Australian Politics

Niki Savva joined the Canberra press bureau in 1972 and today is a columnist for The Australian and commentator on ABC TV’s The Drum. During the Howard Government, in 1998, Niki Savva left her job as head of The Age’s Canberra desk to take up the position of then Treasurer Peter Costello’s press secretary. In February 2010, Savva published her autobiography So Greek: Confessions of a Conservative leftie. On Tuesday 21 February 2012, Niki Savva joined author and former principal speechwriter for Kevin Rudd, Troy Bramston, to address The Sydney Institute in a discussion on Australian politics.

AUSTRALIAN POLITICS 2012

NIKI SAVVA

Good evening and thank you all for coming. I’ll try and speak really quickly because it’s possible events will overtake me.

Firstly, thank you Gerard for inviting me here tonight. I respect The Sydney institute and the work that you and Anne do in providing a forum for often serious, sometimes humorous and always stimulating debates. As someone who thinks too much politics is never enough, I congratulate people like the Hendersons for helping feed an addiction which has no cure and will never be sated.

Speaking of congratulations, if it is true that we get the governments we deserve and I believe it is, then we all deserve credit for getting us to where we are today. I can’t remember when politics was tougher, rougher, more volatile, or more engrossing, 1975 aside. 2011 was an extraordinary year. So was 2010, and everything suggests 2012 will be no different.

As a struggling freelancer, I think the year has got off to a terrific start but, as a fellow citizen, I also concede it’s pretty terrible.

There has been another broken promise from Julia Gillard, this time on poker machines and this one more cynical than the broken promise on the carbon tax; we had the triggering of an ugly fracas as a result of the actions of her own office, and we have a vicious personal fight for the leadership, with scant regard for the damage inflicted on the government and the party. Labor’s tribal nature usually means the party is put above self. Not this time.

Gillard is dead woman walking, her leadership finished. But she will fight to the bitter end no matter the price or the cost. Kevin Rudd, who says he has changed although one suspects not much, will not stop until he finishes her off. As a result, Tony Abbott’s path to the lodge seems assured.

If there is an election this year, we could have our fifth Prime Minister in five years –John Howard, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott. As I keep saying. Ciao Italy.

Despite her personal warmth and charm, as Prime Minister Gillard has shown an uncanny inability to connect with Australians. After Queensland’s floods last January, not for the first or last time, she failed to capture or convey the mood or our emotions.

Gillard began and finished the year with embarrassingly awkward performances, from the mechanical responses to the floods to the absurd rhetorical flourishes in her speech to Labor’s national conference when she declared: we are us. The logic was irrefutable. Who else could we be? But what the hell did it mean?

It’s far preferable, I reckon, if politicians refrain from over-emoting or crying to convince us they care or feel our pain. All they have to do is find the right words and tone to express how we feel, make us feel better about ourselves, or in simple language persuade us of the merits of whatever it is they are trying to sell us. If a used car salesman can do it, then a prime minister should be able to. It’s an essential prerequisite for successful leadership and unfortunately one which has eluded Gillard.

It would matter less if the government had a blemish free record of performance. Instead voters are left wondering if there is any promise that will not be broken, any principle too sacred to be abandoned, any conviction so central it is immune from compromise.

Voters have every right to expect that if politicians promise to do something, then they will do it. Better still if they promise not to do something, then they won’t. Or have a damn good reason why, other than political expediency, or have an election to seek permission.

If Abbott has learned anything at all from the past four years first under Rudd, then Gillard, it should be to be careful what he promises. He seemed to have got the message at the National Press Club in January when he carefully framed Denticare and a National Disability Scheme as aspirations to be fulfilled when the money is available. Similarly the undertaking to restore the rebate for private health insurance was to do it “as soon as we can”.

The media reacted predictably to these cautious objectives, demanding timetables and costings. Let’s give journos the benefit of the doubt and say it’s not because they’re stockpiling weapons to use against Abbott if he falls short of promises they try to compel him to make, but that they are genuinely seeking more information to help voters make up their minds.

The confusion over whether the Coalition could deliver a surplus in its first term which ended with Abbott’s declaration that they most certainly would, rather than Andrew Robb’s more circumspect “well it depends” came partly as a result of media pressure, but also because his own colleagues were worried his  big spender self could be unleashed by their own loophole.

Abbott’s social conservatism is well known. What he lacks is the economic conservatism to match it. His political talents have contributed to the destruction of two Labor prime ministers. It could, repeat could, soon be three, although it might be the same one twice if you get my drift.

However, Abbott has failed to dispel doubts about his economic credentials. There is a view, expressed privately by senior party officials that given Labor’s turmoil, he should only do what he has to do to get there, then worry about the rest later.

