I could rest my case by saying that after the last federal election, it is more obvious than ever before that we need more than luck. We need good policies. Perhaps the deal on the NBN is a harbinger of better things to come!
Ross Gittins described the failure of the government as ‘a lack of values, a lack of courage and a lack of skill in managing its relations with the electorate’. I can’t recall two successive Labor Prime Ministers who have been so little interested in policy.
The coalition treated the electorate as fools with its negativity and hate-filled prejudice ‘reduce the spending, cut the deficit, no new taxes and stop the boats’. They have adopted the US Tea Party rhetoric – say no to everything and wreck as much as you can.
So much of the campaign was about ‘what is in it for me’. As Tony Judt put it recently, ‘we now seem unwilling to ask hard questions. Is what the parties offering good, is it fair, is it just, is it right? Will it bring about a better society and world?’
The media joined in what seemed almost a death-wish by the major parties, by refusing to ask hard questions, personalising and trivialising the campaign and journalists interviewing each other. The Australian moves from one shrill anti-government campaign to another.
Despite the clear collapse of markets in the global financial crisis, reform parties that used to espouse strong government and intervention in markets, are losing ground. Reform governments seem unable to win the argument.
‘More than luck’ by CPD contributes to getting policy debate back on track.
There are numerous big ticket issues which ‘more than luck’ addresses, and others which must dominate our public discussion
In addressing these and other major issues, we are confronted by the special interests, with their lobbyists who corrupt our public discussion on policy. Journalists are just under-resourced to examine policy whether it is good or bad.
But the real elephant in the room is our failure to discuss the appropriate role of markets and governments. For the dominant liberal market ideology, it seems that the global financial crisis and market failure never happened, even after Chairman Greenspan admitted to the US Congress that his world view, his ideology was not working. The blinkered ideologies in the financial and business commentariat, with some notable exceptions, remind me of the communist fellow travellers of the 1960s and 1970s, who were so ideologically driven they refused to acknowledge the corrupt and brutal policies of communist governments. These liberal market ideologues today are more concerned to advantage capital than ensure effective operations of markets in the national interest. So today the apologists on the ideological right continue to keep their spirits and ideologies burnished, despite the clear evidence of market failure and the need for public action such as in response to the GFC. The rating agencies are still in business, but the ideologues say nothing. Some market failures are glaringly obvious.
It is noteworthy that the deregulation of markets has run in parallel with increased regulation and surveillance of the community which sees our political and personal freedoms eroded.
Australia has shown in the past that governments can make hard but necessary decisions and explain them successfully to the community. This country is far better than what it was when I was a boy in the country towns of South Australia. We can be optimistic that we can do things better despite the last election and the performance of our major parties and the media since then. What is the best way to take advantage of markets whilst ensuring that the public interest is protected through good public policy? As my father often said to me ‘son, stop complaining and do something about it’.