Crispin Hull

The agreement between the Prime Minister, Paul Keating, and the Leader of the Opposition, John Hewson, to have two debates during the election campaign is most welcome. It should become a regular pattern for all Federal elections. In recent Australian history, head-to-head television debates during the campaign have been the exception rather than the rule. A notable exception was the debate during the 1984 campaign between the then Leader of the Opposition, Andrew Peacock, and the then Prime Minister, Bob Hawke. Mr Hawke was riding on a wave of popularity. Mr Peacock was the underdog. The debate, which consisted of questions from a panel of journalists, transformed the Peacock campaign and image. It was widely thought Mr Peacock had performed better than expected in that campaign and the debate played an important part in that. The sad upshot was that Mr Hawke shied away from debates where he would be grilled by a panel. In the 1990 campaign there was one tedious debate where each leader made a statement and replied to other.

There are some pleasing aspects to the proposal for this campaign: there will be more than one debate; they are likely to involve a panel of questioners; they will be 90 minutes long; they will be on the ABC and offered to the commercials; they will not have a studio audience; they will be live; they will be spaced one at the beginning and one at the end of the campaign and they are restricted to the two potential prime ministers. The debates need to be fairly long. One of the most galling things about television coverage of political events is the quick grab. During the last US presidential campaign, for example, grabs averaged under nine seconds on the commercial news. No-one has been patient enough to do the research in Australia, but no doubt the position is similar. Politicians play to this environment; they have to. Given the sad fact that a large proportion of the electorate gets news only from the box, the result is mass ignorance of issues and political judgments being formed around image rather than substance. It may well be, of course, that many will not bother with two 90-minute debates, none the less the opportunity will be there and at least some will take it. The absence of commercials and a booing or cheering audience is welcome because it will enable people to judge the protagonists’ handling of the issues free from distraction. The live debate is important, too. The electors will see the leaders as they are; not after important elements of what they say is left on the cutting-room floor.

These debates could be a turning point in the evolution of the way election campaigns take place in Australia. Up to, say, 1975, the public meeting was the key campaigning tool. Since then, alas, demonstrators and wreckers have made public meetings impossible. The launch before hand-picked audiences and the National Press Club address by each leader became the critical elements. How much better to have head-to-head debates as the main campaign element! Debates provide a direct and immediate comparison, enabling the audience to make a better judgment.
Continue reading “1993_01_january_leader23”

AAustralians should not get too upset or defensive about the report (released last week 50 years after the event) by the Allied Commander-in-Chief for the South-West Pacific, General Sir Archibald Wavell, on the behaviour of Australian troops in the lead up to the fall of Singapore. The autobiographies, memos and reports of politicians and military “”leaders” are full of self-justifications and scapegoats. Indeed, the episode teaches us more about leadership (from the both the Australian and British perspective) than about a national traits of valour or cowardice. Would Montgomery have said similar things about the Australian Rats of Trobruk, whether true or false? Of course not. Montgomery was a leader. Let’s also bear in mind that Wavell was üAllied@ Commander-in-Chief. If he accuses Australian troops of cowardice, insubordination, rape and drunkenness, then it is an admission that troops under his command misbehaved. What does that say for his leadership? More likely, however, he was seeking a scapegoat for the Singapore fiasco. In doing that, it may have been as a result of having been put in an impossible position in the first place.

Clearly, the British High Command underestimated the likelihood of Japan entering the war and its strength once it had. Those on the receiving end in Singapore could hardly report back to their political and military bosses in London that those bosses were to blame. How much easier to blame those below, especially those of another nation, even if an ally, especially if that nation has a larrikin image anyway. Once again, it tells us more about Wavell’s lack of leadership than any national characteristics. The leadership failure was not solely within the British forces. The commander of the Australian troops in Singapore, Major-General Gordon Bennett does not come out unscathed. Questions will always remain about why he did not stay with his troops. Other commanders have been shot for less.

You wouldn’t see Montgomery or Monash behaving like Wavell or Bennett. Once again, a leadership question, not a question of nationality.
Continue reading “1993_01_january_leader17”

The proposal by the Minister for Sport, Wayne Berry, to change the ACT TAB from its present status as a Territory-owned corporation to a statutory authority seems without rhyme nor reason. He has stated it will make the body more accountable, but it is already accountable through the Territory-owned corporations legislation which gives the Chief Minister and relevant Minister one share each, the only shares. That status should be enough to ensure accountability.

