from the Coalition seems to be that they are interested in investigating the possibility of nuclear energy, but no, of course they would never actually pursue the development of a nuclear power industry in this country. No, sir. They are just interested in investigating it. Unless of course, the Rudd Government decides to embrace nuclear power, in which case they would be happy to hop on board for the ride, as they have done on industrial relations, the Kyoto Protocol, apologising to the stolen generations, and so on, over the course of the last couple of months.

The Nelson Opposition has once again been caught junking a seemingly unpopular policy, without actually thinking too much about what its new approach or direction in that area is going to be. This latest sabotage of the Howard team platform adds further credence to the snowballing public perception that the Coalition has not a clue what it stands for anymore, now that its former leadership team are mostly now on the backbenches or else out of parliament. It needs some direction and fast, before the Rudd Government starts feeling like the comfy old pair of slippers that the Howard Government became for so many ordinary voters out there.

Well apologies, but this uncharacteristically provocative opening salvo from Age press gallery stalwart Michelle Grattan has me puzzling about where her head is at in relation to Canberra’s parliamentary “hot property”:

Parties that have lost elections quickly find themselves shivering in the changeroom, policy clothes stripped off and wondering how much of their philosophical underwear has also become unwearable.

Ooh, er. Despite the quizzical opening, Grattan’s latest column is one of the best from her I have read in some time. The point that she makes is not a particularly profound one, but does a fine job of rounding up all the recent evidence we have to consider about the Federal Opposition, arguing in a compelling fashion that they have lost the plot policy-wise. At the moment, we have no idea what the Federal Coalition stands for. Having taken the opportunity to rubbish at virtually every juncture the policy position of the previous government (e.g. Kyoto, WorkChoices, “saying sorry”, tomorrow will no doubt bring more), one could be forgiven for thinking that Kevin Rudd might be the best person to ask what the Coalition stands for on any given issue. At the moment, the Coalition seems to stand for whatever Kevin Rudd stands for with a twist; a twist that they generally are not prepared to fight for with any great determination in parliament anyway. The government is bringing the liqueurs and fruit juices to this particular parliamentary cocktail party, and Nelson’s Opposition appears to have gallantly taken responsibility for supplying the matchstick parasols.

In short, the Opposition is floundering, in desperate need of some policy directions to galvanise them, and a strong leader to take them forwards. Mindlessly chipping away at the government in parliament won’t achieve very much if nobody really knows what they themselves stand for. Turnbull’s cute but somewhat petty NAIRU bombing of Treasurer Wayne Swan may have resulted in some embarrassment for the Queenslander, but if the Opposition’s most useful line of attack on the government relates to the definition of a slightly obscure economic term, it says a lot about their own situation. Apparently lacking any substantive lines of attack on economic policy, they appear to have settled for the time being on pursuing the trivial.

On that ultimately meaningless political front, I wish them the best of luck.

Despite a pointless pursuit of Kevin Rudd by the media on his relationship with Brian Burke, the Prime Minister is currently riding high with the highest preferred Prime Minister ratings in Newspoll’s twenty year history of such polls. The Coalition has already sensed that Rudd is top dog, and are instead concentrating their attacks on Treasurer Wayne Swan. Swan clearly needs to pick up the confidence levels and assertiveness quick smart if he is going to retain his job in the long-term.

Personally it is greatly reassuring to me that so soon after the government’s supposedly contentious delivery of a formal apology to the stolen generations, Rudd’s political standing remains not only rock solid but at record-breaking levels. Arguably it reinforces the point that although there is still a bit of anti-apology (and we may as well say “anti-compassion”) sentiment out there in the electorate, this sentiment is decidedly in the minority. From a progressive, dare I say left-wing point of view, this provides a not insubstantial dose of hope that the country will now finally cease to stagnate on issues of great social import.

