DURING the last Tasmanian state election, a grotesquely grinning Paul Lennon promised that the ALP would deliver “stable”, “majority” government for Tasmania. Since that empty promise left the lips of the fated premier we have witnessed the sacking of his deputy, the depressed departure of Paula Wreidt, the criminal prosecution of his police commissioner, the dissolution of an entire government department, violent and idiotic outbursts from Lennon’s head kicker Graham Sturges, not to mention the spectacular departure of the Premier himself amid deplorable public approval ratings (and that’s just the tip of the iceberg). So why exactly did Tasmanians vote for Labor again? Did they get what they voted for? Can they remember what they voted for?
Did they vote for Labor’s grand vision? Not likely when this consists of a single giant pulp mill. Was it for their finesse and charisma?
Almost impossible when one considers the tired array of moustaches, potbellies and meaningless platitudes that flow from the executive building. Was it because Tasmanians fundamentally believed in a positive vision, a constructive, community minded agenda put forward by the Labor Government?
No, they voted for Labor because Labor sold them pre-packed, easily digestible electoral junk food. For it was the simple empty offering of a “stable majority government” that deluded voters and delivered Labor a four-year extension of their already overdrawn dynasty. It was the nauseating mantra of fear directed at “minority Government” (and the shadowy miasma of greenies, trannies and ferals who are its courtiers) accompanied by mass advertising, letter drops and hate campaigns orchestrated by men wearing pig masks that galvanised a tired constituency around there empty promise. Alternately it was happy visions of families on beaches, pumped on primetime TV and funded by the dynasties big business buddies that drove home the message (as if happy family times on beaches ever had anything to do with politicians).
All this carefully orchestrated, but essentially empty and disingenuous, propaganda brought Labor four more years of power, during which they reigned (supremely and “stably”) over the worst phase of political uncertainty, sheer public embarrassment and plain stupidity in decades.
To put it simply, if you voted Labor at the last election, you got duped, you got fooled, hoodwinked, scammed, ripped off…so what are you gonna do about it?
Tasmanians make a perennial pastime of bemoaning, condemning and protesting our rulers and politicians. Our political history is punctuated by powerful and dynamic campaigns and movements for change: from the moral conviction of the anti-transportation movement, to the mass people power of the no-dams campaign. This tradition of resistance has flourished as the ALP’s grip on our political culture has tightened; with localised disquiet over hospital closures, frustration over railways, water and infrastructure, fury at the organised manipulation of public confidence and due-process over the pulp mill, ingrained resentment over the management of native forests and now open rebellion in the education system. The dismal failure of the Lennon-Bartlett ALP to sustain public confidence, and the barrage of criticism levelled at our political leaders, tame bureaucrats and business barons from a dissatisfied public and even the local corporate media are testament to Tasmanian’s unsettledness, their anxiety about the state of affairs on this island.
But while books, blogs and websites are chock full of articulate anti-government sentiment, the same old sagging bums are quietly returned to sit on the same old seats (albeit tastefully renovated) in a house of assembly that now conveniently and tellingly boasts a glass screen to invisibly block out the yells and taunts of an enraged populace. And while, on talk back radio and letters to the editor, droves of clever, perceptive people deride the shame and embarrassment of being led by a cabal of talentless, uninspiring goons, the same goons fool a majority of Tasmanians, again and again, to let them have another crack at running the state.
So why do we, the Tasmanian people, who are not stupid, not blind and really quite sick and tired of being ignored, manipulated or persecuted, keep handing the reigns back over to the same political string pullers? The ALP has infiltrated and infected our political, economic and cultural landscape so comprehensively (installing tame bureaucrats and cementing convenient friendships with selected big
business) that a bland but dangerous political monoculture has been cultivated. Political monocultures, like their equivalent in the natural world, are risky. When one party has such a stranglehold, there is no diversity, no fresh ideas, no adaptability to change. When leaders, and their business buddies, get so cosy and so cocky, they get lazy, and so do voters. Political debate reverts to discourses of fear and smear. Those in power raise the spectre of “instability”, the horror of change. Unknown backbenchers and parliamentary wannabes are sent to run smear campaigns. Premiers drop lofty ideals and grand visions for dirty mudslinging. Things go downhill rapidly. For, clearly, after so many years of Labor Governments, it is not the lack of stability that is Tasmania’s problem; it is the very social straightjacket of “majority” government that is at the heart of our woes.
