State Govts ousted because they just cannot keep up

FIRST Western Australia, then Victoria, then NSW and then Queensland. Is the ACT next? More of the ACT anon. So, are the conservatives on the march? Possibly. But there is another explanation.

One of the reasons these Governments faced difficulty was not that they were Labor. And NSW aside it was not because they were either corrupt or especially incompetent in the circumstances. Rather it was because the Federal Governments of Howard and Rudd made their tasks virtually impossible.

Voters may have thought that they were voting against tired, incompetent state governments. They obviously bemoaned the failure of those governments to deliver in education, health, transport and land use – perhaps the most important four elements contributing to our standard of living.

Blame is easy. But directing it correctly is a different matter.

The hapless voted-out state governments did not stand a chance. The Federal Government sets the policies which drive population growth. It decides on the immigration intake and provides, under its massive tax power, the concessions which provide bonuses for extra children.

“One for mum, one for dad and one for the country,” as then Treasurer Peter Costello so complacently smirked.

But the states have to pick up the burden. The states are expected to provide the schools, roads, bridges, hospitals and the like.

What hope have they got in this set-up?

Sure, there were lots of other factors, especially in NSW and to a lesser extent Queensland.

But the pressure on infrastructure caused by population growth has been the source of much political difficulty for the states.

The response of the new Queensland Premier Campbell Newman last week was interesting — competitive rather than co-operative federalism – but it is not likely to provide a solution.

Most of the Premiers most of the time whinge that the Feds do not provide enough money. With perhaps the exception of then NSW Premier Bob Carr, rarely did they point to the real problem – keeping up with the pace of population growth.

During the “big Australia” debate, Australia’s population growth was around two per cent. It ate up all the increase in GDP so Australia was really in recession, even though the economists and politicians could deny it.

Worse, it required Australia to double its infrastructure effort – two per cent a year to replace the wearing out of what he have got (most of it having an average lifespan of about 50 years) and a further 2 per cent to deal with the extra two per cent extra population.

State Governments were overwhelmed and fell behind. The stresses on existing infrastructure became palpable – transport, schools, hospitals, roads and so on.

Food prices have gone up as market gardens have been pushed further from city centres.

Voters may not have made the link, but they turfed out governments which could not deliver.

The ACT is the next electoral cab off the rank.

The ACT has a multi-member semi-proportional system, so a Queensland wipe-out will not happen. Further, the Liberals have messed their own nest with the staff-timesheet issue (but that has passed many voters by, I suspect). Also the ACT has a large portion of left-of-centre voters.

Nonetheless, do not rule a change of government out. ACT Opposition Leader Zed Seselja is no Kate Carnell, but let’s look at it on the ground.

The Libs have been smarter than Labor in the placing of their candidates.

Labor has left all its high profile MLAs – Chief Minister Katie Callagher and Ministers Simon Corbell and Andrew Barr in the seven-member electorate of Molonglo. They will all be re-elected, but will not have anywhere near enough vote (50 per cent after preferences) to get a fourth Labor candidate over the line.

In the other two five-member electorates Labor does not have a strong candidate who might drag a third Labor candidate over the line.

Overall therefore, Labor can win at best seven of the 17 seats.

Last election the Greens won four seats. Two in Molonglo and one in each of the other electorates. Can they repeat that effort? Unlikely. All four Green MLAs have performed well in the past four years: intelligent, diligent, policy driven.

But the Greens were lucky to four seats last time. They got the second seat in Molonglo only because the far-right Motorists Party urged its voters not to give any preferences, thereby delivering six percent of the conservative vote into the garbage bin.

That most likely will not happen in October. That six percent will return to the Tory fold and likely elect a third Liberal in Molonglo.

Overall, the Liberals have spread their better-known candidates through the electorates

Will Green Amanda Bresnan win a seat in Brindabella?

Last election she was the beneficiary of some preference quirks. It is possible, verging on the probable, that Tuggers, what passes as redneckville for Canberra, will deliver a third Liberal, rather than a Green.

That would make it eight Liberals, seven Labor and two Greens. Probably, but not certainly, Green Shane Rattenbury will keep his seat in Belconnen-based Ginninderra,

But possibly, the north could get snaky and dump Rattenbury for a Liberal, too. Rattenbury deserves to be re-elected. Like his Green colleagues he has been constructive and contributive, but that may not be enough.

Moreover, with Bob Brown gone and unfortunately less voter concern for the environment, the Green vote is likely to fall..

If Rattenbury lost to a third Liberal, there would be a change of government.

It that happens it will be at least because of the stresses of an ever-growing Canberra. People stuck in traffic on Northbourne and the Parkway or on hospital waiting lists may think of it as incompetent government.

But state and territory governments cannot keep up with the pressure of Federal Government policies that generate high (for a western country) population growth.

The pressure may get so threatening for the survival of state governments that they will dare speak out about the true causes of their woes.

Who knows, the return to competitive federalism might force a state – not to lower taxes as Newman suggests – but to reinstate the tax that sparked the first bout of competitive federalism in the 1970s, that is, Queensland’s abolition of death duties.
CRISPIN HULL
This article first appeared in The Canberra Times on 21 April 2012.