Prequel
Posted by Christopher Sheil on Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Possibly like most New South Welshpersons, I’ve paid almost no attention to the prospective state election on Saturday week. Under Peter Debnam’s hapless leadership, the LNP struck me as a lost cause from the outset, even though Labor has been in government for 12 years and might normally have been assumed vulnerable to the political cycle. Of late, however, the flood of television adverts has pushed the race onto my radar, and the messages are interesting.
At one level, the messages are about nothing but incumbency, and anticipate the forthcoming federal election, only in reverse. The ALP is saying “don’t risk Debnam”, whereas the LNP is saying “after 12 years, Labor has had long enough”. Will this influence the federal polling messages? Will the likely “don’t risk Kevin Rudd” and “after 11 years John Howard has had long enough” messages tend to be reinforced or exhausted in the most populous state as a consequence of the present electronic carpet bombing, albeit that they are in party-political reverse?
The prime minister stars in the NSW election (full advert here) |
The other interesting aspect is industrial relations, which is the only issue that has cut across the incumbency lines, in my consciousness at any rate. Some weeks ago I noticed the nurses’ union running advertisements against WorkChoices, and this theme now occupies the foreground in the government’s own adverts, to the point where Debnam is being pummeled 24/7 for being associated with Howard and his crackdown on workers’ rights. Interstate readers may be interested to know that the latest Labor adverts even open with a picture of the prime minister. Indeed, it is hardly an exaggeration to suggest that the ALP’s entire election campaign has become a (truly) massive extension of the ACTU’s long running “Your Rights at Work” campaign.
In other words, apart from the absence of the federal opposition leader, you would be forgiven for thinking that we are not having a state election, but a federal prequel. This is to say that, suddenly, the race has become interesting. When it comes to a real election test on WorkChoices, which is the message television is currently completely saturating us New South Welshpersons in, are the baseball bats at the ready? The overall election result may be a foregone conclusion, but the detailed outcomes will now be eagerly awaited.
Update: Joe Hockey is a minister in the government that wasted $57 million of our money in the most mind-numbing advertising campaign in history, deceitfully representing IR proposals that hadn’t been before voters at the 2004 election. Now, Hockey has complained that NSW unions “have wasted an unprecedented amount of their members’ money running campaigns against the federal Government on federal workplace relations”. Joe presents as having the best interests of trade unionists in his mind. Thanks Joe. A gold star for hypocrisy.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 14th, 2007 at 2:58 AM and filed under Politics - national.
Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed.
Post a comment or leave a trackback.
It’s hard to tell what affect the IR thing, or anything really, is having, given the complete and utter lack of effective opposition. I mean, there are issues (education, health, transport, the usual suspects) but with an invisible Oppn it’s all a bit of a vacuum. Mostly I have noticed the ads focussing overwhelmingly on Narwee High alum Iemma and what a good bloke he is.
Despite it being a foregone conclusion there are still some outcomes of interest. The exact size and nature of the (inevitable?) swing against the Govt. How the Hunter Independents will do. The southern Sydney fringe seats Mackerras has tipped to go back to the Libs. Will it be enough to save Debby? I confidently predict the confident predictions of a Greens surge in my electorate will be proven false, as they are every election.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 5:25 am | PermalinkOT?
I’m not convinced that the Workchoices message will be the big swinging issue that the ALP is hoping for at the Federal level. No doubt the ACTU targeting of marginals will be an important factor, but it’s appeal is limited.
Mr. Howard made it clear this morning that he’ll be returning to “the Economy” as his main thrust, and the entirely preposterous claim that he’s in charge of it, knows how to run it, and that the ALP doesn’t have the right set of keys even to start it up.
That I think is the message that the ALP needs to start to counteract now that Mr. Howard’s National Security credentials are starting to take on water, as the Bush legacy sinks in Iraq.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:02 am | PermalinkPeter Costello on the former 3LO this morning was talking about the “risk” of a Rudd government, rather than the “possibility” of a Rudd government, so it looks like the Federal Libs are going to go the scare campaign. But we know that already – it’s going to be one long year of “The ALP has scary plans for the country” from the Government at every opportunity.
Re NSW – After hearing Iemma’s response to the NSW DPP’s comments on Laura Norder politics on the ABC yesterday:
Sorry – no link (time constraints). Listeningto the guy I thought it the most stupidly arrogant performance I’ve heard in a while from an elected pollie. But if the Libs can’t put up a credible alternative, they aren’t going to win, are they.
So yes, it’s the detail that’s going to be interesting – will they pick up any ground at all?
Federally, the challenge for Labor isn’t to show that the “economy can run itself” but that the Howard government has spent the past ten years allowing the economy to run itself and most recently, creaming off the windfall gains from a commodities boom to buy pork for its own supporters. Meanwhile allowing a residential properties buble, funded largely by overseas borrowing, to grow – and we all know what happens to bubbles in the long run.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:36 am | Permalinkbut that the the Howard government has spent the past ten years allowing the economy to run itself
Very good point. The word “complacency” should prove effective.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:42 am | PermalinkMr. Howard made it clear this morning that he
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:43 am | PermalinkThis is it Gummo, from PM. Everyone’s bored now, including Iemma and Debnam. Frankly, I’m only holding out for the yummy Greek spread the local Labor branch puts on on election nights. Mmmm homemade tzatziki Mmmm.