Paul Lennon fell very ungraciously on his sword because the community had sensed a rot setting in. They had heard about the backroom deals, the waterfront restaurant deals, the hot-tub deals; they had sensed the urgent, worried arrogance; they had seen the over-confident and aggressive attitude of an emperor rapidly loosing his pin stripes and designer ties. They had turned against their leader and plucked the bad apple from the cart. But perhaps they did not sense that after years in power the whole cart had become irreparably infected.
David Bartlett was meant to restore confidence, to clean up the shop, usher in fresh ideas, shake things up, change the guard- all those metaphors. His public sacking of Svengali-like Evan Rolley was a political masterstroke, if not an unavoidable necessity. But then the momentum died. He wasn’t going to give Government support for the pulp-mill, he told us. Then we hear his treasurer is off on a taxpayer-funded trip to hustle potential investors for the pulp mill.
He was going to consider all the facts and scientific information about forest management, he told us, before dismissing such facts and information as “bullshit”! He was going to be “clever, kind and connected”, he told us, before liquidating a crucial government department, going in to war with teachers and all but condoning red-neck vigilantes who attack, beat and firebomb environmentalists in the dead of night. Its funny, if you spell “Clever, Kind and Connected” with a “K” you get “KKK”. I’m just pointing that out.
In Bartlett’s KKK Tasmania, a perverse and dangerous redneck nationalism is emerging. Websites such as “save Tasmania, shoot a greenie” implore people to bash the brains out of “feral protesting scum”, maybe to take to them with iron bars or run over them with bulldozers. Its really clever, kind and connected stuff.
But this childish and aggressive fear of the unknown, of the dark-green forces that are poised in the forest ready to take our jobs, spoil our barbeques and ruin our happy family times on the beach, is a political parachute for under performing and unpopular governments. When people have nothing left to believe in, no faith in their leaders, no passion for their vision (because there is none); when there’s nothing positive left to vote for, Governments, like Tasmania’s, just have to give people something to vote against. In the coming months we will be told repeatedly, as we have already on numerous occasions, that we have to vote for Labor, because we can’t vote for Greenies, anti-development hooligans, ferals, eco-terrorists and dole bludgers. We will be reminded again and again that the abovementioned evildoers want to destroy our jobs, “lock up” our forests, ruin our families and promote promiscuous sex and drug addiction.
This is a formula played out time and time again and it’s a sad sign that political culture is dead, stagnating; that civil society is browbeaten, broken and bored. So will this election be any different?
Concerned Resident
November 4, 2009 at 13:38
Hopefully the majority of Tasmanians are not the inbred, two headed creatures that the mainlanders think they are… it would be nice if there were enough people here who were not friends or relatives of these pollies. If the citizens would just take a long, hard look at the devastation that is occurring at a rapid rate due mainly to corporate greed backed by the two major political parties of this state. If the election turns out no different to the past elections…I would be inclined to believe that the gene pool needs enlarging considerably.
max
November 4, 2009 at 20:15
The next election is fast approaching and there is no alternative to the present LibLab coalition. I don’t see the Green Party getting the numbers to form government and a vote for Labor or Liberal is a vote for more of the same. Please where is the desperately needed alternative.
Concerned and proud Tasmanian
November 4, 2009 at 23:31
In response to comment #1:
I agree with the article whole heartedly. I am also a long time forest activist and Green voter. However I find your attitude (of commenter 1)insulting and incredibly backward. To suggest that the state of politics in Tasmania is a result of inbreeding shows your level of maturity. May I remind you that Denison is the Greenist electorate in Australia, and that former Greens leader Peg Putt received more votes than the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in her last election. Also that the whole of Australia voted in John Howard 3 times, does that make the whole country inbred. So before you go on suggesting the gene pool needs enlarging to improve the state of politics, even in humour, consider your audience. Learn that many Green voters in Tasmania are of long standing Tasmanian heritage and find such attitudes akin to a racist attitude. Intelligent people in Tasmania, who care about the environment and social fabric they live in, are not just made up of the small number of Mainland protesters that come each spring and go again when it gets too cold.
Tomas
November 4, 2009 at 23:34
Wow Will, need to calm down mate. I don’t think that you could really claim that this is the worst govt for decades (you must be young), as there have been far worse ones!! – the good ones are actually fairly rare over the last 40 years or so. As for redneckery – there is a lot less around than in my younger days. The cultural scene in Tasmania has never been so good, and is a magnet for returning artists, musicians and even the odd scientist or two.