Mr Berry has said it is ALP policy to bring some corporations under government control. If so, its application to the TAB a bad policy. Mr Berry surely cannot argue that the TAB will run more efficiently or profitably as a statutory authority. In its outing as a corporatisation it has performed exceptionally well, especially in the past year. In the past year its turnover went up 2.6 per cent and in the six months to December 31 it went up 7 per cent on the same period the previous years. Clearly the TAB is on a winning streak, and it would be dumb to change owners or trainers now. These are impressive figures in a recession, and they were made against stiff competition for the gambling dollar with the opening of the casino. It is inconceivable that bringing the TAB under more direct government control could improve this, the more so if it came under Mr Berry’s control. Mr Berry has not had an outstanding success in dealing with financial matters, as his form in hospital administration bears out.

One could only therefore speculate as to Mr Berry’s real motives. As a corporation, appointments to the board and the executive must be made on business merit. As a statutory authority Mr Berry would have a wider class of people to chose from _ namely anyone. Once before, Mr Berry made an appointment to a body that caused considerable unease among the professionals involved. That was an appointment to the Pharmacy Board. With that track record, people in the racing industry are rightly fearful of appointments Mr Berry might make to a TAB constituted as a statutory authority.
Continue reading “1993_01_january_leader8”

The Prime Minister, Paul Keating, has issued a defamation writ against the Opposition spokesman for the arts, Senator Michael Baume, over statements made on Melbourne radio.

The statements were concerning Mr Keating’s half share in the Brown and Hatton piggery.

The writ led the shadow attorney-general, Peter Costello, to say: “”Paul Keating has opened his election campaign with a stop writ.”
Continue reading “1993_01_january_keatsue”

The unemployment rate among New Zealanders in Australia is lower than average, but they are more likely to drink and smoke than the Australian-born, according to figures issued yesterday.

New Zealanders were more likely to drink and smoke than people from anywhere else. Several years ago, New Zealanders had a reputation of being more like to be unemployed than the average.

The Bureau of Immigration Research published the figures in its quarterly üImmigration Update.@ The figures put the New Zealand unemployment rate at 9.4 per cent compared to the Australian-born rate of 9.8. The overall rate is 11.4 per cent in November, and the December Bureau of Statistics figure is out on Thursday.
Continue reading “1993_01_january_immig”

The Industries Commission has debunked the view that urban in-fill will solve the problem of sprawling cities.

In a 350-page study it rejects many urban myths. It refutes the popular belief that new home-buyers and the poor are forced by cost to move to the fringe. Its surveys demonstrate that new home-buyers and the poor are well represented in core, middle, outer and fringe areas of Australian cities.

It shows that a move to more medium-density housing will not do much for efficient use of infra-structure or to stop urban sprawl.

The study is a response to questions put at the special Premiers’ Conference in 1991. At that conference it was suggested that Australian cities were too spread out and as a result electricity, water and sewerage were too expensive and used wastefully.

The Industries Commission study found, “”Not much land area can be saved just by a move to medium-density dwellings, given the relatively small share of the total urban area that dwellings occupy.”

It would take a long time to get a substantial impact and it would require reductions in green spaces, roads and other land uses which would be very costly. It would also require expensive replacement infrastructure.

Higher density would also cut private green space, necessitating more public green space.

The commission found there was not enough information about infrastructure costs, however, “”from the information available to it, the commission considers that urban fringe development is not heavily subsidised overall. Reforms would not have a major effect on fringe pricing so might not discourage fringe development.

None the less, there was still good reason for reform because averages can hide significant variations within different areas. Pricing should better reflect actual costs of land servicing. This would affect people’s buying and effect the pattern of land use for the better.

There was a range of tax and other influences which distorted people’s choice of where to live.

Stamp duty was a tax on mobility and interfered with efficient use of land. Capital gains exemption for the family home encouraged greater investment in housing and larger land holdings for the family home than would otherwise occur.

Land tax was not uniform: rental property was taxed; owner occupied usually not. Rural and government land was usually exempt. Local council rates were based on land values, not cost of services and had a wide range of concessions.

“”As a general rule, the commission favours neutrality in all the taxes and charges which affect land use and the provision of urban services,” the report, which came out last month, said. It thought social welfare was better delivered directly than through tax and charges.

In-fill has been cited as better environmentally than carving out new land at the fringe. However the commission said: “”The environmental effects of different forms of fringe development, or of further inner-city redevelopment, are difficult to define, and it is not very clear which generates the greater environmental costs.”

Some fringe development might cause water pollution problems, for example in the Hawkesbury-Nepean system in Sydney, but in-fill might mean bigger storm-water run-off which could be just as expensive and difficult to control.

