federal politics
16 May 2008
Arise Sir Malcolm
Brendan Nelson is a dead man walking. But he could still be doing a better job of it, writes Ben Eltham
Is Brendan Nelson a dead man walking, as Michelle Grattan and more than a few of his colleagues believe?Yes. He's gone.
Last night's budget reply speech showed why. While Nelson is an empathetic and even likeable speaker, it is becoming clearer by the day that he doesn't have the policy credentials to pull his party out of its current mire.
Nelson's rhetoric and language has improved since his disastrous reply to Kevin Rudd's national Apology, but last night's headline policies of a 5 cent reduction in federal petrol excise and blocking the Rudd-Roxon "alcopops" tax increase are hardly substantial policies around which he can build an alternative government. In fact, they're not even fiscally responsible.
Nelson has had a lot of problems coming to grips with the economic debate as Opposition Leader. That's hardly surprising, given his major competitor for the leadership is the Shadow Treasurer. But Nelson and the Opposition in general have been all over the shop on economic policy, and particularly inflation.
Perhaps Malcolm Turnbull and Brendan Nelson genuinely believe that inflation is not a long-term macro-economic concern for Australia. Or perhaps blocking important revenue-positive measures like the alcopops tax increase is merely politically expedient. The advantage of being in opposition is that neither man has to run the economy. But with both underlying and headline inflation bumping up over 4 per cent, it's time someone in their party reminded them that the Australian economy is in real danger of sliding into a nasty bout of "stagflation" - a term coined in the last oil crunch of the 1970s to describe slowing growth and rising inflation.
Surely Nelson remembers the damage caused to John Howard's government by successive interest rate rises last year. Yet just 6 months later, he wants to introduce an obviously inflationary policy like cutting petrol excise. As nearly every media commentator has observed today, Howard refused to cut the excise for a decade. It's this kind of policy back-flip that makes Nelson look desperate.
And what about the climate change implications? Climate change was a huge vote-changing issue for middle Australia last November, driven by Howard's stubborn refusal to face up to the scientific reality. Nelson appears not to have noticed. A cut in petrol tax only plays in to the hands of a government keen to portray the Liberals as climate change skeptics.
On the alcopops tax increase, Nelson is fighting both health policy experts and common sense. This is doubly surprising given his background as both a General Practitioner and head of the AMA. As I explained in my article last week, there is overwhelming evidence, both in Australia and internationally, that increasing the tax on alcohol decreases consumption. The alcopops tax increase is a policy supported by medical researchers, doctors and police.
Nelson's argument that the tax hike won't stop binge drinking is even sillier. One hundred years of prohibition hasn't stopped people all over the world taking illicit drugs, so a minor tax increase on pre-mixed drinks is not going to stop binge drinking. Taxing cigarettes doesn't stop smoking either. But it does reduce the harm. So will this tax increase. It's a simple concept backed by enormous amounts of research.
Where can the Opposition go from here? Nelson and Turnbull must start by building on last night's policies for tax breaks to small business. Labor's budget contained little for small business, offering an obvious opportunity for Nelson to shore up his base. Labor's union-friendly predilection for industry policy is another area where the Opposition should be able to attack the Rudd Government, as Mark Latham observed on Thursday in the Australian Financial Review.
Nelson and Turnbull need to get started. It wouldn't hurt Julie Bishop to lend a hand.
Like Simon Crean, Nelson is destined never to face the Australian electorate as Opposition Leader. But there is much he could still do to help the Liberal Party win the 2010 or 2013 election. Like Crean, he could embark on internal party reform. As anyone who has glanced at a newspaper in recent weeks knows, the various State branches of the Liberal Party are riven by self-destructive factionalism.
Out of government in all States and federally, the conservative side of politics in Australia needs renewal. It is currently unelectable in States such as Queensland and West Australia. There is an opportunity to bring in fresh talent before the 2010 election, with the retirement of Peter Costello and perhaps Alexander Downer. The Liberals need to entice candidates with broad popular appeal - right-of-centre versions of Peter Garrett and Maxine McKew - and many fewer party hacks. At all costs, Mal Brough must be urged to run again. Brisbane's popular Lord-Mayor Campbell Newman is another possibility. There are talented people in business that Turnbull could reach out to. But until the Liberal Party cleans up it act internally, it will find it hard to recruit and pre-select good candidates.
