The next election
Australian issues, Labor politics - - Posted on July, 26 at 12:15 am by Ken L
It’s inevitable that politics become personalised, and when a government’s been in power as long as Howard’s mob, the personalisation gets ugly. I have no hesitation in admitting that I find John Howard a thoroughly miserable excuse for a human being: a devious cunning lowlife who has neither the wit nor the will to work out what is in Australia’s true interests but who instead devotes his entire existence to clinging to office.
Many of his cabinet colleagues, of course, are even worse.
While these personal biases might be unavoidable and even accurate, they’re not really a satisfactory basis for deciding who to support in the next election. If one wants to be taken seriously as a citizen, one should be able to evaluate the way in which an alternative government would tackle the issues of importance to Australia’s future free of personal bias. So I thought I’d list, in descending order of importance, what I regard as the critical challenges facing Australia, and see how a Rudd Government would deal with them.
Issue #1: forge a new foreign policy that positions Australia as a non-aligned middle power, concerned mainly to foster friendly, constructive relationships with nations in the Asia-Pacific region, especially Indonesia.
Prognosis: Confirming that Australian combat troops might be left in Iraq for another 12 months was the final straw; a Rudd Government’s foreign policy would be hard to distinguish from Howard’s.
Issue #2: restore longstanding conventions of good public administration, including ministerial accountability for the actions of public officials; primacy of professional public servants over ministerial advisers; arm’s length relationships with the media; respect for individual rights and liberty; and subordination of the executive government to parliament.
Prognosis: There is no reason to believe that Labor’s approach to these matters will be any different to the Coalition’s.
Issue #3: bring the underclass back into the Australian community – the people who lack the skills, or the family circumstances, or the psychological characteristics, or some other necessary factor to make a go of it in the exciting new Australia that honours the relentless pursuit of wealth as the ultimate meaning of life. Reorganise public policy so that these people can live with dignity and a decent standard of living.
Prognosis: A Rudd Government might take some modest steps in this direction but I rather doubt it. Mark Latham’s aspirational voters unfortunately remain Labor’s target audience. The long-term unemployed, the chronically disabled, indigenous people, the mentally ill and so on will remain second-class citizens no matter who is in government.
Issue #4: plan and implement programs to manage basic environmental infrastructure over the next 20 – 30 years, including water, transport, energy, communications and agricultural land.
Prognosis: It’s a leap of faith but I believe Labor would tackle this better than the Coalition, simply because they are not so beholden to farmers and big business and their chronic short-term mentality. Rudd has also shown that he understands that it’s OK to borrow to fund infrastructure improvements and is not hobbled by Howard/Costello superstition about debt.
Issue #5: plan and implement programs to manage basic social infrastructure including health, education and housing.
Prognosis: Rudd hasn’t shown any inclination to tackle the enormous, bloated, middle class vote-buying schemes that consume so much of the federal budget; nor is he likely to be brave enough to increase taxes; and what’s more he’s made a stupid commitment to run budgetary surpluses regardless of external circumstances. That means all he can do is tinker round the edges and maybe, hopefully, over time he’ll use increased tax revenue from bracket creep to make a few improvements here and there.
On the other hand, Howard is likely to make extravagant pre-election promises to squander the next three years’ budget surpluses on more vote-buying and Rudd will probably feel obliged to match him, meaning there will be bugger-all scope for change. And if the economy goes pear-shaped – and remember that every month that goes by brings us a month closer to the next recession, which is well overdue – then I suspect Labor will be cutting spending on social programs before it cuts useless vote-buying exercises like the baby bonus and the private health rebate.
In summary: Should Labor win the next election I’ll take savage delight in watching the likes of Alexander Downer and Tony Abbott finally get the boot … but truth to tell it will be too late in the day for the event to be genuinely satisfying. These blokes are going into history as outstanding conservative leaders and they’ll live out the rest of their lives in a warm bubble of respect and admiration for all the things they will be praised for having done in 11 years in power - including backslaps from the incoming government, I have no doubt. They’ll soon get over the disappointment of losing one last election.