There are many reasons why Abbott should ignore this advice. One is the NSW government and the other is the Victorian government, both of which have bitterly disappointed the wider liberal party. The main reason why Abbott should ignore it is that it is contemptuous of voters and doesn’t qualify for good leadership. He doesn’t have to spell out every detail, or itemise every cent, but voters have a right to know what he will do, not just what he will undo.

Then again, Abbott’s task to forge his identity as alternative prime minister is miniscule compared to the angst over Labor’s identity crisis, which is really a leadership crisis. A good leader gives life to a party’s values by refreshing the old ones and articulating new ones, restores the faith of supporters and satisfies the voters that he or she can see what needs to be done and will do it. If they can’t be inspirational or visionary, principled and competent will suffice.

Gillard failed on most or all of these measures to emerge as the main threat to her own survival. It is very much a question of character: hers. Can her word be trusted and does she have the judgment for the job? Is she up to it?

Gillard has made many mistakes. One of the biggest was not leaving Rudd to rot on the backbench, after the election. She should have dared him to resign and force a by-election. He had nowhere to go, no inclination to go and no platform from which to launch himself. Quitting was not an option for him. He would have convinced himself resurrection was inevitable and certainly not beyond a person of his talents.

If he had misbehaved, colleagues and the public would have seen him as a bitter former leader venting his spleen, rather than as a bitter former leader disguised as a happy little vegemite crusading foreign minister, everywhere, every hour of the day and night talking and stalking. It is too late to sack him now, he is too strong and she’s too weak.

Another major mistake was Gillard’s approach to Abbott. She should have pretended he didn’t exist. Instead she made him central to every issue, elevating his importance and impact.

Another ongoing threat is the fate of Labor MP Craig Thomson, under investigation for using union funds to pay for visits to prostitutes and for expensive meals and alcohol. The purchase of Peter Slipper as Speaker is a very expensive insurance policy which has tainted the parliament as one dirty deal begets another, begets another.

Regardless of what happens, the carbon tax which has consumed debate in Australia for six years will remain a deadly political issue. In America, they argue over abortion laws, in Greece they are rioting because they now have to pay taxes as well as forego siestas. In Australia, we fight over the weather and what if anything we can do about it, even though the answer is, on our own, not much.

So far, the climate debate has claimed four leaders, and will claim at least another one, possibly two, depending on what happens. If Gillard hangs on till the election, Abbott will continue to use the carbon tax to blame her for every job lost and every power increase, and to convince people that because she broke her word on this, and other things, nothing she says can be trusted.

If Rudd gets to Gillard first, Abbott, in what would be a truly byzantine drama, could kill Rudd twice with the same issue. Unless, after Rudd gets in again he dumps it… again. Or delays it. It does your head in thinking of the possibilities.

Since last August, when the High Court struck down the Malaysian solution, the government has effectively not had a border protection policy. I reckon if it’s a choice between no policy and the Malaysian solution, none is best. The majority of Australians do not agree, even though most of us are boat people or the descendants of boat people, so while the boats keep coming Gillard and her successor will keep paying a price in the polls.

Throughout, the economy has remained in reasonable shape. You would think the government could have got some credit for this, yet the most recent polls show when it comes to economic management, and despite claims of a $70 billion black hole in their policies, voters prefer the Liberals.

Euromoney magazine rated him the world’s best treasurer, yet Wayne Swan struggles to tell or sell a good story. Swan’s tentative presentations and Gillard’s credibility gap means the government has failed to convince people they are in safe hands. They are not helped by daily stories of job losses and unauthorized interest rate increases.

The government is desperate to meet its political objective of a surplus in the may budget, by hook or by crook, but it’s doubtful punters will burst into spontaneous applause. When the economy is going well, governments get little credit because people think it is because of their hard work and the best thing the government can do is stay out of it. If it isn’t going well, then clearly it is the government’s fault and why aren’t they fixing it.

Plus, Australians don’t like being told by the government and its advisers how much better off they are than the Americans, the English, the Greeks or the Syrians. We almost always are better off than anybody anywhere. Forget about we are us, we compare us to us. If Australians feel worse off today than yesterday, patronising reminders they don’t live in Greece, like the one from Martin Parkinson last week, won’t cut it.

The obvious prediction for this year is that almost anything can happen and it probably will. Right now a majority of labor MPs would still prefer to burn in hell than turn to Rudd to save them. One backbencher I know says he would rather chew his arm off than vote for Rudd.

However, when it comes time to choose between their own survival and Gillard’s they will choose their own and that will almost certainly mean voting for Rudd, if not the first time, then the second time around. To block Rudd, the Praetorian Guard might try to force Gillard to step aside for Stephen Smith. They’ve got Buckley’s. She will have to be voted out at an election, or blasted out by her colleagues. If she hangs on, unless the liberals self destruct which is always possible, labor faces annihilation.

