Tag Archive for 'Paul Keating'

Rudd one year on

Well, having opened a thread that perhaps proves that Ute Man is still out there but not actually supporting Emo Man, it behoves me, I guess, to have a bit of a say about the tenure of the Rudd government to date. To some degree all these sorts of anniversaries are somewhat artificial, as you can easily see in the United States with the fetish of the “first hundred days”. Governments will eventually be judged by the electorate in due season, as Kevin Rudd would say, and as almost all politicians intone (particularly those who are dissatisfied with their contemporary popularity), in the end they will be judged by history - whose verdict is perhaps as mythical as the Judgement of Paris, but never mind that. However, as I was suggesting, if politics and public discussion is cruelled by the vagaries and obsessions of an ever shorter media cycle, a year really is a long time in government, and it is worth taking stock.

It can also be interesting to compare first term governments at this stage of the electoral cycle, and here the obvious contrast - despite all the media beatups - is the absence of major scandal and ministerial resignations compared to both the Hawke and Howard governments. That doesn’t, of course, imply that all the Labor ministers are fabulous, but it is worth observing.

One of the things that’s interested me in the discussion that had already began quite a while before we reached the actual milestone is that in both comments on this blog and in conversations with some friends I’ve seen the sentiment expressed that simply avoiding hearing a daily litany of horrors from the Howard crew is Rudd’s greatest achievement. It might, and no doubt will, be objected that - “lefties would say that, wouldn’t they?” But I think there are a couple of points here. First, there is no doubt that a government with a more humanitarian tinge and an appreciation of propriety and ethics is to be welcomed, and that sentiment - along with the promise keeping - will be a contributor to Labor’s continuing lead in the polls. Secondly, I think The Howard Years has been interestingly timed to stimulate some comparison and to reinforce the whole sense of relief that we don’t have that turgid mob to kick around any more.

But, again, one thing that wore out the Coalition’s welcome with the electorate was the constant “rabbits out of the hat” and the whole bag of divisive tricks, along with the internal ructions and the cockiness of ministers. I agree that the Liberals are still playing at the same game in many ways. John Howard was elected in 1996 as a safe pair of hands and the Libs were “the party of order”, if you like. By the end of their fourth term, they looked like the risky and unsafe proposition and Kevin Rudd’s calm demeanour undoubtedly contributed much to Labor’s victory. WorkChoices was also probably the biggest single mistake the Coalition made, and the related apprehension that worse would follow and more leadership instability also condemned the Howard government to defeat.

But what of policy, and that shibboleth beloved of the punditariat, “the narrative”? Continue reading ‘Rudd one year on’

Talking about Gallipoli: Paul Keating

Paul Keating has been speaking out again about Australian history:

Continue reading ‘Talking about Gallipoli: Paul Keating’

Malcolm Turnbull haunted by Paul Keating

As I’ve commented before, it’s always a bit difficult to keep track of Malcolm Turnbull’s economic narrative du jour. At least with Emo Man Brendan Nelson, we could always rely on undiluted populism with not even a minimal pretense at making any sense. Turnbull’s supposedly better than that, but in the lead up to the budget we had accusations that Labor were wimping out by not cutting spending aggressively enough, followed in very short order with claims that the surplus was unnecessarily large. We’re being treated to something comparable now, with the switch apparently flicked randomly between solemn appeals for bipartisanship, insinuations that the fiscal stimulus package is too big, loose language - subsequently repeated - about the global financial crisis being “hyped”, and now I think the beginnings of a “don’t spend the surplus” theme.

Jacques Chester, I suspect, has pinged what’s going on with all this:

It’s a lawyerly way of arguing. Pick an argument, any argument, that might be plausible, and throw it at the judge. You never know, it might stick.

There are certainly some straws blowing in the wind over the past few days, which in the way of these things, either represent columnists in The Australian flying kites for the opposition to grasp, or reciting lines fed to them by the Coalition. Continue reading ‘Malcolm Turnbull haunted by Paul Keating’

The stimulus package and fairness

Just before last year’s federal election, I read Neal Blewett’s Cabinet Diaries. The book is a good read, but I was also interested in reminding myself - in the dying days of the Howard Era - what a Labor government felt like. One of the things that really jumped out at me was regular discussions around the Cabinet table about assistance for the unemployed, and several of Keating’s measures to stimulate the economy were targeted to people on the dole, among others. Those with longer memories might recall Labor’s opposition to Malcolm Fraser’s “fight inflation first” austerity regime in the late 70s. Mike Steketee has a very good column today which shows just how much things have changed in the era of the deserving poor (and not so poor) and the undeserving poor. He rightly points out that some of the pensioners receiving payments will have substantial assets and incomes of up to $66000, and self-funded retirees with incomes up to $50000 for singles and $80000 for couples will also receive the one off payments. It would be very hard to argue that they are the folks in the community doing it toughest, and as Steketee suggests, there’s no guarantee the money will be spent rather than saved.

