Larvatus Prodeo

I’m going to have a go at it. I’ll leave comments closed on this post until 7pm-ish. Until then, comments can be left on Rob’s speculation thread. Once the liveblogging starts, remember to refresh periodically to see the updates, and please leave your own updates in comments.

A thought to start off with - the lack of a “budget bounce” for the Coalition in recent years led to (accurate, I think) commentary that the importance of the budget as a political event had been massively overplayed. This year, everyone knows the tax cuts are coming, and it’s a much more complex messaging/communications event - as Bernard Keane captures in this piece at Crikey, noting that the leaks have been finely targeted to particular publications covering particular demographics (for instance, “soak the rich” going to the tabloids, climate change for the Sunday Fairfax papers):

Crikey and others have been lamenting the Government’s mixed Budget messages, but we were missing the point. The messages were only mixed for the commentariat itself, which analyses everything the Government says. The media diet of most people is far more limited, and they would’ve only heard what the Government targeted at them.

Similarly, speculation that the budget will establish or damage the Rudd government’s “economic management” credentials is another elite preoccupation. As demonstrated by Kim in this post, that famous phrase is a piece of bad polling anyway - literally asking the wrong question, with endless narratives built on something that has nothing to do with how people vote. It’s much more likely that people are awaiting evidence that Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan will do their utmost to protect them from economic uncertainty, than that there’ll be some sort of collective scoring exercise on what is increasingly a very niche piece of political theatre. The Opposition probably know this as well - though they’re caught in the headlights having set Brendan Nelson up as a bunny who’ll need to perform or face the consequences. They should be much more worried about the polling that demonstrates that “welfare for all, not just the poor” is going down like a lead balloon even among their own voters.

Elsewhere: Riffing off Kim riffing off Zoe’s crystal ball liveblogging, tigtog proposes a budget drinking game. Demonstrating the odd time sense that surrounds budget night, Zoe reports on reports of struggling working families with babies earning more than $150000 already bemoaning how they’ll find it hard to make do without the nanny state. And Trevor Cook deconstructs some of the spin about the budget that’s been going on for quite some time already.

Update: GreensBlog will also be liveblogging from 7.30pm.

Further update: Comments now open. Liveblogging will start below the fold at 7.30pm.

6.59pm The ABC reports Brendan Nelson coming out swinging, asking Kevin Rudd in question time:

Isn’t this a Budget of confusion from a Government that doesn’t know what it’s doing?

Pot, meet kettle, some might say.

7.09 A “budget for the next decade”, says Swannie on ABC news, looking very Treasurial, while Abbott and Costello revive memories of the Howard era with their comedy stylings.

7.17 Killing some time, reading some of the pre-budget opinionating. Nelson says the budget is a revival of “the left agenda”. They still can’t get their head around a couple of things:

(a) Labor might, as the PM intimated, deliver a Labor budget.

(b) Labor has been fiscally conservative before - viz. the Keating Treasury years. Remember Bob Hawke’s “trilogy” of economic commitments? Lindsay Tanner and Wayne Swan do.

7.20 The Age reports (comprehensively) on what is known about the budget so far. I’ve already referred to the strategic leaking over the weekend in particular. Will Swannie pull a rabbit out of his hat despite claims to the contrary? Do people who use these metaphors know that headgear is banned in the parliamentary chamber except during divisions?

7.22 One thing I’ve been thinking about over the last few days - in the context of the difficulty the Pineapple Party is going to have in Queensland even if it gets off the ground - is the spend on infrastructure. It’s anticipated that a large part of the surplus will be ploughed into the National Infrastructure Fund - already set up by legislation and overseen by Infrastructure Australia. This will also tie in with Swan’s savings/combatting inflation theme - in that the money will accumulate rather than be spent immediately, being allocated to infrastructure as it seems appropriate. This is going to be an interesting political weapon to wield in state politics too - the argument from state Labor governments will be that their current travails are the fault of the Howardistas giving them no help. Now Kevin’s here from Queensland etc… but not til the inflationary clouds are dispelled.

7.26 Another thought - where do the papers find the photogenic folks who either praise or damn selected budget measures?

7.27 ABC live streaming has begun online. Getting the low down on the weather in Liverpool at the moment!

7.28 That live streaming link is here.

7.29 Ok, folks, time to mix a quick scotch and soda to avoid that alcopop tax, and we’re live!

7.31 Well, here we go. First Labor budget in 13 years (not 12 as a lot of the media have said - the last one was Ralph Willis in 95 when the L-A-W tax cuts were delivered as super).

7.32 And the colour theme for the night is…. blue!

7.33. 55 billion for working families - that’s 30 of tax cuts, plus?