The Oppn had a brief glimmer of an open door when the charges were laid against Orkopoulous but then Debnam slammed it in his own face. Memo to Debby: Using parliamentary privilege to make repeatedly discredited allegation of pedaphilia is not the way to convince an electorate you can “govern responsibly.” Even an electorate champing for any excuse to switch.
There was a big feature on Debnam in the Herald over the weekend, it painted him sympathetically but neither he nor anyone around him seems to have a coherent plan. Gung ho when its disasterous to be so and completely defensive and weak when he should be on the offensive (ie the “Member for Vaucluse” stuff.) Very very weird. Surely there are some decent campaign hard men around in the Libs who could have taken control.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:52 am | PermalinkSorry for going off topic but their complete cluelessness amazes everytime I think about it.
On topic is this SMH article
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 9:12 am | Permalinkhttp://www.smh.com.au/news/state-election-2007/pm-an-albatross-in-labor-ads/2007/03/13/1173722471418.html
and
*cough*blog*cough*
http://blogs.smh.com.au/nswelection2007/archives/2007/03/is_howard_a_plus_or_minus_for.html
Missing link from my previous comment: http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2007/s1870616.htm
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 9:54 am | PermalinkIt’d be good to have some good honest polling on whether WorkChoices is a factor in the state election. Some people think it’s a big factor, and some think it barely figures.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 12:06 pm | Permalink“Re NSW – After hearing Iemma
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 12:13 pm | PermalinkGee it’s difficult to get a feel for how IR is affecting this State election. The anti-WorkChoices ads are powerful and they’d certainly be cutting through into peoples’ heads – what happens after that is anyone’s guess, and it’s even unsure unless, I imagine, extensive exit polling is done, to know whether it played a role in firming votes.
Those TV ads, incidentally, evoke a very deep Australian quality of old which, in its absence for what seems an inordinately long time, comes across like an iron fist in a velvet glove.
Regional NSW is obviously beset with local issues: wouldn’t it be fair to assume these will take far greater precedence than IR? It may be quite different in the city.
Similarly, State Labor problems which have been given much air time don’t so easily translate, if much at all, regionally.
In the leadership perspective, I’d guess that people would give Iemma a go – he’s distanced himself from Carr and has been pretty relaxed and well natured during the campaign. Debnam has hamstrung himself coming from a harping, negative background and that has stuck, I think. Whatever Debnam has put forward, too, it’s appeared as politically expedient; behind him is the spectre of the brutally uncompromising religious zealots and NSW is no Midwest. Iemma looks sloppy, Debnam tending dangerous.
At a guess, I’d say those negative aspects of Debnam might have more effect in local seats than IR, casting perhaps a bit of a pall over the Liberal National candidates.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 2:13 pm | PermalinkGee it
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 3:05 pm | PermalinkFascinating, Chris. Hopefully those insights can be worked through in the period ahead.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 4:15 pm | PermalinkIf work choices is a really difficult call, what can we make of global warming/climate change? Again the federal/state distinction is blurred but I would contend that in marginal non-metropolitan seats it could be a real sleeper.
Posted on 14-Mar-07 at 8:21 pm | PermalinkI attended a meeting in a smaller country town tonight discussing water. More than 100 people showed up which is huge for such a locale. Inasmuch as people lump drought with climate change, Morris Dilemma (as he was referred to) could be surprised.
Quite right Sacha. My expression was exaggerated. Neoliberalism has always been large part fantasy, and this government has in any event always sought to balance populist interventions to advance its political interests against regulatory interventions to advance its class interests.
Yet the notion of “non-intervention” still holds in theoretical/rhetorical principle (just ask any of the CIS and libertarian nutjobs around the place), and the contradiction between the liberal theoretical default to non-intervention and “working hard” to achieve this still holds politically (in comparison with, say, a social democratic government, which believes in intervention).
Posted on 15-Mar-07 at 9:35 am | Permalink[...] Christopher Sheil here at Club Troppo also previews Saturday’s NSW election, noting the prevalence of anti-WorkChoices messages in Labor’s ads and the fact that the parties are largely mirror-reversing each other’s primary messages from the federal sphere. Chris poses an interesting question: Will the likely
Posted on 15-Mar-07 at 11:24 pm | PermalinkThe NSW Labor Government has been appalling. The problem is, the Coalition don’t look any better. I say vote for a minor party/independent and register a protest against both the incompetent major parties.
Posted on 19-Mar-07 at 3:05 pm | Permalink[...] back to us.” All very convenient, but completely false. As faithful Troppo readers will know, I blogged on the WorkChoices saturation over a week ago, 10 days ago to be precise, noting [...]
Posted on 25-Mar-07 at 1:58 pm | Permalink