The Liberals would prefer it if the situation stayed exactly as it is with Gillard twisting, Rudd stalking, Smith waiting, Crean hoping and Shorten preening. It won’t, it is untenable. That does not mean it will be fixed.

If Gillard is dispatched, Rudd will have to decide whether to try to settle in for a period of quiet governing, or have an election and seek a mandate. Much depends on the extent and duration of labor’s post traumatic stress and how it all plays out in the polls. One will influence the other.

Labor will try and sell the switchback as righting a wrong, however the animosity has so poisoned the party it will take years and the departure of both Rudd and Gillard before any real healing can occur.

I’ve learned a few things about politicians and what drives them from my years on the inside. Firstly, never underestimate the depth of the paranoia. Secondly, never underestimate the depth of the resentments, and how much they fester. Thirdly, never underestimate the desire for revenge and retribution. Whatever made the faceless men think they could knife Rudd and he would go away and quietly bleed to death is a mystery.

The last prime minister to go at a time of his own choosing was Robert Menzies. Gough Whitlam raged, Malcolm Fraser’s bottom lip trembled, Bob Hawke clung on to the bitter end, and he and Paul Keating are still fighting the legacy wars. Keating has never got over losing to Howard and, although gracious in defeat, Howard stubbornly stayed longer than he should, refusing to step aside for Costello, who will never forgive him.

Rudd blubbered and will not rest until he gets it back or he kills off Gillard, and she will spend the rest of her days cursing him. One of her senior ministers told me recently that one of Julia Gillard’s best attributes was she did not feel she had to show people she was the smartest person in the room.

I will refrain from making the obvious and gratuitous comment, except to say it helps if the prime minister is the smartest person in the room and everybody knows it, they just shouldn’t rub people’s noses in it, like Kevin Rudd did and like Malcolm Turnbull is prone to do.

All the polling tells us that, despite reservations, people are prepared to vote for Tony Abbott if it means getting rid of Julia Gillard. We can’t be sure what Abbott will be like in the job. He could be bad or he could be brilliant. You can bet he won’t be boring. In his defense, Abbott was a competent minister. There were no stories of scandal or waste in any of the departments he managed. He is decent, well read, and thoughtful, qualities he too often suppresses and to his own detriment. He writes very good speeches although he invariably finds a way to wreck them.

Because anything is possible, and in spite of everything, if Labor’s leadership battles cease, it could still pick up and get the magic four in front of its primary vote. If that happened, the Liberals will get spooked, and search for a replacement for Abbott. Of course Turnbull is ready and willing to serve.

Turnbull’s small “l” liberal values make him the leader of choice for capital “L” Labor voters. They figure if there has to be a Liberal Party, then Turnbull is the ideal person to lead it, and sometimes wish he was leading Labor instead.

Sadly, Malcolm Turnbull is about as well liked in the Liberal party as Kevin Rudd is in the Labor party. Roughly for the same reasons. Turnbull, like Rudd, cannot suffer fools, which is another prerequisite for leadership. Malcolm can be charming and he is highly intelligent. He is also willful and arrogant and an absolute pain in the arse. I gave him a free character assessment in a recent column, then ran into him soon after. Unsurprisingly he was upset. “You keep writing all this stuff about me,” he said, “and you know, it isn’t true….I did not lose weight on a lemon detox diet.” Did I happen to mention he might be vain too?

More than a year ago, I wrote a column giving Julia Gillard what I thought was sound advice, to fix her appearance, get her own policies and separate herself from the Greens. I became public enemy number one. I was accused of picking on her because she was a woman, as if appearance doesn’t matter.

As a journalist, I broke the story of John Howard’s makeover by saying he was hanging on to the Liberal leadership by the skin of his new teeth. As a staffer I went shopping with Peter Costello, especially for the budget, and because he was such a tight arse I made sure he bought the most expensive suits and ties.

In politics, everything matters. Get the policies right, get the politics right, get the message right, and get the transmission right. First and foremost, get the leadership right.

Lastly, I would like to congratulate Troy on his book and his writings. For too long people pretended everything inside the ALP was hunky dory. Critics were knee capped or ostracised, so nothing was fixed. Now, the situation is so dire it is impossible to silence the many voices calling for reform.

That’s not to say criticism is embraced. Recently I told a former Labor staffer turned commentator that I agreed with 90 per cent of what she said. She did not thank me. That is why they think I’m a treacherous bitch, she said. I did not take it personally. I knew how she felt. A few people have said the same about me.

Interestingly, two people who say they enjoy my scribblings, even if it hurts, are two politicians I have criticised most – Tony Abbott and John Howard. That tells you something.