What we’re seeing here, I think, is a combination of Kevin Rudd’s very conservative personal values and political calculation.

Continue reading ‘The stimulus package and fairness’

Here’s something a bit interesting

Some Democratic congressfolks have had the intriguing and unorthodox idea that the role of Congress is to legislate. Ian Welsh has the details on the preparation of alternative bills to the Paulson take it or leave it (with bells and whistles to entice you to vote for it added in the Senate!) TARP measure.

I’m not sure, though, how “market sentiment” of “it’s 700 billion or the apocalypse” will deal with this development.

More at OpenLeft.

Ps: Paul Keating on Lateline last night made some very instructive points about why pumping liquidity into markets isn’t working and why Malcolm Turnbull is playing a populist game on interest rates.

Continue reading ‘Here’s something a bit interesting’

Michael Costa sacked [Update: Iemma Resigns]

The only question is why it took Morris Iemma so long to see what everyone else could see plainly. Apparently Paul Keating had a hand in the decision.

Update: Trevor Cook:

Costa is a loud-mouth political bully who screams and screeches like a two-year old when he doesn’t get his way. He held several portfolios without distinction. He is basically a blow-hard and ineffective politician who has spent his miserable career doing damage to the union movement, the NSW Government and the people of this state.

Update: Via Amanda in comments, there’s speculation that Iemma will be toppled too when caucus meets.

Update [dk.au]: Iemma resigns. Daily Telegraph

Bursting the Costello balloon

In the wake of the punditariat’s latest game of deconstructing each parliamentary interjection by The Great Pretender and wistfully wishing his incoherent comedy lines on the public, it’s worth taking a step back and asking whether - even if you think Peter Costello’s schtick is remotely worthwhile - it matters.

Andrew Bartlett points out:

I remain to be convinced that being the best performer at ‘throwing the switch to vaudeville’ does much on its own to attract public support.

Kevin Rudd didn’t defeat John Howard because he had a lot of witty putdowns in parliament. Nor did John Howard win against Paul Keating in 1996 for this reason. Indeed, one could argue that this fixation with Keating’s apparently unchallenged ability to dominate the arena during Question Time was a key reason why so many commentators argued he still had a chance of winning in 1996, well after the electorate had already decided they’d had enough.

Exactly.

Continue reading ‘Bursting the Costello balloon’

No news is good News II

The supposition I had - shared by Lyn at Public Opinion - that even the diehard Milnes and Shanahans of News Limited might give up on their “Costello for Saviour” campaign in the absence of anything actually happening has been spectacularly shattered. Our Dennis - in perhaps the longest column he has ever written - piles speculation on top of speculation on top of speculation and - well, you get the picture. Labor is probably a oncer because this might happen if that happens and that might occur if this happens. Unbelievable.

And the hero of the narrative is…

As a bit of a follow up to the post on PJK’s various bomb throwing exercises (that - as you may recall - was the business he said he was in many years ago), I wanted to note two things.

The first is the lamentable habit Rudd has retained of retail politics Howard style. So we get grabs on the tv news every night of what Rudd thinks about x y and z - many of which have zip to do with the job of being PM. Let’s not forget the excuse for bringing the Beazer down - mixing Rove McManus and Karl Rove up. Perhaps the twenty something whiz kids Inside Kevin08 have a better grasp of pop culture, but would you really trust KRudd to comment on the political pop culture story of the week - Paris Hilton? Maybe the dude got where he is today in part because he was on breakfast telly and FM radio all the time, but isn’t there some truth to what Keating says about not just the dignity of the office but also trivialising the Prime Ministerial voice? When the Orstrayan public becomes less enamoured of Kevvy than we are at the moment, could it be that we’ll be as uninterested in what he has to say about economic policy as what he thinks of the last cricket result or all those many many many artistic and intertube-ish threats to teh kiddies? (Which probably - incidentally - needlessly alienates part of his support base without really gaining him much…)

Secondly, there’s a very sensible piece by Bernard Keane in today’s Crikey on the narrative thing. It repays reading in full but there’s one bit I wanted to highlight.

Continue reading ‘And the hero of the narrative is…’

Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd

Crikey editorialised about Paul Keating yesterday:

He’s the Bert Newton of Australian politics: the polished performer whose gift for spontaneous, stiffly splenetic wit was honed in tougher vaudevillian times, times when having a personality meant more than booking an in-store appearance from Sophie Monk. “He” is of course Paul Keating, a man who knows how to milk a moment in the public gaze, a man who also knows how to fill that moment with something pointedly amusing and worth the repeating.

Two brackets of achingly sharp political standup from Keating yesterday have hogged the airwaves and set a handful of agendas in the 24 hours since. That Keating need only floss his teeth in public to turn the news cycle on its ear says a lot for the standard of over-massaged, verbally neutered performance we have come to expect from the modern political operator.