As for quality of Tas politician, I couldn’t agree more – but you need to start paying them more if you want to get quality candidates interested.
Brian.M
November 4, 2009 at 23:48
I fear that the implications of this article are true. Tasmania has a population that by majority, lacks education. Given what I have seen, the vast majority of Tasmanians over the last 10 years have not attended school past grade 9 or 10. Sure, there’s grammar kids, private schools and so on (a breeding ground for much of the status quo), and there’s those that go on to vocational training. But where’s the young independent thinkers? You’re average young voter does ‘blockies’ in a gemini on weekends, maybe has a dead-end job, and ‘doesn’t watch the news because it’s boring’. They like Labor governments because they see the positives of a welfare state. Most western countries see teenage pregnancy as a problem. Here we reward the welfare breeders with $5000.00 per illegitimate rug-rat that springs forth from housing commission areas. That’s more money than most will actually save in a bank in lifetime. All state labor has to do to win a majority is to promise $20.00 phone credit and free Austar for a month for each eligible voter, and encourage welfare recipients to vote..hey presto, Barty’s in for another term! An uneducated populace is one who is more interested in who wins Australian Idol than who wins the state election.
Tom
November 5, 2009 at 00:36
That a political system can promote a man with the half witted autistic grin above, to become premier of this state is a clear reminder that we are doomed!
Mainland Immigrant
November 5, 2009 at 01:36
Not long after arriving in this beautiful state, I had occasion to ask a group of very earnest Hobart journalists what they thought of the joke that passed for government in Tasmania. This was just prior to Lennon’s resignation, and the hot tub jibes were a daily feature in the Mercury – I felt sure they would get what I was saying. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Without exception, they were silent, looking at me as if I had uttered some unspeakable heresy.
I pondered their response for some time, and now, a year later, I think I know what’s going on. Tasmanians, especially native Hobartians, are not satisfied with the best living conditions in the Western world – they want all the trappings of big city life. They hanker for the indelible imprint of big business on their everyday lives, so they can feel equal to the ‘big boys’. It doesn’t seem to matter that this means destroying their natural habitat, pollution, traffic issues and corrupt politicians. Exactly the things that expat mainlanders are hoping to leave behind.
Next year, I’ll have an opportunity to vote in Tasmania for the first time. I’ve always voted Liberal in the past – more out of habit than anything else – but this time the Greens and independents will get my vote.
Wake up to yourselves, Tasmania. You don’t need to trash your environmental heritage, and you certainly shouldn’t tolerate being held to ransom by a single corporation and a spineless, unimaginative administration.
Dr Kevin Bonham
November 5, 2009 at 03:46
Copying my response to this article from another forum:
———————————————
The KKK comparison is pathetic. It’s little different to a Godwin’s Law type call.
“Save Tasmania – Shoot A Greenie” was a Facebook group that Facebook deleted in April. Whoopy do.
“Redneck” sentiments of the sort mentioned (whether as graffiti, stickers or now a Facebook site) have always existed in this state, as have similar levels of derogatory abuse from extremists on the other side. Nothing new there and Will Mooney is clearly part of the problem and not the solution. This guy complains about “childish and aggressive” attitudes while himself making a juvenile lark out of the fact that three hard k-sounds can be used to form the initials of a racist murderous cult. Hypocritical and lame.
The stuff about stability is valid but it’s nothing new; he would be at least the 50th if not the 500th TT poster to make similar points.
And it was not just the majority government thing that won Labor the last election; to suggest it is is to ignore the extent to which the other parties stuffed up. The Greens shot themselves in the foot completely with Peg Putt’s blatant power grab for the Deputy Premiership and the Liberals were uninspired under the leadership of the clearly unsuitable Hidding. Lennon also outcampaigned his opponents on conservation issues with the Recherche Bay buyoff and effectively neutralised the forestry angle in that election. It’s no good blaming the result on the Liberals’ shadowy religious-cult pals; that Labor had a serious chance of retaining majority government was on the cards considerably further out than that.
Another problem with the Mooney article is its confused view of cause and effect. It asks why Tasmanians keep voting the same lot back given what we now know about them, but most of those substantiating examples are of the condition of the government now, not pre-2006. In 2006 Labor had only been in for eight years; being returned to office twice is hardly evidence of a political monoculture. Labor had every opportunity to build it into such a monoculture on the back of its 2006 win, but has totally squandered that.