7.33 Surplus around expectations - 1.8% of GDP.

7.34 My surplus is bigger than yours, $weetie! This blah is all about addressing the markets, not the folks. But here comes the political narrative…

7.35 This is the bit where Swan reinforces the narrative that the government can’t save the world (so much for the nanny state Liberals) - the government is kind of like a partner who tries to protect us from the winds of turmoil globally. This is also the bit that most of the commentators don’t get. But it’s the same message that resonated so strongly with voters last year.

7.36 Is it just me or does Anthony Albanese sort of have a very 1940s Labor look developing?

7.37 What’s the bet Swannie gets asked what the price of a loaf of bread is? Since he just referred to the rise in 18% in the staple of the family dinner table over 4 years.

7.38 Again with the “we feel your pain” - that’s what Shanahan etc. don’t get. People don’t expect Labor to magic away their financial problems, but to offer support.

7.39 Now we get the redistributive element. Aka “soak the rich”, but again that’s the wrong way to look at it, as was Malcolm Turnbull’s blather about “politics of envy”.

7.40 Mainly election promises now. Embedding the Medicare changes in a frame of “fairness” is interesting.

7.41 The reiteration of election spending has its communicative purpose. Most of this will have been forgotten by many, or slipped past in the frenzy of the campaign. This is a good occasion for Labor to address a broad audience, and to tie its themes together. Doesn’t look much like “me-too-ism” now, does it?

7.43 Here’s a bit of audacity! Pensioners and carers getting the dosh that Nelson claims to have saved for them…

7.44 But the enhanced indexation will be the headline. As will the expansion of eligibility for carers.

7.45 ACCC, groceries, petrol, etc. The Oppo noise won’t go over well. It’s interesting to see how most of the speech so far is pitched - not in terms of “beautiful numbers” etc. but at the “family dining table”.

7.47 There’s an interesting aspect to the savings offset thing. It was interesting to see Morgan research which showed a sample of low and medium income earners conceived of the federal budget much more like their own personal budgets. Swan is trying to subliminally pin the inflation demon on crazed Liberal spending, among other things.

7.48 But teh rich can feel virtuous - they’re sharing the burden according to their means!

7.49 Doing what we said we would do - and reciting the campaign lines. Unlike Howard and his non-core promises. Again, the “why didn’t they follow the narrative other governments have?” commentary misses the target. This is about restoring trust.

7.51 $3.2 billion over 5 years for public health. The Libs will be attacking “revitalising the public health system”. Hockey gave the game away yesterday by characterising the medicare changes as an assault on the private health industry. Who gives a feck about the private health industry? Do they really think increased spending on public hospitals is going to be unpopular? Time to wake up from the Howard dreaming!

7.53 You can already see that the commentary on the budget speech is going to be a ho-hum from the commentariat. Swan is not doing it as theatre. He’s doing it as message reinforcement.

7.54 In other words, he’s talking directly to the public and not to the media and the pundits. So who needs soaring rhetoric? You don’t get that from Kev08 either. It’s irrelevant, and it means that there’s little purchase the opposition can get in terms of traction, because it’s in effect apolitical.

7.56 Responding to comments there in part - remember Swan is not trying to play to the gallery as Keating and Costello were.

7.57 Here’s the long term investment stuff. Something new?

7.57 New funds!

7.58 $20 billion for nation building.

7.58 $11 for education and skills, $10 billion for health. And here’s the differentiation from Cossie. And the “give it back!” message is the wrong one from the Oppo.

7.59 Here’s the next nine Labor budgets!

7.59 Code for an end to National Party rorts and white boards…. “indepedent”, “guardians”, etc.

8.00 So the pitch is - no more handouts for the rich, carefully husbanded spending for the long term, national priorities.

8.01 The politics of this budget are all about not just “helping working families” but also about being the anti-Howard - planning for the future, not election winning handouts. Will the media be able to understand this supercedes the “winners and losers” paradigm?

8.03 Now we’re getting a preview of the priorities that will go into the tax review. Productive capacity, fairness, demographic challenges. Headed by Ken Henry.

8.04 The key thing about the Rudd style of politics and policy is this long term stuff. The daily diet of political commentary and snark becomes irrelevant background noise.

8.05 “A Labor budget for the nation”. There’s a bit of branding on one hand, and one for the true believers on the other!

8.07 Well, I’m outa here - off to watch Big Brother courtesy of the VCR! So let the insta-commentary and analysis begin! I might come back later tonight with a bit of a wrap up of what I think of the politics of the budget, drawing together some of my own insta-commentary on this post.

Ps: It seems there’s an advantage to liveblogging from Brisbane rather than Parliament House. Crikey were told “electronic devices” weren’t allowed in the chamber, and had to deadblog the budget speech instead.