Continue reading ‘Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd’

No news is good news at News

What do you do if you’re a columnist for the Opposition Organ and nothing is actually happening in the Peter Costello Leadership Story? Write about Chrissy Pyne’s Facebook status updates as if they’re news, that’s what! Score one zero for the Liberals in the Web 2.0 politics sphere, I guess.

Liberal frontbencher and staunch Costello supporter Christopher Pyne used his Facebook site to kill the speculation, writing: “Christopher Pyne thinks Peter Costello’s position is clear and unchanged since November and wishes everyone would move on and get stuck into the ALP. Who arehopeless!”

Well, thanks for that, Dennis. Paul Keating probably killed off the Great Pretender for the time being more effectively, but I suppose it is hard to keep writing the same columns and stories about a quintessential non-event day after day. We’ll miss the comedy value. I imagine we’re about to see the switch flicked back to that other “media narrative” - “the Rudd honeymoon is over” now.

Inside Kevin07

Hunter S. Thompson, who’s repeatedly if repetitiously quoted in Christine Jackman’s Inside Kevin07: The People. The Plan. The Prize., would be turning in his grave.

I’m unable to think of any good reasons for parting with $34.95 for Jackman’s book, which is touted as the ultimate insider account of the Labor Party’s campaign strategy in the lead up to last year’s federal election. As noted previously at this blog, any juicy tidbits have already been extracted in the News Limited papers, and the non-story of Peter Costello’s alleged popularity is still rumbling meaninglessly on as I write. (Incidentally, the fact that quite a bit of research mentioned in the book showing Costello as electoral poison wasn’t selected for “news” stories tells a bit of a tale in itself.)

The book’s importance - insofar as it has any - lies in what is in effect an auto-critique of the standard of political journalism in contemporary Australia, in what its publication says about the strategies of university presses and particularly MUP, and in whether it actually adds fuel to the fire of the “hollowmen” narrative of colourless political apparatchiks it tries to counter. Let’s take those in reverse order.

Continue reading ‘Inside Kevin07′

He’s from Queensland and he’s here to help cave in before the debate starts

This was my response to the argument that Kevin Rudd’s Emissions Trading Scheme Green Paper was a fine piece of pragmatic politics: Continue reading ‘He’s from Queensland and he’s here to help cave in before the debate starts’

Rudd set to implement popular emissions trading scheme

Most people in commenting about Rudd’s dilemma in introducing a highly unpopular emissions trading scheme were pessimistic as to whether Rudd would be brave in policy terms and do the right thing, especially as it applied to petrol. Most thought he would cave in to Nelson’s cynical populism.

Most thought that the populace at large liked signing international treaties that were largely symbolic but baulked when it meant coughing up their hard-earned cash. MSM commenters largely took the line that Rudd had pulled a swiftie in deluding the electorate into thinking that they could have pain-free climate change policy.

I seriously doubt that was ever the case. Whatever. I was heartened, though, in reading in the Courier Mail this morning Denis Atkins (he’s not a flake) saying:

PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd decided last week that he would make climate change his sink or swim issue.

Continue reading ‘Rudd set to implement popular emissions trading scheme’

What’s with the AMA?

Interest group politics following a change of government is always interesting. It’s not always quite as simple as rewarding your friends and locking out your enemies (though maybe it was with Paul Keating and John Dawkins), but some repositioning always goes on - for a smart lobby, in advance of the election. That occurred last year with business groups - some were prepared to cut the Howard government loose and go public with concerns about lack of infrastructure investment, population policy, climate change, productivity and federalism. From early 2007, blind Freddy could have seen the defeat of the Howard government coming, even if the national news media couldn’t, and the agenda of groups like the BCA was well articulated to the policy direction of the Labor party, thus guarenteeing influence both before and after the election itself. Even on the touchy issue of IR, it became fairly clear that ideologues such as Peter Hendy aside, most business interests had reasonably happily accommodated themselves to the end of WorkChoices well before November, and in fact that they extracted significant concessions in their favour. Those who really kept their head down when urged to put it above the parapets by the Howard government - such as the AIG - have had their reward in spades under Kevin Rudd.

The Australian Medical Association seems to be an exception to this rule. As Tim Dunlop writes:

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has obviously decided they don’t like the Rudd Government and seem to be doing everything in their power to criticise, annoy and/or embarrass them. Since before the election, the doctor’s union has made clear that they don’t like the approach the Labor Party takes to health and were, for instance, critical of Labor’s plan to—potentially—shift control of hospitals to the Federal Government.

Since then, they have taken every opportunity to attack the Government’s plans to change the criteria for the health care rebate, and have been particularly upset about moves to allow nurses to increase their role in the provision of general practices services.

The degree of self interest in the positions they’re adopting is a bit too blatant for comfort, I’d have thought. Continue reading ‘What’s with the AMA?’