Perhaps a touch more conclusively, it also says something about the Coalition. On the other side of the fence, sadly a very fragile hope is all that Brendan Nelson has at the moment in his position as Opposition Leader. That Nelson is currently burdened with just a 9% rating as preferred Prime Minister tells one a certain something about the current state of play with the major parties in this country. Federal Labor have succeeded (perhaps beyond their wildest expectations) in replacing John Howard with a mainstream, quasi-conservative figure, whom the “Howard battlers” can see a respectable degree of good in. That 70% of people prefer Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister sends a strong message to the Coalition that Brendan Nelson is currently not providing the leadership they require in order to be competitive. That only 9% of respondents prefer Nelson as Prime Minister more or less confirms that only rusted on supporters and party zealots (and Nelson’s friends and family) have elected to board the Nelson “I’ve never voted Liberal in my life” Express Train towards a Turnbull Opposition.

The clock must surely already be ticking. Having won the leadership and then completed a horrendously messy about-face on the apology issue, Nelson needs to be competitive or make way. One wonders if the Coalition party room, having not had the guts to do the politically intelligent thing and endorse Turnbull initially, will now have the guts to realise their error fast enough.

I don’t think there is anybody out there at the moment who thinks Brendan Nelson is making a good fist of it as Opposition Leader. For some reason, he has found it difficult to command the authority that one expects from a party leader in parliament. On just about every issue worth debating, the Federal Coalition have been all over the shop. The Opposition does not seem to know quite where it stands on industrial relations, besides promising to wait for the government’s legislation and deciding accordingly. It does not know quite where it stands on an apology to the stolen generations, because Nelson seemingly lacks the political capacity to forge a consensus on his own steam. Only now, shamed by the interventions of party heavyweights like Shane Stone, will Nelson’s ragged bunch of independent entities likely fall grudgingly in line behind the position of the Rudd Government.

Malcolm Turnbull must be feeling fairly frustrated right now, as he watches his party and Nelson wobble around like drunken sailors. Unfortunately, when politicians get frustrated they usually end up making mistakes or saying some fairly silly things. In this AAP report (via SMH), Turnbull takes what might have been a decent point to make about the government’s approach to inflation issues and makes a bit of a mess of it. Take for example this “red hot” analogy:

“For a treasurer to complain about economic challenges is like a fireman complaining about fires.”

“That is the job of the treasurer - to manage the economy.”

Well, if the so-called fires were lit (or at least stoked) by the Howard Government after a number of snoozy years at the wheel of the national economy, I don’t think you can really blame the firemen for getting a bit stroppy about it. Turnbull goes on to elaborate on how what Rudd and Swan’s public statements are actually the cause of all the nation’s troubles in this area:

“The problem with Mr Rudd and Mr Swan at the moment is that the language that they are using is so immoderate, so un-measured, it is actually creating economic problems for us,” Mr Turnbull told ABC Radio.

“He (Mr Rudd) is actually creating or exacerbating an inflation problem.”

Err… of course! It’s not the economy, stupid, its Rudd’s big mouth, stupid. How silly of us. Sadly for Malcolm, I wouldn’t advise anyone to hold their breath waiting for Glenn Stevens from the RBA to describe Rudd and Swan’s use of language as a major factor driving up inflation. Now on the one hand, I do think there is a good argument to be made asserting that Rudd and Swan should moderate their language in relation to inflation issues. There is certainly no need to (further) frighten the horses, although to be honest I don’t think their use of language has really gotten out of control in the way that Turnbull seems to be suggesting. However, to assert as Turnbull does that the Rudd Government is actually creating an inflation problem by making a series of high-level, generally accurate observations about the situation, is an absurdity. In short, it is a sign that the Opposition is in a real spot of bother. Presently, if there is any blame to be worn locally for the domestic economic situation, it lies squarely with the Coalition. This will change over time, of course, as the Rudd Government’s history in office grows, but for the time being at least, the government is effectively untouchable on economic issues.

When on considers the situation, what with Nelson creating chaos in the leadership, and the mouths of the Opposition gaffer-taped shut on economic issues thanks to the wastefulness of the Howard team over the last couple of terms, I’m not surprised our old friend Malcolm seems to be losing the plot.