Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has used her keynote address at the Queensland ALP state conference at the Gold Coast today to distance herself and her government from her predecessor Peter Beattie. Bligh criticised Beattie for short term thinking and for being reactive.
Ever since she became Premier, it’s been clear that Bligh understood the importance of putting some clean air between herself and Beattie. Frustrations about service delivery and perceived inaction on health, water and infrastructure almost saw the veteran Premier lost the last state election, saved only by a clever campaign and the complete uselessness of the Nationals and Liberals in opposition. Beattie was also able to argue that service delivery had been impeded by the Feds’ inaction under John Howard, a line that resonated powerfully, and that was put to good use in delivering Kevin Rudd and Queensland Labor such a big swing and a swag of seats in the Federal election last year. Bligh will be hoping it’s a theme good for three elections - her argument will now be that Kevin Rudd is helping where Howard didn’t, but that results will take some time to eventuate.
Bligh’s emphasis on forward planning was established before her ascension to the top job - when she was Treasurer, she began to move away from the state’s traditional low debt and low taxes mantra, and this is a direction she’s accentuated as Premier - keeping business sweet by going with the PPPs Beattie had always nixed. It also gives her the chance to do something that many in the Labor Party had always regarded as neglected under Beattie and Wayne Goss - ramp up Queensland’s historically low levels of social spending. Bligh has eschewed Beattie’s “media tart” strategy, keeping a lower profile and not popping up on the tv news every night in the manner supposedly characteristic of state premiers. In fact, her appointment of Beattie to a Trade Commissioner position in the US is looking a bit smarter than it did at the time - enabling her to insist that as a public servant, he no longer hold forth on the news of the day. His running commentary certainly continued after his ostensible retirement.
A Galaxy Poll published last week showed Labor and Bligh going backwards - a result that was met with scepticism among the pseph tragics at the Poll Bludger’s thread. But, while I’d agree that a fifth term next year is Labor’s to lose, I wouldn’t be as sceptical as some are that the Borg has been gaining ground. As I suggested earlier, Labor have the continuing legacy of dissatisfaction with sound bite politics and service delivery problems built over a ten year period to deal with, and Bligh’s strategy is clearly designed to counter this. While the Pineapple Party and all its associated machinations might be a source of endless amusement for the political class, Springborg has been cleverer than some would credit in his repositioning. I know people close to the Premier were worried about his ad campaign, and he’s also seemingly taken a lower profile to avoid the “carping, whining” tag that was so liberally applied to him in his first go as leader. He’s probably getting some traction by playing a strong hand in the amalgamation stakes. Yet, I suspect that when things start getting serious, even without the implosions and ructions that may accompany the Liberal Nationals, a win is still a bridge too far - Bligh is a smarter politician, and an asset to Labor, and the ALP’s generous majority is a very big hurdle to jump. I also doubt the Borg will get a fourth chance if he falls at the hurdle next time around.
One wild card in the pack is the state redistribution. The left has been flexing its muscles, and Ministers such as Judy Spence whose seat has been redistributed will face potential threats to preselection. This might be spun as “renewal”, but it’s also a reflection of the fact that the factional balance in caucus is skewed towards the AWU and Labor Unity when the composition of branch membership as opposed to parliamentary representation is taken into account. Some potential woes for Bligh might lie within the ALP rather than from the Opposition.
“Indepedence”? It’s when you run into an obstacle while trying to go it alone.
Spelling fixed!
Mark,
Reasonable analysis but a couple of obvious points jump out.
1. Do Queenslanders prefer a high profile in your face Premier?
2. Dropping 9% in one fell swoop would indicate some gnawing issue upsetting the voters. e.g. petrol prices
3. Why would all the failings in service delivery suddenly manifest themselves in this poll?
GG, good questions.
(1) I don’t know! Beattie was very well liked for a while, but I think the “media tart” thing accentuated his decline in popularity because it contributed to the perception that he was all talk and no action. Obviously Bligh has taken a conscious decision which she signalled at the time of her elevation - we’ll have to wait and see.
