Prior to the release of the Henry Review, Abbott delivered a speech to the Lowy Institute, advising all who cared to listen that Australia was punching below its weight. He believed we as a nation were contributing less than we should in current fields of service, especially Afghanistan, where he proposed increasing troop deployment to replace the role of the Dutch once they pulled out.
Our own national security, including our border protection, was an issue that deserved serious consideration, and increased investment in the areas that mattered most. This was Abbott’s view.
Twenty-four hours later, and Rudd announced a doubling of Australia’s civilian involvement in Afghanistan – more diplomats and aid workers would be deployed to the area. In doing so, he criticised Abbott for making “erratic policy decisions on the run.”
Such a statement was typical of Rudd at this time. He appeared on our TV screens that night, looking self-satisfied and sanctimonious. Looks can be deceiving, but in Rudd’s case, there was little room for misinterpretation of intent.
The writer's sympathy went out to the press present for the announcement. Delivered in his usual monotone, Rudd’s ability to disinterest the most avid follower of political affairs was acute.
As important as defence spending and procurement was, however, it was the arrival of Tuesday, April 27th that made front page news for days thereafter. This day would go down in Australia’s contemporary political history as one of the greatest policy ‘u-turns’ of modern times. It was Kevin Rudd who faced the media to announce a major change in policy, no, the major change in policy – the ‘postponement’ of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
Paul Kelly of The Australian referred to it as the greatest back-down in public policy in the last fifty years. The media at large were unable to put a positive spin on the story. Tony Abbott laughed out loud. Bob Brown was less than impressed.
Rudd had reverted to Brendan Nelson’s position of a couple of years prior. At the time, Nelson was the Opposition Leader and was pilloried by left and right for his stance. With Rudd’s announcement, what was once considered the greatest moral challenge of our generation had been put off until 2013 at the earliest.
No matter which way the ALP tried to ‘spin’ the story, it was indeed a back-down of immense proportions. A ‘wait and see’ approach had replaced the proactive stance the ALP had previously espoused.
Tony Abbott had won.
All that talk, all that press coverage, all those feature articles and editorials on the ETS had come to nought, nothing, nil. Kevin Rudd had become the Prime Minister who announced grand schemes and programs but could not implement them with any success, if at all. He simply could not walk the walk.
On Thursday, April 29, in The Australian, it was Peter Van Onselen who said it best. “In December 2009 Rudd said: ‘The argument that we must not act until others do is an argument that has been used by political cowards since time immemorial.’” By Rudd’s own admission, his current position of postponement was one of cowardice.
Van Onselen continued. “...Rudd once said: ‘To delay [implementing the CPRS] any longer would be reckless and irresponsible for our economy and our environment.’” By Rudd’s own admission, he was now acting in a reckless and irresponsible manner.
As Van Onselen concluded: “It would appear Rudd is more concerned about being in power than implementing policies he believes are important...” What is it that is said about power corrupting?
The whole saga was not unlike the story of the village boy who sat on the hill watching the sheep. “Wolf, wolf,” he cried. “The wolf is chasing the sheep.” The villagers came to his aide to help him drive the wolf away. All the shepherd boy could do was laugh as he watched the reaction of the villagers when they soon realised there was no wolf.
It was the best entertainment in town. The shepherd boy could not resist. “Wolf, wolf,” he shouted out once more. The villagers fell for it...again. The third time the boy cried wolf, the villagers had had enough. “Nobody believes a liar," they told him, “even when he’s telling the truth!”
Aesop’s Fables have stood the test of time, and although not much is known about Aesop himself, the fables attributed to him have a cogent message for contemporary politicians of every ilk.
Kevin Rudd, the shepherd boy of Australian politics, was not going to fool the voting public, the villagers if you will, any more. The greatest moral challenge of our age appeared to be anything but. And even if the “liar” was “telling the truth” it may well have been too late for the villagers to listen to his message.
No comments:
Post a Comment