Shorten SSM speech

The Prime Minister was in a hurry to move on from marriage equality this week. Having declared he would be too busy to actually campaign for a Yes vote in either a proper plebiscite — an option that was knocked off by lunchtime Wednesday — or the junk mail survey, he wanted to get onto more substantive issues. The actual details of the ABS’ mega marriage survey had not been — still have not been — resolved, but Turnbull, doubtless conscious of the criticism that obsessing over marriage equality made it look like the government was out of touch with voters, wanted to get on with other things.

The first was to address electricity prices, on the back of summoning power company executives to Canberra. The result of the meeting was up there with the Rudd government’s early initiatives on fuel and grocery prices — half-arsed ideas around making sure consumers would find it easier to shop around. If Fuelwatch etc under Rudd was the product of the era of High Neoliberalism, when governments of all stripes thought it heretical to ever intervene in any market anywhere, Turnbull’s version was more reflective of the grim reality that no intervention was going to conjure lower power prices. Turnbull, after all, has already shown he’s moved into the Post Neoliberalism era by intervening directly in gas markets. He lacks no willingness to intervene if it will produce a result. But there’d be little point in following the Greens’ suggestion about capping power prices. That would just lead to rationing, because there’s an actual supply problem created by the Coalition’s policy uncertainty of recent years.

Nonetheless, the government has to be seen to be Doing Something on power prices, and Wednesday’s effort was fine as far as it went and certainly won’t do any harm.

So did this herald the start of a government shift back to talking about what Nick Greiner, back in his heyday, would label “bread-and-butter issues”? Yeah, not quite. Yesterday was “Jail Bill Shorten Day” as Turnbull and his Employment Minister Michaelia “Chuckles” Cash expressed their pleasure about the passage of legislation outlawing “improper” payments from businesses to unions, the entire purpose of which appeared to be so Turnbull and Cash could say that, had such laws been in place over a decade ago, the Opposition Leader might have been jailed.

[The surprisingly quick death of neoliberalism in Australia is underway]

This is the latest iteration of a long-running Get Shorten campaign. The Coalition hoped its trade union royal commission would destroy him, but apart from denting his never-spectacular popularity with voters for a few months and embarrassing him over some years-late political donations — something that’s a little hard for the Liberal Party to ever complain about — it didn’t do much. Since then we’ve had the brief campaign (in which Turnbull was alleged to have rediscovered his mojo) to frame Shorten as some hypocritical friend of the rich, quaffing champagne with millionaires rather than representing workers; there’s also the ongoing attempt to portray Shorten as an extreme left-winger, an Antipodean Jeremy Corbyn waiting to usher in socialism and burn businesses to the ground. 

With none of these efforts successful, we’re back to the “Shorten was corrupt” stuff. And hell, maybe it will work — after all, Donald Trump talked about putting his opponent in jail and he won, so perhaps Turnbull will win too. But at a time of growing alienation and disaffection toward politics as usual in the electorate, does the government’s brains trust really think talking about Bill Shorten, and chucking him in jail, is going to signal that it is in touch with what’s important to the community?

This is the error the Gillard government made about Tony Abbott. Abbott was so manifestly unsuited for the prime ministership, Labor thought, that it was unbelievable that the electorate took him seriously. The ALP thought that if only it constantly pointed out his flaws, the electorate would see them. In fact, the electorate knew perfectly well Abbott was a dud, which was why he was never popular with the electorate — but Labor, which was busily tearing itself apart, was far worse. Sound familiar?

Shorten wasn’t especially interested in the corruption stuff. Nor was he quite as ready to move on from marriage equality as his opponent. Instead, there was something he wanted to hang around Turnbull’s neck: responsibility for every offensive comment and vile smear made against LGBTI Australians by marriage equality opponents in the course of the coming campaign. In question time, Labor had pointedly and repeatedly asked Turnbull whether the usual protections around campaign materials would exist; Turnbull reluctantly confirmed they would not by talking about telecommunications legislation instead (kudos to the PMO for crafting the lamest possible answer on that one).

[Howzat: how the tide turns when unionists wear cricket whites]

Shorten then used the Matter of Public Importance debate to reveal Labor’s attitude to the junk mail survey — sympathy with the view that it should be thrown in the bin, but a determination to campaign for a positive outcome. His speech was full of pointed — and very on-point — barbs at Turnbull. Unlike Turnbull, Shorten said, “I will be campaigning for a Yes vote. I will do my bit, and I encourage people to join the movement for marriage equality, because no true leader is every too busy to fight for a fair go in this country.”

And he took aim at the moment Turnbull’s judgment deserted him on Tuesday when he uttered the one phrase strong leaders never need utter: “I’m a strong leader.” Strong leaders, according to Shorten, “prove it with their actions. By acting on their convictions, by fighting for what they believe in, even by taking a political risk. Strong leaders lead — they don’t stand by and allow children of same-sex couples to be treated as pawns.”

Overnight, the government realised how exposed it was on the issue of allowing the campaign to proceed without the usual protections of elections, and was offering to legislate to provide them. But Shorten had used the issue to contrast himself in every way with the Prime Minister. No wonder Turnbull wants to jail him — at this rate, it’s the only thing that will give the government a chance.