You could look at the current contest between the Albanese Government and the Taylor Canavan Opposition as being a battle of pragmatism against populism.
The opposition, who constantly criticizes the government’s economic ineptitude, called for a reduction of the fuel tax a week ago. The Coalition did propose offsets. However, many economists viewed this policy as being counterproductive.
However, the opposition was aware that it would prove popular – and so did the government who, a few days later, announced a reduction.
In a completely different context, Don Farrell Special Minister of state had been having discussions over the summer with Liberals and Nationals regarding his proposal for expanding the size of parliament.
Although some Liberals privately supported the idea, others were skeptical. The Nationals led by David Littleproud favored it.
After Matt Canavan was elected Nationals Leader, the right-wing group Advance began to campaign against this idea. This has many merits once you look past the initial reaction.
Canavan and Angus Taylor attacked the plan this week. The two were playing on pure populism, as people dislike politicians.
Albanese publicly killed the idea in Parliament within hours, believing it would bring him only political pain. He implied that he was a fool to continue with it. On Thursday, he said that the discussion would have not been “healthy” for democracy and it would be over without any change.
Albanese, in the process of removing the superannuation legislation of Chalmers, threw under the bus one of his senior ministers, much like what he had done earlier with Jim Chalmers.
It’s a good thing for the prime minister that these ministers don’t behave like Paul Keating, who didn’t accept Hawke’s criticism of policy. Chalmers may sulk, but he remains calm in public. Farrell is a hard-headed factional man who just accepts the situation.
Albanese will use his pragmatic, cautious approach in dealing with the crisis that is most likely going to be his worst during his tenure as prime minister.
The prime minister left most of the work to Chris Bowen, Energy Minister. A week ago the Prime Minister changed his approach, as the crisis worsened. On Monday the National Cabinet met and announced that it would be cutting excise taxes, along with other emergency measures.
Albanese has a multi-faceted strategy. Where possible, get ahead of the crises.
Show that you are responding. While warning of the dangers, try to keep the community calm. Bring the public with you.
Albanese was preoccupied by communication, which led to his address on Wednesday night. The purpose was to get the public’s attention.
However, since Albanese is so well-known, it becomes more difficult for him to “cut through”.
As expected, certain sections of media have criticized the speech. Overthinking it is not the answer. The message was to assure people that they should enjoy a typical Easter while also realistically predicting difficult months in the future. It was intended to reassure people by suggesting ways to conserve fuel. (Just take what you need and use public transportation where possible) This would benefit those who drive, such as farmers, tradesmen, nurses, etc.
Albanese is trying to dispel fears that the country will soon be in a COVID like situation, with extreme restrictions placed on everyday life. The “r”-word, rationing is something he has avoided (so much) because it’s seen to have overtones similar to the COVID locksdown.
The comparisons between COVID and COVID tend to be irrational.
COVID had a completely different feel. The current crisis may be an economic one, with uncertainty and dangers for people. But COVID is a matter of life and death.
There have been fuel crisis before, but COVID was unprecedented.
In terms of the number of lives that were saved, Australia’s actions during the pandemic were viewed as positive in comparison to other countries. Many people now view the Australian response as being wrongheaded, especially in the light of the long-lasting effects the pandemic has had on the young.
In his speech to the National Press Club on Thursday, PM Abe made another attempt to communicate from a high platform. His declaration that fuel shortages would not stop the government from pursuing reforms in the budget of May 12 was notable.
Chalmers talked about his plans to utilize the budget for tax reforms and other improvements. Many questioned, however, whether Albanese would abandon this initiative due to new circumstances.
The prime minister stated on Thursday that this budget would “be our government’s biggest and most ambitious yet.” “It has to be.”
It is necessary to always implement economic reforms that boost productivity, reduce inflation, and improve living standards. In times like this of unpredictability, it’s urgent.
These words may comfort Chalmers, but they are also a benchmark for budget evaluation. Chalmers said that the budget would be completed later than normal.
A plan that puts Australia’s long-term fuel supply on a more solid footing should either be included in the budget or addressed separately, but urgently. Australia only has a one-month supply of fuel in reserve. This is much lower than other countries.
We are now down to just two refineries. Albanese, when asked to elaborate on the long-term plans to ensure fuel security in the future, said that the government will consider the measures “in an appropriate way”, but pointed out the high cost associated with a 90-day reserve (our obligation to our international partners).
Iran’s war showed how our position could be easily compromised. It’s not worth thinking about how our supply chain would be affected by a Pacific conflict. Any “reform” plan must include a comprehensive, detailed and credible fuel strategy.