It's probably all too late for Brendan Nelson. But Australia needs a viable party of opposition.
Sensible fiscal policy, good candidates and party reform should be the first items on Malcolm Turnbull's agenda.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Well said indeed and as part of the reformation telling the truth should be a rock solid condition imposed on every member of the Opposition Front bench.
As a Liberal, I recognise that Rudd will have relatively smooth sailing for quite some time. That said, one element that seems to have emerged very early in his tenure is that of technocratic control and "Dad knows best" crypto-wowserism.
While I don’t think that Nelson has done a great job enunciating this message to date, I think Hockey has made some valid points expressing cynicism about the "war on binge-drinking" and the extent to which the revenue raised by this tax increase will be spent on alcohol consumption education campaigns.
The fuel excise cut proposal is silly politics. Very few people believe that a cut in excise won’t be gobbled up by oil distributors anyway! A better but less sexy policy would be tax deductions for new generation fuel efficient cars.
The Liberal Party is completely split over climate change. It will take time for the more rabid elements to accept that this is both "settled science" and "prudent politics".
I agree that the Liberal party needs to get stuck into business tax and innovation policy - particularly for small business. Perhaps they should parallel Rudd’s review of the tax system with a full and complete review of the Business & Company tax system in Australia - but report one month earlier than the Rudd Review. It would be a good way to re-energise business around the Liberal party and also create some genuinely decent policy around small business and innovation.
Ben, I’m not as convinced as you are that Nelson will go. Turnbull won’t want to make his run too early - especially as the Rudd’s honeymoon drags on and on. The key indicator will be Costello. If Costello feels that he could win in 2010, he will challenge. If he bows out, then we are in for a summer of discontent. There is no solid candidate for the Right to coalesce around. Turnbull isn’t aligned to a faction but is amenable for moderates. Bishop and Hockey are Mods. Nelson is an indy who tends to side with the Mods as well. Given that environment, it is unlikely that Mods will knife each other. Equally, the only way Turnbull could be convinced of full support would be to gain Right backing - which will be difficult given that he thinks Abbott and Minchin are halfwits.
I agree that Brough needs to run again, Campbell won’t touch it with a 6ft pole. There are rumours about some recognisable names running for the Lis in 2010 but really - who would be interested in running with the polls so low!
The problems are destined to continue for a while until some of the more intractable factional problems keeping safe seats for muppets like Alex Hawke, Peter Slipper etc are resolved.
Do you blokes mind, Mal Brough??!!! His policies on the Intervention in NT were bloody woeful, and getting worse every day. Also, one of these days, maybe the Media will forget how photogenic he is, and look a bit closer at his personal financial dealings in regard to some of the aspects of the intervention. The Libs need Brough back like a hole in the head. Oh well, speaking as a progressive, perhaps it is a good idea, he can only cause them more harm.
Campbell Newman is getting closer to financial meltdown every day.
Sooner or later his profligate spending on bloody roads and tunnels and bridges around Brisbane, and the massive cost over-runs, will catch up with him. He has one of those Monument to Himself diseases, with the public of Brisbane and Queensland paying the ever escalating bills. If he does not stop soon, someone is going to ‘get him an a dark alley’, as the only way of stopping him.
Dazza.
You only have to hear the incredibly insincere waffle that falls out of Nelson’s gob to understand that the Libs still don’t have any legs to stand on.
Jules
Hmm… I have a feeling as I am writing this that I know far too little to comment, but it’s interesting, so instead of comment, I want to question.
1. Was Howard a star on economic mangement or was Costello? Did that help Costello at all? Would polling for the Libs increase if Costello were the leader? If so, given the the sentiment of the general Australian public towards Costello, would it increase enough to make the Libs a viable alternative government?
2. If we say the Costello was the star on economic management, how might this construct Turnbull as an alternative treasurer?
3. Isn’t it normal that a party newly in opposition is quite scattered for a fair period of time?
4. Does anyone get the feeling that Nelson may be Australia’s version of McCain?
I’m probably a swinging voter- but I’m very interested in some feedback on these questions.