There is a lot not to like about this government’s headstrong and heavyhanded approach to a wide range of change management issues but Mooney’s article is the worst way to go about criticising. It claims to be opposed to hatred but ferments hate in the inane way in which it responds to it and is an easy free kick for Bartlett’s supporters(if they can even be bothered) and an example of the sort of preaching-to-the-converted junk that makes it hard for TT to get itself taken seriously.
Dr Kevin Bonham
November 5, 2009 at 03:50
Oh, “call” in my above should be “case” – what I’m suggesting is that Mooney’s KKK claim is not much better than the common habit of poor debaters calling each other Nazis or fascists as a substitute for anything more original, proportionate or valid.
will
November 5, 2009 at 15:12
Its comforting to know that somewhere, out there Dr. Kevin Bonham is watching, waiting to pounce, to disect and demean. So Kevin, what is your strategy for curtailing “this government’s headstrong and heavyhanded approach to a wide range of change management issues”?
Gee Eff
November 5, 2009 at 16:24
Oh dear – the job of devising a “strategy for curtailing this government’s headstrong and heavyhanded approach to a wide range of change management issues” is up to Dr Kevin? Why wasn’t I told of this? When was this taken from the hands of the voters and handed to one man? Where’s the memo?
How does this differ from the normal cycle of government gets in, does what it likes, gets re-elected once or twice, then gets voted out because no-one can remember how bad it was under the other lot but it can’t be any worse than what we have now?
How many voters do you thing analyse any aspect of how a state (or council or nation) will be governed?
Dr Kevin Bonham
November 5, 2009 at 16:48
Well, heaven forbid I should “demean” an article in which it is considered acceptable to draw semi-serious comparisons with one of the most repugnant and vile political groupings that has ever existed on such a threadbare basis.
What is my strategy? Short of highlighting the problem in the unlikely hope that Bartlett will get some political judgement and temper his bull-at-a-gate approach to reform of practically any kind, I don’t have one. I would suggest that people vote for someone else next March, but since the other two parties have so much unresolved illiberal baggage I’m in no great hurry to recommend either of them. Quite simply I see the current three-party system as being a depauperate political condition and until new parties emerge that are seriously distinct from what we have, or new leaders clean up the problems with the existing parties properly, I don’t see too much hope for politics in this island.
Oh, and can we please stop this furphy about a “crucial government department” being “liquidated”? It was another bits-and-pieces Tasmanian department in the first place and its constituent parts have been reassigned; some of them back where they originally belonged and shouldn’t have been moved from to begin with.
andrew
November 8, 2009 at 17:13
I found this article totally ridiculous.
I am no fan of the Labor government, but I’d like to see people produce mature, informed criticism that gets to the core of issues rather than frothing at the mouth like this. Asserting things without any form of evidence, screaming corruption and conspiracy at every opportunity, and using propaganda classics like demonisation by association make me wonder if these are the only arguments people have left, and indeed if they are wearing tinfoil hats. I sincerely believe hysterical rants like this do more harm than good.
I’m 41 years of age and have never voted any other way than Green, like a great many others in Denison.
Dr Kevin Bonham
November 9, 2009 at 17:30
I think it is well worth placing Premier Bartlett’s exact comments following the Florentine sledgehammer incident on record so readers can judge for themselves about Will Mooney’s claim re Bartlett “all but condoning” such attacks and other alleged incidents:
Mercury 26 Oct 2008:
————————————-
“I have full confidence that police can do their job.”
“I think the protesters need to take a good hard look at themselves and make sure they are not impeding the legal work of forestry workers,” Mr Bartlett said.
“If they [forestry contractors] are legally doing their work, earning a living for their family I can understand that anger and tension rises.
“But in no way can I possibly support violence, or violent acts or the destruction of property.
“There needs to be the right to protest, but not the right to impede people going about their lawful business.”
———————————————
John Coombes
November 10, 2009 at 02:01
Re 7 by Tom.
Bartlett’s ingratiating public smile may well be repulsive to many people, including myself, but to describe it as a ‘half witted autistic grin’ is extremely insensitive and abominably discourteous to the many people and their families who are afflicted with autism.
And to claim that we are doomed because Tasmania’s political system has allowed Bartlett to become premier sounds to me like yet another excuse for apathy. Remember, we get the politicians we deserve.