Glenn Milne’s latest intervention, talking up a line from Liberal MP Scott Morrison, has to be one of the lamest ever political attack lines. [For those who don't want to wade through a farrago of fallacies expounded at excessive length, his core point is echoed by Sinclair Davidson at Catallaxy, though without attribution to Milne. Rendered in short form, the basic logical fallacy is starkly evident.]

So, there’s going to be an “emissions financial crisis” and the Reserve Bank wasn’t consulted by the Government before climate change legislation was prepared? A non sequitur built on speculative and incoherent fantasy does not make for an effective political attack. ‘OMG! Governor didn’t read legislation! Rudd FAIL!’…

The political syntax of this claim, of course, is that Rudd and co successfully berated the Liberals for ‘ignoring 20 (or whatever it was) successive Reserve Bank warnings’ in the lead up to the 2007 election. Now, we have the Liberals, and their echo chamber, arguing that the Reserve Bank should have been given a chance to warn. Somehow a hypothetical and unlikely warning was pre-empted by the Government deliberately choosing not to do what it doesn’t have to do. Try to make any sense of that.

What would be far more interesting to examine would be the politics of invoking the Reserve Bank (and for that matter, Treasury and its ubiquitous Secretary, Dr Ken Henry). There are significant questions about the independence of Treasury – or perhaps around the degree to which it is closely intermeshed with Rudd, Swan and Tanner’s agenda. And it’s clear that both Ken Henry and Glenn Stevens’ presumed authority is used by the Government regularly to legitimate its economic management credentials.

The Libs have occasionally made attacks in similar form as the essential structure of the Milne claim (leaving aside for the moment, that it rests on non-events) – that the Government has ignored advice. Of course, such attacks are irreconcilable with claims that the Government’s policies – when effectively ticked off by Henry and Stevens – are wildly irresponsible.

None of this makes a lot of sense. The Opposition, and its buddies in the right wing media and academic commentariat, might be better served by exploring the real issues around how economic policy is made, and defended through the aura of institutions which are perceived as independent. Don’t hold your breath, though.

Update: Sinclair Davidson responds.

John Hewson’s contribution in today’s Fin falls into the latter category. I strongly suspect his article is the first time evah a columnist in the venerable biz organ has written the sentence: “Whatever!” – indeed, Dr JoHew has been rather exuberant with his punctuation for emphasis in what is a sustained attack on the Reserve Bank. He may have a point that Glenn Stevens indicating that he’ll be taking a rest over January isn’t the best idea – as he points out, the Fed has rates heading down to a range between 0% and 0.25% and UK rates are at 2%. Perhaps Stevens thinks that in the month or so of the Great Australian Stupor, we’ll all spend the economy back to health by splurging on alcopops and sunscreen. On the other hand, Hewson is probably right that Aussie parochialism can’t be afforded anymore – the rest of the world may not understand that we’re all at the beach.

But Hewson’s paradox is that his solution is typical of what got us here in the first place – better “governance” and a more “independent” board – which sits uneasily with his own complaint that no one is allowed to complain about the independent Bank. This is the sort of neoliberal managerialist fantasy that landed us in this mess (in part) and the proscription is even more technocratic wonkery!

Speaking of which, that takes me to my segue about Kevin Rudd, political reality, climate change and technocratic wonkery.

In Crikey, Bernard Keane has one of those articles which fall into my second category. Rightly, he says:

Rudd has the keenest political instincts we’ve seen in a generation. Whereas Howard’s talent lay in coming from behind and converting bad polls into convincing election wins, Rudd’s skill is in avoiding the bad polls in the first place. Not having to come from behind each time is an altogether better strategy. And Rudd has been a very, very good student of political history.

…

It’s the media’s job, or one of them, to make much of little and it has done that expertly for much of the year, as it does always. History suggests that, barring incompetence on an inordinate scale, Labor will be in power for several terms, but that’s not going to attract many eyeballs. Instead, the most minor political events are forensically analysed, with each tiny feature placed under the microscope so that it looms large to the viewer despite its irrelevance.

So true.