Tonia
The Liberal party is dead. Without major policy change,within 10 years the new dichotomy will be between the ‘Laboural’ party and the greens.
The big divide from now on will be on the failed economic rationalism philosophy - a transparent rehash of Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’, which has only served to increase the gaping gully between rich and poor, embraced by both major parties- and resource rationalism, where we address the problem of a tiny percentage of the world’s population owning a major percentage of the resources.
It was a major irony recently, when Costello claimed Swan was merely cashing in on the work he -Costello- did, when Costello himself followed Keating’s program of ‘rationalism’ and privatisation so closely.
If the Australian people are to get a genuine choice of what sort of Republic we are to have, political parties of every stamp are going to have to choose their models, and stand by them.
This is the only hope the Libs have of survival -particularly with Turnbull at the helm.
www.thecomensalist.com
Grim, I love it,
This Labor party is a "New" Labor model.
The name "Laboral" Party sums up this mob nicely.
I keep expecting Brendon Nelson , like in the movie, "The Nutty Professor" to go into writhing contortions and the old Nelson" to pop out and point to Rudd, and say "That should have been me, why did’nt I ride it out on the back bench and become Prime Minister of the Labor Party?"
I wonder what budget Swanny could have pulled down to satisfy Brendan.
"We are really angry…" The taxes are too high for the rich and the benefits are too much for the poor , reading between the lines.
In fact, neither is the case.
Get real mate, if you think you could block supply and force a double dissolution on the strength of this budget you’re just pissing in the wind.
You might have to wait at least until the mini budget around august to see what backdowns and amendments they have to make.
Even then the Ruddymoon still won’t be over unless the Maid Marian (Reserve bank) turns out to be really in bed with the big banks and not just pretending while appearing to be on the govt’s side in lowering inflation. By then, those of us in debt may be suffering Keatingesque interest rates.
Meanwhile, Robin Hood, ditto riding through the glen, RH RH with his band of (wo)men feared by the bad, loved by the good R’n Hood, R’n Hood, R’n Hood (winked).
Apologies to the series in the 60’s starring Richard Green.
Hmmm I wonder who should play Friar Tuck?
"Turnbull is now known to be at odds not only with Dr Nelson but also with the ‘collective view’ of the Liberal leadership group and the front bench," according to the front page of today’s Australian. Doesn’t really bode well for him succeeding Nelson as leader, does it?
(That said, he may well end up grabbing it anyway. More than Hillary Clinton, Turnbull really does seem "inevitable". Although we all know how far that got Clinton…)
Brendan Nelson could do worse. He could run in ever widening circles by hiring Ben as an adviser.
Why this analysis of Nelson in the world of media-speak? and nothing about Nelson’s failure to engage Australians deep within, where they fear and hope and cry.
Ben, why even mention the asinine polly-games of alcopop and small business tax cuts, when that part of Australia that is really being crushed out of existence is family farmers fighting subsidised foreign produce, manufacturers dying in the same war; and young families being pressed inexorably out their doors and onto the streets.
I have often heard the observation about AGW being a major influence on voting last November, and I rather wonder who did this survey and how many options were incorporated in the questions.
My surveys showed IR laws, high unemployment, falling wages and rising prices as major concerns. Only the youth element saw global warming as very significant.
Perhaps Ben and Brendan might be well advised to actually conduct their own surveys door to door and find out from the horse’s mouth what’s really going on, and what’s important. Forget the TV and telephone surveys, or Morgan’s rap on the opinions of 14 year old school girls. Knocking on home doors, following a genuine Australian demographic corridor reveals an entirely different picture.
Armed with the expressed concerns of ordinary Australians, perhaps Nelson could show the ALP up for what it is, a more devious and ruthless Liberal clone. Of course this would necessitate the good doctor actually assuming real leadership and formulating real policies, rather than bizarrely flip-flopping former Coalition mantras. One gets the feeling this is entirely beyond his capacity, but can anyone else do the job?
It appears that if Rudd is to be constrained by a real opposition, the people of Australia are going to have to organise this for themselves.