Even the pleasure that I take in watching the mighty finally fall is likely, I fear, to be offset by the pain of seeing good decent progressive people overlooked by the electorate yet again. I anticipate that this election will see the Democrats wiped out and the Greens stall or even go backwards – both events will be sad developments for our society.
What I won’t feel is a surge of joy that Australia has elected a government that will make significant changes for the better. It will be more “Thank god we finally got rid of that contemptible bunch … now let’s hope that Rudd’s mob turns out to be better than expected (for which they in truth will not have to be very good.)”
Australia deserves better than such an uninspiring prospect.
Posted in Australian issues, Labor politics |
July 26th, 2007 at 12:41 am
“These blokes are going into history as outstanding conservative leaders”. Ken, whilst the abovementioned have insisted that this is how history will judge them, they fail on any objective criteria save longevity; not usually regarded as a reliable indicator of excellence.
So stuff ‘em; we’ll see how history judges them. I’m quietly confident they won’t be opening Tony Abbot ovals or unveiling Peter Reith statues in 20 years time.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:41 am
I put in my 2c worth.
I agree with you, Ken, regarding the issues you have raised, and also agree the election is unlikely to effect much change in issue(2) and issue(3).
in regard to issue(2) I am thinking about how it might be possible to change the electoral system to a decentralized, democratic one, which would have the implication of eliminating general elections, and incorporating effective recall of representatives after a set period of say two years to five years. The effect of that change would be significantly reduce centralized control by the executive, the party or the media. Then the problem becomes how to form a strong enough executive in that framework.
In regard to issue(3, it seems to me, there are related matters to WorkChoices and the casualization and individualization (as per pseudo contractors. This issue goes to issue, in my view, of human values, as distinct from the commodification of labor.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:46 am
I’d be grateful to get someone who just gave us the truth every now and again, without the constant spin and polish Howard and his lot have made their stock-in-trade.
I’m convinced that Howard even gift-wraps his turds and labels them “chocolate bars” before flushing.
Someone that just wipes and pulls the chain will be a welcome relief.
July 26th, 2007 at 2:47 am
Know where you’re coming from Ken…but i reckon in this environment, if after the election Rudd & Co. let the side down too much we’ll see a rerun of the 1968 Democratic National Convention or somethin’ similar. I’m reading a lot of pissed off & suspicious people out there who have had their fill of the political BS. And Corporate excess. It’s quite worrying. Of course Howard’s myopic answer to the growing unrest is a Police State & a Big Stick approach. Anything to keep the Corporate lobby groups happy.
But I don’t think Labor are that stupid…they know they’ve got to let some steam out of the pressure cooker. Ease the tensions w/ some half-decent workplace & social reforms.
The last thing we need in this Country is a civil war being fought on the streets because this idiot Howard & his media minions divided the society for political & financial gain…& then Rudd decided not to heal the wounds.
I think the Laborites have read enuff History to know there are acceptable compromises…& alternative ways to deal w/ IR reform w/out stickin’ it to the Workers & the Disadvantaged.
lol…but wouldn’t a Reith statue make a handy outdoor urinal…:)
Anyone else hear Peter Costello declare himself the Pope tonite on the 7.30 Report? Seems King John & his nits of the Square table have turned poor Pope Peter into a political celibate. You can imagine Howard & his mocking men & Luddite ladies handing him the key to Obscurity Villa & cheerfully giving the middle finger as they cry out “Have a good trip!…your Popemobile is out near the Mad Monk’s bike & Joe’s sweaty joggers…now go wave at the people & pray for a miracle whilst we servants of the Corporate Gods go screw the Aussie flock for all they’re worth…thanks for coming!”