(2) But it’s not really “one fell swoop” because the two polls are months apart - that decreases the reliability of any inferences we can make because a regular series would make it easier to weed out any polls that might be prone to sampling error, and to observe a trend better. But it doesn’t necessarily surprise me that there’s been a drift of support to the Borg and the opposition - even if I suspect the numbers are wrong. My answer to (3) as well would be that the failures in service delivery are a continuing problem which can be masked by a weak opposition - if Springborg has indeed gained some cred recently, then one would expect votes which were only reluctantly attached to Labor to drift to the Pineapple side of things.
Who should have a shorter attention span!? Elected officials,media,academia,voters or web commentators!? A nine percent change,would appear significant,more so because Queensland doesn’t suffer the same type of brain flashing potential loss as colder climates have.I have my beanie on,as well as a brown coat.’tis winter I would say!
“Ever since she became Premier, it’s been clear that Bligh understood the importance of putting some clean air between herself and Beattie. ”
Beattie would be the first to agree with the necessity of same. FGS the Beattie brand has been done and dusted.
“keeping business sweet by going with the PPPs Beattie had always nixed.”
Beattie did so for very good reasons. I am yet to see any proposal that is in the public interest - long term.
“In fact, her appointment of Beattie to a Trade Commissioner position in the US is looking a bit smarter than it did at the time - enabling her to insist that as a public servant, he no longer hold forth on the news of the day”
Mark, it’s now clear that Beattie didn’t leave without creating a ’soft landing’ for himself and so many of his loyal staff. No names and no pack drill.
The interesting twist is how Bligh added her ’supporters’ to the favoured list and at the same time silenced the Opposition by giving Quinn a sinecure, knowing full well that the Borg would never dump on Quinn.
Nevertheless, it is obvious that Bligh didn’t engineer the ‘deal’, Beattie did. Bligh simply added the icing.
That sounds plausible, wpd.
Whilst it may be possible to argue that Anna Bligh does not have all of Beattie’s serious flaws, the article seems to overlook a whole range of hugely controversial and unpopular pro-big-business policies of Anna Bligh and her government. Some are clearly Bligh’s own initiatives, whilst many others are continuations of Beattie’s policies.
These include her anti-democratic trampling on the rights of communities and their local councils to oppose over-development and overpopulation (as discussed in the forum Will “the great immigration debate” take place? abruptly ended on the seemingly flimsiest of pretexts) and her policy of continuing to flog off the family silver (currently the Cairns and Mackay airports, and, before long I expect, water, Queensland Rail also) to pay for other government services.
Her determination to accelerate the insane destructive enormously costly frenzy of road, bridge, tunnel and high-rise construction across Brisbane is beyond belief, and her continued encouragement of population growth, when existing Brisbane residents cannot afford to rent accommodation let alone buy dwellings seems to indicate a reckless indifference to their welfare.
She is truly a servant of the property lobby and other powerful vested interests.
I have just learnt from Peter Wellington’s electoral office.
The Nambour hospital cannot cope with the current residents of the Sunshine coast. All the infrastructure in the region is straining. There are no plans to upgrade the infrasruture and yet Bligh wants to bypass the opposition from the Sunshine Coast Council, elected with 70% of the popular vote, and dictate to it that it take 75,000 more residents.
I need to make clear. The above post was not made on behalf of Peter Wellington. I indiscretely assumed that what was said to me personally by a member of Peter Wellington’s staff was Peter Wellington’s official position. My apologies to Peter Wellington and his staff member for any embarrassment I have caused.
Nevertheless, the strong opposition to population growth in the Sunshine Coast is a matter of public record. What sort of Premier and what sort government knowingly and repeatedly disregards the expressed wishes of people?
It seems as if Anna Bligh may not have left her student activist past behind her, after all.
If you look at the second of two photos of her in a story in today’s Courier Mail, you can see her clearly leading a protest to save the endangered lungfish, the Mary River Turtle,the Mary River Cod and the rural community in the Mary Vary from a heartless uncaring Queensland Government in the pockets of developers and corporations.