Liberal leader Bruce Flegg seems to have got at least one thing right. The inability of the Nats and Libs to answer the question of who would be Premier if they won rests on a “fanciful hypothetical”. Because if they keep carrying on as they are, it’s totally fanciful that they will have any chance of winning. My analysis from today’s Crikey is over the fold.
Elsewhere: At Queensland election blog Currumbin2Cook, Graham Young addresses the hypothetical of the Libs winning more seats than the Nats.
Update: Some interesting commentary at Pollbludger.
16. Who’s running things in the Qld coalition?
Mark Bahnisch writes:
Observers of Queensland politics could be forgiven for having a touch of deja vu. In a number of recent campaigns, the conservative forces have blown themselves out of the water in the first week. In 1989, Liberal leader Angus Innes asked the question about what he would do in the event of a hung parliament, insisted the question wouldn’t arise because he would be Premier, despite leading the smallest party in the House. In 1998, Premier Borbidge had his own credibility as a leader undermined when the National machine insisted preferences would flow to One Nation against his wishes. Borbidge was visibly shaken, and appeared to give up hope of a win.
History is repeating itself, but with a vengeance. On the first night of the campaign, Opposition leader Lawrence Springborg unconvincingly insisted that the small matter of the next premier was an “internal party matterâ€?, while Liberal leader of one week Bruce Flegg displayed his inexperience by almost losing his temper. Given that south-east Queensland is where most of the Labor seats need to fall, it’s very hard to construct a scenario which sees the Coalition win and the Nats have more seats. This was quickly seized upon by Liberal MPs, who insisted that the party room would determine the issue.
It got worse. Party hard man Michael Caltabiano claimed that “The Liberal Party will provide leadership for Queenslandâ€? alongside the Nats. That’s being read as code that Catalbiano wants to mount his own coup against Flegg. Flegg’s now backflipped, saying that the coalition agreement would allow him to become Premier if the Libs have more numbers. But Springborg has insisted he will be Premier, that he as alternate Premier will debate Beattie, and the Nats’ election ads are reputed to be presidential ads focusing on the Borg.
Confused? The electorate will be. It makes Walletgate look simple.
Peter Beattie couldn’t have written the script better himself. Many Liberal voters in Brisbane are horrified that a vote for the Liberals would elect a National Premier. Undecided voters don’t know enough about first-termer Flegg to make a judgement about him. At worst, Beattie wins on the “devil you knowâ€? basis, and no matter how hard the Coalition try to play catch-up, he has endless ammunition for his theme of strong leadership opposed to a squabbling rabble. And the worst of all is that the Coalition appear jointly and severally arrogant, contemptuous of the electors on one Liberal hand, and presuming a God (or Joh) given right to rule on the National hand.
The word in political circles now is that the Liberals are despairing of attacking Labor marginals in the south-east, and rushing to shore up their own marginals. Beattie’s got Howard-style luck from his opponents at a time when many Queenslanders are looking for a change of government.
It is a fallacy that weak Oppositions make bad governments.
john Howard, Steve Bracks, Bob Carr etal show this to be false thus vote for the Libs/Nats in the QLD election.
A change of government is desperately needed.
I don’t disagree in general, BBEP but they weren’t a flash government last time around under Borbidge and Sheldon, and would be even worse this time around. Partly because the Libs are all first termers with the exception of the retiring knifed Leader Bob Quinn, and partly because they just don’t have a clue what to do about any of the problems they’ve been highlighting. And they plan to decapitate the public service, so we couldn’t even rely on their getting good advice. And there’s enormous animosity between and within the two parties. Most scenarios where they form government have them having to rely on Independents. Howard, Bracks and Carr were all much better politicians than the lacklustre and luckless Springborg and Flegg.
two points
1) if they are hapless water buffaloes then one can toss them out at the next election alah borbidge or Corcoran.
2) Neither howard,Bracks nor Carr were held in high repute in Opposition.
It’s more likely in the context of a hung parliament they might not last a full term – either through a confidence motion or by-election losses.
I disagree about Bracks and Carr – Bracks (on the back of a lot of the work of Brumby) had a pretty good set of policies and directions mapped out and Carr had ministerial experience and was seen as having done well in a tough job rebuilding the NSW ALP.
These guys are clueless – as I understand it, they don’t even have a transition to government plan, and their policies are clearly made up on the spur of the moment – like the nutty plan to build a new Bundaberg hospital (”to change the culture”). The old one is reasonably new, and just needs more beds (as Beattie has promised), and everyone can see it’s a waste of money and just silliness. In Bundaberg it went down like a lead balloon, and got Beattie the endorsement of the Patel Survivors Group. So even in a seat where they should be so well placed to capitalise on Beattie’s problems, they end up turning themselves into the issue in the dumbest possible way.
I think if you were in Qld, BBEP, you’d be able to see it really is a chaotic and hopeless campaign.
I agree completely. Mark, do you know whether any of Quinn’s staffers stayed with the good Doctor?
I understand not, wpd. The other problem is that Jake Smith (the Borg’s staffer supremo) keeps changing things around no matter what’s been agreed. There’s precious little co-ordination between the Libs and the Nats – despite there supposedly being one campaign. Greene apparently is behind the new line on the leadership – but it’s catch up stuff.
Decapitating the public service is a great idea.
This should be followed immediately by decapitations of the law & then accountancy professions.
Hehehehe, Will Flegg or Springborg be leader after the election?
First they gotta win!
I can’t get into this election really. Beattie deserves to lose but probably won’t. I expect a ’surge to the Opposition’ news angle being worked into the coverage in about a fortnight’s time.
Appreciate the coverage, Mark. We who are lazy salute you.
I don’t think they need to worry too much, steve. The Australian reported today that despite the fact that health was always going to be one of the two big issues in this election, the Coalition had no health policy on Tuesday, so Flegg rushed to make one up and pulled a figure out of the air. And he told people about it, and they leaked it. I’d hate to be a Liberal right now.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20167370-2702,00.html
Thanks, C.L.
I’m enjoying myself more than I expected to because the farcical has overwhelmed the whole Coalition show to a much greater extent than anyone anticipated!
This mob can’t take a trick, it seems.
But ABC tv news just showed vision of Flegg being escorted out by two centre security guards. How clueless and badly organised is the Liberal campaign?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1718749.htm
Update: Some interesting commentary at Pollbludger.
Some commentator wrote during the week that Flegg hadn’t learned how to mask his facial expressions yet. Something in that. But the one on his face tonight was “how the fuck did I get into this mess?”…
The Liberals have long been attacked in State Parliament for having no policy on their website. If they can’t get the message before now then the rest of the campaign is only going to get worse for them when the real heat and pressure begins to build.
I heard an interview on and took notes of the Morning Show on the ABC radio 612 Brisbane on 23June 2006 where Springborg claimed coalition “Policy is uniform and seamless” and the coalition had a “Commonality of purpose”. He then went on to say that he thought “there would be an early election in September on a Water Mandate”. So why are these clowns so unprepared?
Laziness and incompetence are the only reasons that readily spring to mind when considering the main traits of the Queensland coalition…