Prime Minister John Howard and the Coalition have won a third term, but it was not a resounding endorsement. The Coalition picked up an increase of primary vote of just over 2 per cent and just under 2 per cent on a two-party preferred basis. Much of that primary swing came from the decline of the One Nation vote.
It was apparent that the Government was headed for defeat before the Tampa sailed towards Christmas Island and the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Mr Howard cleverly exploited those issues. The election timing was fortuitous for the Government. The Coalition managed to play on people’s fears. The ploy worked – just.
It means that Labor’s strategy did not. Opposition Leader Kim Beazley slavishly agreed with everything Government did on asylum seekers and the response to the terrorist attacks. He suffered for it. Labor – despite having the edge on domestic issues before the international issues bit in – lost nearly three per cent of its primary vote.
It seems that the Greens were the big winner – not so much because people were suddenly embracing environmentalism, but because many Labor voters felt it was only through a vote for the Greens that they could protest against the Labor sided with the Coalition on the refugee and terrorism issues. The protest did not find its way to the Democrats, perhaps because they allowed the GST through the Senate.
The other recipients of the protest vote were independents. Three independents were elected this time – the largest number in modern times. In a single-member system, it is remarkable to get any independents. The fact there were three, and a fourth went close, indicates a high level of dissatisfaction with the major parties.
In short, it was a political and moral mistake for Labor to have fought the election on the basis of agreeing with the Coalition’s refugee and terrorism policy. Mr Beazley should have taken a stand more in accord with Labor’s historical position. Those who were going to vote on fear and xenophobia would have voted for the Coalition anyway. There will be some acrimony within the Labor Party because of it. Labor must now go through a process of renewal – not just in leadership, but also in policy.
Australians had one of the worst choices this election for 40 years. Perhaps that is why the voting swings went so unevenly. Perhaps, also, many people stuck with the sitting member – whether Liberal or Labor — in the face of the unpleasantness of the choice. There was no enthusiasm for change and no enthusiasm for the Government. One or other major party had to win government.
The upshot is a House of Representatives very similar to the outgoing one. The Government is in much the same position as it was.
The implications for the country on the economic front are reasonably good. The Government will no longer be under pressure to bribe for votes and so can be more responsible with the surplus. The electorate will be watching to see if Mr Howard returns surpluses in the form of tax cuts rather than higher government spending.
But internationally Australia faces the prospect of being seen as a racist, inhumane nation. The fair go and the belief in tolerance look like past myths. Nationally, Australians have a Government that is not inspirational or aspirational and that goes to defining us. Reconciliation, treating refugees with humanity and decency and having the confidence to cut the strings of the monarchy will stay on the back-burner until the Liberal leadership changes.
The refugee question will not go away. The Government’s policy is unsustainable. As that becomes clearer over the next few months a more generous policy will be needed. And as the war in Afghanistan goes on without the desired result of bring the terrorists to justice, the integrity of the platform upon which Mr Howard stood at this election will come into further question.