The teflon coat

Peter Tucker

THE hash Bryan Green has made of the Tasmanian Compliance Corporation monopoly deal has landed the government in hot water — no argument there — but what are the long-term consequences for Labor?

Probably not terminal in the modern Australian political landscape.
MY observation is that current Australian governments are Teflon coated. All state Labor incumbents are at least into a second term and three states, New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania, are enjoying a third. Victorian Labor, under Steve Bracks, are at unbackable odds to join them when that state goes to the polls in November, while Peter Beattie in Queensland, despite some hiccups, is favourite to win a fourth term in May 2007.

But each of them has had to deal with its share of accusations of impropriety and cronyism.

However, for a variety of reasons, voters have tended to discount government scandal and incompetence when it comes to casting their vote.

Firstly, electors appear not too fussed if a government loses a minister or two. Perhaps they see it as a way of getting rid of dead wood?

Most Australian premiers over the past decade have lost ministers to political indiscretion, but that has not stopped them holding on to power.

Voters don’t care

Indeed both Paul Lennon and Peter Beattie had ministers resign in the twelve months before their most recent elections (Ken Bacon and Merri Rose respectively) but both premiers went on to record impressive election victories.

Secondly, it is a fact that the public do not hold politicians in particularly high regard so shock-horror stories about political hi-jinks tend to wash over the electorate as so much “seen it, heard it all before, wake me up when I have to vote”. It is four years to the next state election so for that large section of the public that takes little interest in politics, there is not much incentive to pay attention to what any politician does or says now.

Thirdly, even when perceptions of government scandal bites in the community, it does not appear to influence election outcomes; rather, it is self interest that dominates how a person votes.

Australia is enjoying an extended period of economic growth and many ordinary Australians have a large stake in keeping the financial ball rolling: their priorities are for buoyant real estate prices, low interest rates and high jobs growth.

Is it any wonder that, at the ballot box, this army of pragmatic voters puts economic record ahead of questions of political propriety?

Add all the above up and the odds favour Labor riding out the TCC furore, whatever Bryan Green’s personal political fate turns out to be.

But that does not mean Labor can afford to ignore community perceptions of incompetence and cronyism. State governments may have a high degree of “stickability” at the moment but in the end there can come a tipping point.

Tipping point

It could be argued that, leading into the last election, Tasmanian Labor was closer to tipping than some may care to concede.

In the months before the election opinion polling clearly showed that Tasmanian voters withdrew five to ten percentage points of support for Labor — enough to plunge it into minority. Issues dominating at the time included the resignation of Ken Bacon, the Federal Hotels monopoly deal, the Betfair licence to PBL and various other accusations about the premier’s propriety.

History tells us that the voters put that aside and stuck with Labor, returning a primary voter for the party exceeding 50 per cent. It appears the electorate’s economic pragmatism won out, coupled with perhaps the Liberals not presenting themselves well enough as a viable alternative government.

But the lesson for Labor is that perceptions of mismanagement or cronyism will not have gone away. Bryan Green’s mistakes add incrementally to those perceptions, and recent bad press on the TT Line and the Hydro can be added to the list as well.

Labor enjoys a commanding position in Tasmanian politics at the moment and it should be able to manage its present troubles.

But if it keeps on spending political capital at this rate, voters might just start to give the Liberals more serious thought as an alternative government than they have to date.

This is the original text of the item that appeared in The Mercury, Friday 7 July 2006, p. 35. Peter Tucker has worked in Tasmania as an advisor for the Liberals in opposition and in ministerial offices for both Labor and Liberal governments. He is currently a free-lance political commentator and writer, and PhD candidate at the University of Tasmania’s School of Government.
peter.tucker@tdctasmania.com

Earlier: Incumbency is king