Any integrity Costello had left just slouched its way out the backdoor. And you know, i actually think he deserved better. Seriously. I guess gettin’ done over by a back stabbing Cabinet & ungrateful electorate can have a real deleterious effect on a guy. Still, at least Paul Keating had the guts & courage to match the grandiosity. I guess it says a lot about politics today…& the state of the media. And why spine transplants are a MUST.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:46 am
While I agree with most of what you say, Ken, I dispute this:
When the cabinet documents are released, and the biogs come out and the historians sift through the Howard years, the truth will out. These people must, by definition, have many skeletons to hide, and not all of them will remain obscured.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:16 am
I don’t know if this translates to federal politics or not but in the recent NSW govt elections the Nationals got 10.1% of the vote which gave them 13 seats. The Greens got 8.9% of the vote but this did not give them any seats.
To my way of thinking, there is something seriously wrong with the electoral system.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:42 am
Ken, considering the prominence of global warming/climate change among better informed voters as an “issue”, why do you think the Greens will stall or go backwards this election?
Rudd has cheesed-off a lot of voters who place principle over realpolitik, eg. on Haneef, Tassie old growth logging, cynical troop deployment to sort NT child abusers etc.
One in four of the 18-24 year olds who voted Rodent in 2004(in effect, 21 to 24 y.o’s) have cast Ratty adrift, like a turd into the ocean of political life.
This, to me, suggests that Team Brown/Green will more than hold their own. I agree that the Dems are done. Pity about Andrew Bartlett, he actually went to the courthouse to support the good doctor, when the magistrate granted the hapless Haneef bail.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:29 am
my thoughts on election spending is that labor will not spend anything near what the liberals will ,thus trying to appear better managers of the economy
the reason i say this is because of the rudd budget reply,from the looks on the liberals faces it was’nt what they thought rudd was going to say
if the reserve bank lifts interest rates in august or septemeber the economy becomes the main game again
July 26th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Sometimes parties tend to stray out of the centre once elected.
As I stated in another post you have to convince swinging voters to swich and you don’t want to scare the horses.
This has happened with ‘Relaxed and confortable’ Howard telling people in 1996 that things would not be that different than before but once it had its chance introduced drastic IR laws.
Hopefully, if Labor wins, there may be a chance to drag it more on the Left. Not by much, but more than at the moment
July 26th, 2007 at 11:44 am
If the Haneef investigations go belly-up and interest rates rise then the Howard government lose the two areas in which they are deemed to be superior managers.
Maybe then the ALP can begin to talk outside the square.
However the current paradigm is so strong and entrenched that I reckon it can only be challenged from a position of real power - once in government.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:57 am
You say you would find the electoral marginalisation of the Greens sad; why then continue to perpetuate the mainstream media’s refusal to discuss the validity of their policies, which address every concern you have listed?
Like in the US, to restrict serious debate to the two mainstream parties — which are, as you say, beholden to the very groups that stand in the way of the changes that need to be made to ensure human survival — is to fall into Teh System’s trap.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
I think the character of the first Rudd term will depend heavily on how big the swing is. If they get a landslide, Labor could introduce more sweeping policy changes than foreshadowed. If they scrape through, they’ll go softly softly for the first term, and see how the electorate likes them.
On some particular issues, I just don’t swallow the populist rhetoric as enduring policy direction. For example, I refuse to believe Garrett will sit by and let the Tassie forests go, or implement a toothless carbon trading system.
There will no doubt be change. Perhaps not quickly, but it will come nonetheless.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Lomandra, I remember hearing on radio some time ago that Howard keeps cabinet minutes to the bare minimum. There will be little in them to interest future historians.
July 26th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
*sigh*
Why should I be surprised….
July 26th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Well said, peterm (11:44 am).
July 26th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
At the moment Rudd & co. are busy dodging flying wedges from a vicious and conniving govt. Being an effective opposition trying to win government is evidently more complex and difficult than just opposing everything the govt does.