The popular myth is that transport from outer areas is subsidised. The commission pointed out, however, that the web of regulation, restrictions on taxis and the monopolies given to buses in fact led to penalties to fringe dwellers who needed greater flexibility. They also increased private car ownership and use.

The commission said governments were not good or efficient developers of land. Government development might subsidise lower-income people, however, it was an inefficient way of doing it. Price stabilisation had not been achieved by government entry into land development.

“”People should be subsidised; not the place where they live or work,” the study said.

“”In sum, polices for urban settlements need to emphasise flexibility, and to conscript market mechanisms wherever possible. The issue is not urban consolidation vs fringe development, nor is it low versus medium density housing development. It is about what people want from their cities, and enabling them to express that in the clearest way possible: by paying for it, and getting what they pay for.”

In order for that to happen, more information was needed.

“”Public-sector providers of urban services should be required to compile and publish annually the costs, revenues and charging structures associated with development in different areas within their administration,” it said.

We now know why John Hewson has been so determined on the goods-and-services tax. He has been to Damascus and back.

A biography of Dr Hewson by Christine Wallace published last week tells us how Dr Hewson arranged his tax affairs while a consultant in 1985.

Dr Hewson’s tax arrangements, though perfectly legal, were a bit more complicated than a straight real-estate investment with negative gearing.
Continue reading “1993_01_january_hewson”

John Hewson has succumbed to the pressure of the opinion polls and his party colleagues and announced that he will make changes to the Coalition’s Fightback program. In doing so he treads a fine line between becoming “”just another politician”, bending like a reed in the face of the latest opinion polls and being seen as a responsive leader being flexible in the face of a changing political and economic climate. How he is ultimately seen at election time will depend very much on the extent and nature of the changes he makes to Fightback.

Fightback is a detailed policy, but it contains three essential elements: tax reform, industrial-relations reform and cutting public spending. The first of these present Dr Hewson with a greatest difficulty. The electorate has shown a remarkable lack of sophistication in its response to the Coalition’s tax reforms. It sees just a 15 per cent tax on the necessities of life. Full stop. Churches, welfare groups, people responding to polls, the Government and others have highlighted that single point, neglecting the other side of the equation. That is unfortunate, but it is the fact, and Dr Hewson would be wise to deal with it.
Continue reading “1992_12_december_leader10”

The High Court has firmly and justifiably wrapped the Government over the knuckles for its shabby treatment of boat people held in detention. The treatment was shabby because the Government passed a law two days before the Federal Court was to resume hearing a case in which 37 Cambodians sought release from custody after up to two years in custody. The law attempted to prevent the court from hearing the case.

The calamity was the Government’s own making. Successive Governments have been caught in a dilemma. If they create rigid rules and apply them strictly they are accused of heartless inflexibility. If they allow more discretion they are accused of favouritism and permitting uncertainty. In the past 10 years, the Government has had disadvantage of both horns of the dilemma as its policy jumped from one to the other and then back, largely attempting to please ethnic lobbies on one hand and economic and union concerns on the other.
Continue reading “1992_12_december_leader9”

Senator Graham has been a quiet man, publicly, since he resigned from the ministry in May. Last week, however, he gave a speech at the National Press Club to press gallery journalists. This is normally an off-the-record affair, but since Paul Keating used the same occasion to bucket his then leader, anyone speaking at it could reasonably expect their comments to be made public. Thus it was with Senator Richardson. His speech was less colourful and less personally directed, but its message was as important for the political survival of Paul Keating as Paul Keating’s was two year before. Essentially, Senator Richardson said it was not good enough for the Government to use negative scare tactics on the GST and industrial relations to win the next election. It must present a positive platform for a fifth term.

Senator Richardson is quite right. Though the polls indicate that Mr Keating has so far done well out of John Hewson’s messianic determination to lead his party across the Red Sea and into the promised land, it might not be enough. Voters, though mistrustful of Dr Hewson’s rigidity, his tax on the essentials of life and fearful of an industrial-relations climate where their jobs depend on a bosses whim, might still conclude next year that the messiah you don’t know is better than the devil you do. This is because economic conditions in Australia might get to such a pitiable state that desperate straws must be clutched at. In that environment scare tactics might not work because rational voters will conclude things cannot get any worse. Once negative scare tactics are removed the Government must look to presenting a positive program for a fifth term, because the alternative _ standing on its record _ is untenable for this Government.
Continue reading “1992_12_december_leader8”