Abbott could be the Liberals worst nightmare
27 December 2009
AWU National Secretary Paul Howes opinion piece written for The Sunday Telegraph on 27 Dectember 2009.
They say that those who don’t learn from history are forever doomed to repeat it.
And so, over time, 2009 will become known as the year the Liberals did a Latham. It was an action packed year. I know for all my fellow political voyeurs that it was, at times, almost too much.
From Ute-gate, the spectacular failure of Turnbull’s leadership, Nathan Rees’ self-destruction, the Oceanic Viking standoff, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) to Copenhagen there was enough fun and games to fill several political tomes on the importance of the year that was.
However, as thrilling as 2009 was for those of us who care about such things, I think that 2010 will top it. Because for both Labor and the Coalition, the coming election will be a turning point – but for very different reasons.
For the Coalition, they would be better served in the long term if they lose.
In the same way that John Howard’s victory in 2004 saved Labor (not to mention the country) from the ideological zeal of a Latham prime ministership, a government lead by Prime Minister Abbott would not only be a social disaster but would divide the conservatives in this country on a scale never seen before.
As Howard was Menzies’s political child, so too is Abbott Howard’s. However, such a comparison underestimates the ultra-right-wing values that drive Abbott and the lack of pragmatism that guided Howard.
Abbott is now the leader of a deeply fractured and divided party. He’ll try hard to remake the Liberals as a serious political force by reaching out to the moderates and by toning down his radical political rhetoric.
But I don’t think anyone will be fooled. Australians are very good at sniffing out a bloke who’s having them on. It was the same tactic used by Latham when he moderated his views, toned down his language and sought the political middle ground, and nobody fell for it then.
And Abbott seems to be singing from exactly the same hymn sheet. Right down to the old tactic of “Look at me! I’m a regular bloke, not like that geek Kevin/John!”
However, for the nation’s sake, hopefully Abbott’s con job will fail, just as spectacularly as Latham’s did.
As a loyal Labor member, I’m committing heresy by saying this, but I think that losing the 2004 election was the best thing that could have happened for the ALP.
If Labor had won, it wouldn’t have been too long before the real Latham emerged. Ultimately, his erratic and ideologically driven style would have stymied any chance of re-election and would have led to damaging splits in the party (or the ignominy of caucus kicking him out as leader in his first term).
As much as he would like us to forget, Abbott was the architect and loyal defender of WorkChoices and as the Health Minister who tried to insert ultra-right-wing religion rather than medical science as the basis of our health system before being pulled into line by Howard. Like Latham, Abbott’s radical views are there for us all to see.
Like Latham, he’s written them down in a less-than-modest political manifesto. But like Latham, his values are so far removed from those of most Australians, that he’ll have to have a personality transplant in order to win an election. And I don’t doubt that he’ll try.
Teamed up with the Joh Bjelke-Petersen of the 21st century, Barnaby Joyce - imagine what Prime Minister Abbott would be able to do without Howard keeping him on a tight leash.
It would be a disaster for mainstream Australia but equally it would be a disaster for the long-term unity of the Coalition.
How could the so-called moderates of the Liberals remain in the party if Prime Minister Abbott got his way on women’s reproductive rights, for example?
Surely a new Don Chipp would emerge, whether it’s Macolm Turnbull, Christopher Pyne, Scott Morrison or Joe Hockey -presumably if these are people with any moral fortitude eventually they would need to challenge Abbott or leave.
And with the Coalition only needing a 1.7 per cent swing under the new boundaries, 2010 will be a competitive election.
The great news for all my political junkie mates is that next year we are going to be dealing with real issues and real choices.
We’ll have a genuine choice between action or inaction on climate change, a choice between going back to WorkChoices (with another name) or ensuring a fair go for all. We’ll have a choice between a zealot who sits slightly to the right of Genghis Khan, or a mainstream leader governing in the interest of all.
So, Liberals, beware of what you wish for in 2010. Your fantasy of a one-term Labor government may turn into your worst nightmare.
And for the rest of us get your Twitter ready and hold onto your seats because if you thought 2009 was fun you ain’t seen nothing yet.
All electoral matter is authorised by Paul Howes, National Secretary