To resort to a tortured basketball analogy, Rudd has the ball but is being triple-teamed and harrassed in the back court, while the refs look the other way at the slapping and trash talk. We’ll have to wait a few months before his team unfurl their fast breaks, alley-oops and dunks from the foul line, but first he has to advance the ball across the half-way line.
Rudd has talked a big offensive game since December with references to Bonhoeffer, brutopias, thinking different and bridges too far. A lot of people in the ALP and media are going to hold him to that - don’t expect the newly minted ALP Hero sheen to last all that long (speaking hypothetically here, not taking anything for granted … please God don’t punish me for my presumption … simper simper).
By the way Ken, why wasn’t climate change mentioned as an important issue? Not stroking The Skeptic Within, I hope! I don’t completely buy the line that all swinging voters are selfish callous pricks who let only personal finance and xenophobia guide their choice. A significant chunk (particularly older voter nearly done with their time on earth) might be wondering what sort of legacy they’re leaving their descendents, and which party is best equipped to deal with the mess.
July 26th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Ken says: “I have no hesitation in admitting that I find John Howard a thoroughly miserable excuse for a human being: a devious cunning lowlife who has neither the wit nor the will to work out what is in Australia’s true interests but who instead devotes his entire existence to clinging to office.”
But gee, Ken forgot to add this: John Howard is a WAR CRIMINAL as culpable as those Nazi thugs hung at Nuremburg. The only difference being that Adolf’s mob fought to reinstate their perceived country’s boundaries, Howard illegally and immorally invaded other defenceless states who had never done a single thing against Australia. And he did this for no reason except to grandstand on the world stage.
He should not be allowed to simply shuffle quietly off the political stage to re-emerge as chairman of Qantas or BHP on $15 million a year, plus bonuses, of course, but should instead face a world court as the ‘alleged’ defendant, to be tried, convicted by a jury and promptly hung drawn or quartered, as the case may be. A slightly better choice than what he offered to millions of Afghans and Iraqis: extermination and genocide.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, Little Johnny, you might run and you might hide but we will never forget your atrocious crimes, while history will condemn you to Hell forever.
Arsehole.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
JHC, speaking of Nazi thugs, remember this section from an article in the Guardian Unlimited?:
“George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.”
and
“The debate over Prescott Bush’s behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the “Bush/Nazi” connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis’ plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler’s rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html
Ya gotta give it to these blood lines, they know where to put their money to make the biggest impact. Who says you can’t help bad regimes & in turn construct Wars whilst making worthwhile profits?
July 26th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
and now we have this to add to the jigsaw:
http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/bush_crime_family_prescott_plotted_fascist_coup.htm
Howard sure has some nice allies.
If the War is expanded into Iran & Pakistan
then i doubt Kevin Rudd is gonna get much opportunity to focus on Social Reform & Housing affordability (I applaud Labor’s efforts today regarding the co-ordination of the Housing Affordability Summit…damn sight more listening to the diverse views than Howard’s Govt…& much less cloaked in secrecy)…we’ve seen how the so called Terrorist actions in the UK have diverted the focus of Brown tho (wasn’t he pushing a Housing Affordability platform?)…not to mention the flooding (no two ways about it, the fossil fools & greedy public have screwed up our climate)…so many indications that the Neo-Cons are about to sabotage the Aussie election…or at least divert Rudd if he gets in.
For instance, nice little move by CNN to bring Dan Senor’s wife Campbell Brown into the picture, just in time for the next ’shock & awe’ fireworks i imagine…Senor was the former spokesman for the U.S. civilian authority in Iraq, was a senior advisor to Paul Bremer - and we know how well that turned out - & also conveniently worked for Bush Poppy’s Carlyle Group from 2001 to 2003.
No wonder Murdoch is so keen to get his hands on the Dow Jones & Wall St. Journal…sure, he gets more access to China…but imagine the expanded war coverage when the sh&t hits the fan as Iran & Pakistan meltdown like Iraq…imagine the bucks to be made outa controlling stock & shares info…& taking on Bloomberg simultaneously?
