The final straw?

It’s fair to say that Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s request for embattled MPs Craig Thompson and Peter Slipper to step aside did not quite have the effect the ALP desired. Instead of putting this issue to bed, it has caused yet another round of questions regarding the credibility and legitimacy of the Labor government. It has also resulted in more personal, almost slanderous, attacks on Gillard even from more liberal (small ‘l’) media publications, such as The Age in Melbourne. But while it’s clear that the ALP is on the nose around the country, what isn’t as apparent is why the government attracts the level of vitriol that it does. Is the Gillard government as incompetent as it is portrayed, or does Julia Gillard suffer from the “un-Midas touch”?

Very few people are lucky (or unlucky) enough to know their political representative personally.  They don’t get the chance to have a casual conversation with them about the political issues of the day, and so they rely on others to get their information. Those others of course, are the media, and nothing stimulates the media quite like bad news and controversy. Unfortunately for Gillard, her tenure as PM has been overshadowed by, if I can use her term, a “dark cloud” of controversy her since her replacement of Kevin Rudd as Australia’s Prime Minister back in 2010.  Her removal of an elected PM, problems with government programs and alleged broken promises are all been issues that the media have latched on to, as it their right. What has occurred though is that these issues have become the main story, rather than the functioning of the government. The general public, seemingly unforgiving of her deposition of Rudd, have linked these events, even other minor ones, creating a very unfavourable view if the government. The media, aware of publishing pieces that will appeal to their readers, write more articles of a similar nature, creating a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. This results in the government appearing much worse than they perhaps are.

That’s not to say that the government aren’t also responsible for the predicament that they are in. The ALP is suffering from a chronic inability to effectively convey its message to the general public. It proved to be Rudd’s downfall after failing to pass the original carbon pollution reduction scheme. The ALP then failed to properly explain why Gillard replaced Rudd when it appeared to going so well. It has since failed to sell ideas which should generally appeal to the electorate, including, the mining super profits tax, the disability and aged care scheme and most importantly, the pricing of carbon as a means to reduce greenhouse emissions.  Indeed, the explanation the last idea was so poor it is now known as simply ‘the carbon tax’, originally a slogan devised by the Liberal-National Party to discredit the policy and provoke fear of a ‘great big new tax’ amongst the general public. Labor’s failure to promote their policies and achievements effectively, as well as their problems with damage control when things have gone wrong has resulted in the appearance of incompetency in government.

The attacks on Julia Gillard are perhaps the most extreme faced by any Prime Minister of Australia. But while Gillard could definitely have handled things better, she was also dealt an incredibly difficult hand for her first elected term in office.  The first difficulty is the hung parliament, which has bizarrely raised questions of the legitimacy of the minority ALP government. What is perhaps forgotten is that opposition, itself a coalition, would be in exactly the same position if it held government, relying on MP’s outside the party to form a majority.  The second is the relentless negativity and obstructionism of the opposition. While it is the role of the opposition to hold a government to account, it is the sheer scale of the negativity and the continual attack of the man and not the ball that damaged the government, even at times when that negativity and criticism was unwarranted. Another issue that has that Gillard has faced is the perceived issue of trust and honesty in the government. The apparent about-face of carbon emissions has defined her leadership, resulting in her being branded as a lair, or ‘Juliar’ as the online trolls would have it. Again this seems a bizarre occurrence to be singled out for.  If there is one thing politicians aren’t its 100% honest, particularly when circumstances beyond their control change, as it did for Gillard following the 2011 election.

That’s not to say that Gillard government has handled all of the challenges well. In response to the negativity from the opposition, Ms Gillard has changed tack a number of times, switching from dismissive, to combative and has even been accepting of it at times. This has quite rightly raised the question as to which is the ‘real’ Julia Gillard. Another problem has been her relationship with the public. Gillard does not have the charisma of her predecessor, nor have the sloganistic appeal of opposition leader Tony Abbott. Gillard’s main ability lies in negotiation, and while it is a valuable tool that has been used effectively in parliament, it doesn’t capture the attention of the general public. Her handling of the Thompson/Slipper saga unfortunately was another error, supporting these politicians despite their positions, at least in the public’s eye, appearing untenable. Her refusal to then acknowledge her mistake and change of opinion compounded the error.

It is a strange juxtaposition that a government, which is functioning quite effectively in a parliamentary sense, is seen as incompetent and even as ‘the worst government ever’ in some circles. It is the ALP’s problem with communication which has them staring down the barrel of a heavy defeat at the next election. Unless they improve in conveying their ideas, some of which are quite visionary, to the general public Labor will hand control of both houses of parliament to the opposition in 2013. And if having a minority government is seen as bad, a majority government with no meaningful opposition should be seen as much worse.