by FRED PAWLE – THERE is nothing so ridiculous as the leader of a government telling us what he’d do if he were leading the government.
Few people these days are naive enough to believe that Australian elections are direct and untainted reflections of the will of the people.
- If they have good ideas, just implement them. Labor is the government!
- Today’s politicians are bereft of policies.
- Both Parties throw a blanket over their respective candidates during elections, who direct all inquiries to head office.
The factors that dilute the democratic qualities of our elections are many, but if we were to reduce them to the most alarming they would be the secret relationships that Party leaders have with media barons and wealthy donors.
Add to that compulsory voting; the disproportionately high number of senators representing the inbred Leftists of Tasmania; the distribution of campaign refunds from the Electoral Commission that goes mostly to the two major Parties (one of the few things they seem to agree on).
PUNTERS
Far be it from me to add to the legislative and regulatory technicalities of our elections, but I’d like to propose one more law that should apply at both federal and State level that will, in fact, make the whole process infinitely simpler. At least for us punters.
That law, which I have drafted myself, is this: No Party which currently holds office shall be allowed to conduct a campaign launch or publicise any new policies whatsoever for the duration of the election campaign.
If the incumbent government must hold a rally to generate enthusiasm amongst its followers, every speech therein shall consist of, and only of: “Vote for me, and I solemnly swear I will pursue similar policies to those I pursued during this current term in office. Thank you.”
I was compelled to propose this after watching Anthony Albanese launch Labor’s pitch for re-election in Perth on Sunday.
While the hand-picked audience clapped like trained seals at every announcement of an exciting new policy, I, like most other punters, was wondering: If it’s such a good idea, just implement it already. I mean, you are the government, aren’t you?
The answer is obvious.
Albo had thought about these ideas – and kept them in his back pocket until now – to use as a sales pitch for another three years.
Today’s politicians are bereft of interesting policies.
What few of them they have they put in a folder marked “Top Secret: Not to be revealed until two weeks before the next election”.
Such is the short attention span of the electorate that it is possible for a government to spend most of a term in office causing unprecedented carnage – like locking young people out of the housing market, letting in millions of politically allied but unskilled immigrants and forcing up the cost of living – then magically coming up with solutions on the eve of an election.
Significant numbers of voters are dumb enough to not realise that it was the government that caused these problems in the first place.
Albo’s speech was full of them: he promised to deliver cheaper energy, easier home mortgages, the “biggest home-building program since the postwar housing boom”, finish building the NBN and give people who don’t want to submit tax returns $1000 back anyway.
All these were either problems caused by his own Government or ideas that he has ignored until now – conveniently three weeks before we are forced to return to the polling booths.
Of course, there will need to be a carve-out for my proposed legislation.
There will be times when an incumbent government must seek a mandate from the electorate for a major structural reform – and should be permitted to do so.
CHALLENGES
If any incumbent wants to rouse the rank and file, here is its chance, by tackling difficult and specific challenges.
Had this law and its caveat been in place on Sunday, Albo would have had to choose between letting his first term speak for itself – hardly a convincing pitch – and articulating his big ideas for the nation.
As it happened, he made vague claims about his first term’s achievements and even vaguer promises to change the weather and give more jobs to women during his next term without explaining how or why.
If his Government is forced to shut up and rely on its record in its bid for re-election, aspiring opposition politicians should be forced to do the opposite.
You may not have noticed it, but both Parties throw a blanket over their respective candidates during elections, who direct all inquiries regarding policies to head office.
This is to democracy what Irish backpackers with fake eyelashes holding lollipop signs outside construction sites are to the free flow of traffic.
Any candidate wishing to become part of a new government should be automatically disqualified if he or she declines a single invitation to speak to the local media or address kids at a local school.
Maybe then we would get representatives who engage with the electorate and are driven daily to earn our respect.
God knows they aren’t doing that now.PC
– Fred Pawle
• Substack
• X
• TikTok
• Instagram
Comprehensive comment. It is astounding that voters accept a government producing previously inheard of solutions to long standing socio-economic problems. What is more so astounding is the lack of detail and, as history that old reference point tells us, messy if at all implementation once the thought bubble has materialised as govt policy. And the effect on forward Budgets is ignored. A prime example is the insidious Labor immigration policy. It was unannounced in May 2022 election, implemented without any thought as to its cumulative effect on housing supply, rents, infrastructure deficit, social cohesion risk, schools, transport etc. The only temporary benefit was a potential Budget windfall, Treasury’s sole interest. The $400b resources revenue windfall, another Budget benefit cheerfully spent on cost of living subsidies and more federal public servants engaged in Labor boondoggles, a failed YesNo referendum where voter intent has been ignored.
So not only are thought bubbles poorly conceived, so is their implementation. Australian voters are willingly, imo, misled by wilful politicians. Its a reason 30% vote other than Labor or Liberal. A serious failure of the media to be objective allows this charade to exist.
Fred, I ask myself how people who have been born in the same country, who have the same history and who, supposedly, want the best for their children would ever vote Labor.