Get prepared people for the continuation of:
The Greatest Con on Earth!
July 26th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
For most of the nineties I was on the single parents benefit, or whatever it’s called these days. For the first few years I dutifully reported extra bits of income, filled in forests of paperwork, but was largely left alone.
Come Howard, three different inspector types came from Centrelink to our house to check up on us in the space of a year. The last one was an older union bloke (he told me that), friendly, so I asked what I’d done wrong, had the rules changed or something, was I under suspicion?
He said the rules hadn’t changed, but different governments emphasise different bits of the rules. Labor treat people like human beings, Liberal treat people like economic units. It was an interesting and true observation.
Ken has gone to pains in other posts to explain why treating human beings like economic units doesn’t work (merit pay for example). So for arguments sake if merit pay appeals to the electorate a Labor govt might agree with it, but that doesn’t mean it will be followed to the letter or implemented in the same way under Labor.
I’m more optimistic about Rudd than I probably should be, but there’s been no indication yet that he thinks people are anything but human beings, and that’s what he emphasised early on when he published his Howard’s Brutopia pieces.
He may not do everything we’d like. He may have to compromise. But he’s unlikely to run the country like the hate factory Howard’s presided over for the past decade, and that has to be good.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Great comments by nasking, and others.
So let me take the entire opposite view. Can anyone here on this wonderful blog explain to me any of the following:
Tell me any good things Howard has done for Australia’s foreign relations, given that he announced pre-emptive strikes on any neighbour anywhere at any time; a sure-fire dinner winner at cocktail parties in Jakarta, Delhi or Tokyo.
Tell me any benefits obtained from Australia’s (illegal) invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq which has helped to kill about 3 million people, mostly women, kids and babies.
Has the reputation of Australia prospered on the world’s stage in the last 11 years or has it not?
Is Australia’s name around the Pacific rim island nations (a) wonderful (b) not too good, or (c) shit?
Why?
Having pissed off the whole world, has our wondrous Prime Minister, who is one of the 20th and 21st century’s greatest war criminals without any singular doubt, finally perceived the error of his deluded ways and decided to leave us alone, or is he still persisting in defoliating our urban swathes with his endless Agent Horrible, his ancient looney right-wing clap-trap-pap?
Finally, who let the fucking dogs out?
July 26th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
I loathe the Prime Miniature and all his works, but claiming that he’s “one of the 20th and 21st century’s greatest war criminals” is a sentence unalloyed by truth.
In a cage-match between any of the top-ten war criminals you could name, are you going to bet on Stalin or JWH?
July 27th, 2007 at 9:57 am
I’m not a climate change sceptic, more of a fatalist. Being somewhat of a fan of complexity theory, I don’t think human beings are capable of building the accurate models required to develop an effective response to climate change. Attempts to influence climate are therefore likely to have all sorts of unanticipated consequences. It is likely however that ecosystems, being complex adaptive systems, will spontaneously move to a new equilibrium regardless of anything human beings do. We (or rather our descendants) can only hope the new environment is still favourable to human existence.
At a more mundane level, Australia can’t do anything significant to affect global climate. If Europe, China and the USA reach an agreement we’ll be told what to do and we won’t have any choice. If they don’t, anything we do will be pretty much symbolic.
July 27th, 2007 at 11:29 am
Can’t say I disagree with you there Ken.
I tend towards the view that more emphasis should be placed on planning how we’re going to deal with the effects of climate change. Eg adapting our cities to cope with extreme weather events, working out what to do about all the refugees from more radically affected countries etc.
After all, the planet’s climate has huge inertia. Even if we cut carbon emissions to zero now, many of the negative effects will still occur before things improve (if they ever do).
Cuting greenhouse emissions is important for a number of reasons, but it’s only one aspect of the problem we face.