I am a self confessed election nerd.
Y’know, in case the whole having a PhD in election stuff didn’t give it away, my friends and family will tell you that this is what I live for. Especially federal elections – I basically exist in a semi hibernated state for three years, then gorge myself on federal election fun, and take three years to recover.
But even for an election nerd, this election is stunningly uninspiring. I couldn’t even muster an all-nighter for the unusual election-eve budget. I made popcorn and everything.
Where’s the drama? The wow factor? Any genuine feeling like this decision is important?
Could the pitch of the parties be any more boring?
Option A: a tax cut that they can’t really afford and won’t be delivered for a year; money into health care that doesn’t come close to addressing the structural shortfall, they’ve already announced two or three times, and is all going to the same city centres and the same diseases like always; and a bit here and there for infrastructure projects in key electorates, again in the city.
Option B: a temporary fuel excise cut; more energy management myths with nuclear and gas nonsense that is both complex, doesn’t stand up to even the most basic scrutiny; and ideological claptrap about firing thousands of people from their jobs just because.
Where’s the big idea? The rallying call? Can any politician of any colour please annunciate an actual vision for the nation, or are our leaders only capable of bumbling around and mumbling nonsense about minor reforms at the edges of utterly broken systems? Piss-weak reforms and ideas that none of them ever actually expect to do?
I’ve been listening to podcasts by New Englander and former Deputy PM John Anderson, who has become a bit of a YouTube sensation and influencer while no one was watching. No, I don’t agree with much of what he says. But the clarity with which he communicates it, the manner in which he does it in conversation (making it easier for people to follow), is genuinely inspiring. Take this clip on how our energy bills are too high for ideological reasons… I completely agree.
Our energy prices are ideological, and the utterly nonsense debate about whether governments can reduce them – while the private companies who send us the bills jack up their profits some more and rub their hands with glee – is one of the most shameful parts of the energy debate. It’s almost as shameful as suggesting we should abandon safe renewable tech like solar in favour of putting a nuclear power plant in a known and active earthquake prone area like Muswellbrook, which is also too far from water sources to be able to manage a meltdown.
Real leadership on energy prices would be sending the ACCC in to investigate why the energy companies are behaving in a cartel like fashion to keep energy prices absurdly high while huge supply of cheap renewable energy comes online. Instead, we have politicians giving them huge cheques for ‘rebates’ on bills that went up more than the rebate, and mutterings about gas markets that no one understands.
The clarity with which Anderson understands and explains economic challenges – and the job of leadership – has left me yearning for the Howard era. And I hated Howard so much I joined the Australian Democrats because I felt his hateful, bigoted bile – particularly towards women – needed to be opposed with every fibre of our being. I’m still furious at the Dems for being more interested in destroying themselves than fighting for the dignity of Australians who didn’t fit Howard’s 1950’s ideals.
Dutton may stomp around saying he wasn’t to be like Howard, but that’s not a good thing in my view. That’s a reason to put the Coalition last.
Now, if we had someone that had the ability to communicate issues clearly like Anderson, or had the economic credibility of Costello, that would be worth getting excited about. That might look like leadership. That would be worth voting for.
We have big structural issues in this country that need addressing. The lack of innovation and leadership that plagues all levels of government in Australia keeps fuelling these absurd ideological debates, and leaves us without any real solutions or path forward. I’m not sure exactly when the rot set in, but I’m pretty sure it had something to do with facts becoming optional and everyone was being painted as ‘believers’ or ‘deniers’ in climate change.
I want political leadership that will encourage housing by making land cheap, reducing rates and charges on new construction by taking unfair costs off local councils, and deal with the structural obstacles for builders that is constraining supply. I do not want a government that thinks the solution to the housing shortage is for governments to build or own homes.
I want political leadership who will deal with the structural issues that cripple health services, including abandoning the fee for service model of Medicare that rewards poor medical care and sub-standard outcomes. I want leadership prepared to correct the gobsmacking bias of decades providing funding for diseases only if they have great lobbyists, rather than basing funding on patient numbers or economic impact of the disease. Urgent care is great, we should have urgent care everywhere – not just major centres – but the way it is being funded and run smacks of short-termism bandaids and an utter failure to grasp the systemic problems. I do not want a government that thinks more of the same is ok, or that blaming Trump for Australia’s systemic health system failures is a legitimate excuse.
I want political leadership who will actually properly invest in infrastructure, roads, and essential public services like transport in a way that delivers equity to all Australians, not continually upgrading already good train lines and roads in marginal electorates of Melbourne and Sydney, while half the New England’s roads get washed away (again) and the train line north sits unused and unusable, despite the New England being one of the highest recipients of internal migration post-Covid. I do not want a government that only thinks about infrastructure in three year election cycles, rather than dealing with the 30 year problems.
I want political leadership that will acknowledge the pain and pressure of the cash flow crisis and what it is doing to small businesses. To offer more than lip service about the fact that government slowness in paying bills and processing grants is part of the problem. And do something to force our very profitable banks to do a lot more to ease that pressure and stop the dominos from falling when one business doesn’t pay their suppliers, who then can’t pay their suppliers and staff, who then can’t pay their suppliers, staff and debts, and so on. I do not want a government that thinks corporate lunches and tax deductions will fix anything.
I want political leadership that is not hypocritical. Ever noticed how New England Times doesn’t have government advertising? It’s because governments won’t book ads on small regional news websites – only print newspapers. They’ll advertise on Facebook though – last month alone, $145,034 worth of your money spent on advertising on the main Australian Government brand page. And then they’ll stomp up and down about Facebook being mean to news publishers and demand Facebook pay publishers, rather than just instructing their ad bookers to book with local public interest news outlets instead of global tech giants.
Maybe I’m being too demanding. Maybe the current state of politics and the nasty toxic communities that are most political parties is turning the real leaders away.
Or maybe a need to find a new hobby. Perhaps I can make a sculpture out of all the popcorn I’m not eating… it would certainly be more interesting than this election.
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.