On climate change and the White Paper, Keane is inclined to give Rudd more of the benefit of the doubt than many posters and commenters on this blog. The theme here is that Rudd should spend more political capital because the consequences of not doing so are so important. I agree. But, conversely, the cry that “this issue is too important to be left to the politicians” is barking up the wrong tree. There is no other way of ordering human affairs and coordinating diverse and conflicting interests than politics. “Leave it up to the scientists” is another fantasy, because diagnosis of the causes and effects of climate change does not and cannot imply agreement about public policy solutions, nor how to communicate and implement them. Just doesn’t and can’t. The motto here is not to join the ranks of those decrying politics itself as the art of the possible (in the best sense) like the neo-liberals have been doing for so long, but to remember that we’re all part of politics as well and a disengaged disaffected citizenry is what allows our rulers to get away with it.

There’s a bit of an affinity here with the cry from the liberal blogosphere in the US about many aspects of Obama’s performance since the election. “President-elect: u r doin it wrong!”… The most recent explosion is over homophobic preacher Rick Warren giving the “invocation” at the Inaugural. I won’t bother with a link. Check just about any American liberal blog. The real surprise is why anyone is surprised. Obama, as I kept saying all year, isn’t the Messiah, and the Democratic Party is a very flawed entity indeed. Again, there’s a bit of collective delusion going on. But the result shouldn’t be disillusion, but real engagement and a recognition of reality and that issues based campaigns can have a most necessary supplementary effect to electoral efforts. In that, lies the audacity of real hope.

And with that thought – dear reader – I’ll sign off for a bit. I’ll be back with a Saturday Salon and another condemnation post, but I’m off on my own holidays. So thanks to everyone for a bloggingly fabulous 2008 and have a happy and safe festive season! I’ll be seeing youse in 2009!

The stock market’s fall may also have had something to do with evidence of a growing deflation in consumer prices in America, or so opinionators opined. Well, I guess we don’t have the “inflation dragon” to kick around anymore.

And we’ve had another outpouring of deficit aversion, bipartisanship at last (!), in response to Glenn Steven’s expression of the belief that the government had a responsibility to “borrow to invest”.

And, yet, we’ve had a piece of prime silliness – to put alongside all these other signs of the times – in Crikey‘s editorial:

There’s not a lot politicians can do. The Government handing money to low income earners who’ll have virtually no choice but to spend it makes sense, but there’s only a limited number of times a $10b heart-starter can be administered to the economy. Even the Opposition has been doing its bit lately, prefacing virtually every statement on the economy with the mantra that Australia is best-placed to weather these difficulties.

And there’s not much businesses can do without demand. It’s actually up to us consumers to realise Australia’s economic fate is in our hands, and act accordingly.

Righteo. Hopefully there’ll be another Herringbone sale again soon and I’ll try to do my duty. The rent went up $200 a month – does that help?

But Crikey’s leader writer might like to think about household debt being at 160% of earnings at a time when – even if unemployment is yet to really hit home – the evidence is in that hours and overtime are being cut back all over the shop. And while the mortgage rate may be down, there’s been very little or no discernible movement in credit card rates – something Kevin Rudd acknowledged some time ago, and vaguely promised to look into now that consumer credit is to be regulated by the Commonwealth. If citizens – also known as consumers – are trying to do their own “deleveraging” and get their balance sheets back to something a little more realistic, I hardly think that’s a matter for the loud condemn. Or for that matter, people choosing not to buy more, well, stuff. Do you like stuff? You can never have enough stuff – apparently.

I’d much rather go with Glenn Stevens’ view and look to the government as investor and consumer of last resort.

Henry’s testimony led to a most unedifying spectacle where Malcolm Turnbull failed pathetically to dig himself out of his hole on the 7 30 Report. It was – quite seriously – one of the most appalling interviews I’ve seen a political leader give.

Michelle Grattan claims, in a column that – among other things – recites some of Turnbull’s own talking points, that the opposition leader suffers from “periodic bad judgement”. I’d like to ask – quite seriously – if someone can instance for me an example of Malcolm Turnbull exercising good judgement. When are the media going to realise that Turnbull’s not the Messiah, just another arrogant barrister with an inflated ego?

Update: If anyone was wondering about Dennis Shanahan’s “we were right!” stuff in today’s Australian, Bernard Keane puts it to the test and gives it the epic fail.