Perhaps the lack of bold vision for Australia in the election campaign thus far can be understood by looking at what happened to Kevin Rudd. He was the last mainstream political leader to stand before the country making bold promises about the future, and look where he ended up.
John Howard may have been victim of a tired electorate looking for a change in 2007, but he was also hobbled by the thousand pin-pricks sustained in attacks by left-wingers on a range of issues.
The “Howard haters” were angry about the Iraq war, reconciliation, asylum seekers, and climate change. Rudd said he would do something about all of these. In what is now one of the great political parables about the dangers of overpromising, Rudd’s efforts in some of these areas would ultimately prove his undoing.
He brought the combat troops back from Iraq, ratified Kyoto, ended the Pacific Solution and apologised to the stolen generations.
Three years on and there is no global or local consensus on tackling climate change. Asylum seekers arriving by boat are a hot political issue again, and something very like the Pacific Solution is likely to make a return. Rudd revealed in his first “closing the gap” speech outlining progress on reconciliation, the day-to-day problems facing Australia’s indigenous people have changed little.
And as the bodycount mounts in Afghanistan, some of the same old noises about the fight against the Taliban being “not our war” have been resurfacing in the more radical – and I don’t mean that pejoratively, it’s a valid opinion to hold – corners of the blogosphere.
This isn’t to suggest grand gestures like ratifying Kyoto and the apology are of no consequence. They do matter. They can make powerful statements about national identity, leadership and courage.
The apology was a significant moment in the Australian story and something deeply meaningful to those affected. Signing Kyoto got Australia inside the tent on climate change. (And yes, once inside we got ratf**ked by those Chinese f**kers, as Rudd himself so memorably said.)
It was his inability to deliver on climate change action that started Rudd’s ratings slide. In his final appearance on the 7.30 Report Rudd protested non-stop about his government’s tough approach to reform.
This belligerence about being a government tackling the big challenges has been replaced by Gillard’s more conciliatory leadership style. So far at least, there have been no sweeping reform programs announced, no commitments to change the country – just to move it forward.
In short, it appears Gillard is keen to avoid Rudd’s mistake of promising too much.
But where are the voices agitating for the traditional left issues in this campaign?
The signal issue in this is on asylum seekers. Where are the powerful voices seeking an end to mandatory detention? Progressive activist group GetUp! hasn’t issued a media release on the matter for weeks.
What about MPs who object to offshore processing? Why aren’t they out there complaining that the official stated policy of both Australian political parties involves mandatory detention?
The obvious answer is that Labor in particular is happy for The Greens to seek out the fringe of voters and then mop up their preferences under their deal. GetUp! is about to mount a campaign on pricing carbon, but there is no sign yet that either major party is prepared to do something bold on environment policy
That’s because there’s no longer any sense of urgency on the issue.
Between Tampa in 2001 and Rudd’s election in 2007 there has been a consistent group of bleeding hearts – again, not a pejorative – advocating for the interests of asylum seekers, seeking action on the environment and changes in Australia’s defence arrangements.
This pressure built on Howard over years and he tried to manage it. He announced an emissions trading scheme and proposed a referendum to recognise indigenous Australians in the Constitution.
But the progressives were joined by a jaded electorate, and the dam burst. Voters turned to Rudd as leader who promised to deliver on key concerns of the louder elements of the progressive establishment.
Where are they now?
There’s not much time left for them to make a mark on this campaign.
Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day
Get The Punch on Facebook
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it
An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…
Our special forces don’t always need special treatment
We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…
A good holiday is about unrest, not rest
Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
Michael S says:
"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone
Change Up! says:
I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]Gentle jabs to the ribs
They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more
Most commented