Terror talk drowns out debate

bunch of business bigwigs were in town this week for a host of regular talkfests. That’s not unusual for Canberra, of course, but the headline events were not the main subject of discussion.

“Is debate any longer possible in this country,” asked one executive despairingly on the sidelines of one of the conferences.

His lament was about the state of Federal politics and the goings-on in the the big house on top of Capital Hill.

This fellow was complaining about the timidity caused (ironically) by the aggression in politics; that if anyone ventured beyond the doorstep on certain topics, they’d lose their toes or be kneecapped.

A hot topic among some of the executives was industrial relations. One even dared to complain to a Government figure about the lack of movement on this front.

He didn’t expect the answer he got. “You should go out and prosecute the case yourself,” the Government figure told him.

The intimation was that the business community had more credibility than the coalition would on the subject.

In reality, the Government has spooked itself on IR, as if it constantly fears the son of WorkChoices will come crashing through the cupboard like some stiff from a Hammer House of Horror flick.

From the WA perspective, this should worry both sides of politics. Future coalition and Labor governments will be reliant on a pipeline of projects in the State, yet without a new pact on IR, it won’t happen.

Aside from Prelude and Browse there is nothing substantial in prospect in the oil and gas sector.

“Help us help you” is not an especially new refrain. Every government gets annoyed one time or another about the business community not making some of its advocacy public.

It’s amusing to remember, for example, the previous Labor government fuming at the Business Council of Australia not voicing support for the emissions trading scheme.

Timidity on reform and debate phobia means there is a whole lot more focus on fewer things.

This has thrown up mixed results for Tony Abbott and Bill Shorten.

The Prime Minister, who has been vigorously yanking on the national security lever, goes into the six-week parliamentary winter recess having had a good fortnight. In fact, compared with Shorten, Abbott has had an excellent fortnight.

Thanks to some nifty negotiation by Mathias Cormann, Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg, combined with Labor capitulation on fuel excise and a couple of other Budget measures, the Government has secured $14 billion in savings.

Abbott wants to be seen as getting things done. The FTA with China, the pension plan, the small business tax cut and instant asset write-off have all been finalised or legislated in the past fortnight. But Abbott’s political focus has rarely been far from national security.

Despite a mucky development, the citizenship changes emerged in a shape largely acceptable to legal eagles. Take a bow Malcolm Turnbull.

The relentless pursuit of photo opps to accompany the khaki narrative got downright silly when Abbott turned up at ASIO headquarters to peruse maps of where terror suspects are living.

And Abbott dialled it to 11 when he asked the ABC “Whose side are you on” for allowing a convicted terrorist to ask a question on the Q&A program.

Let’s be clear: the ABC made a serious mistake giving a live microphone to a peanut-brained cretin such as Zaky Mallah but the use of such McCarthyist language is another instance of Abbott overreach, coming just a week after accusing the ALP of “rolling out the red carpet” for terrorists.

Given the current climate, it was also unfortunate that Abbott should express his jihad on the national broadcaster yesterday by declaring that “heads should roll” over the Q&A incident.

National security has been a difficult subject for Labor. Abbott’s manoeuvres have caused bipartisanship to creak and moan. Cracks have emerged.

But some of Shorten’s problems are more ancient than Islamic State’s rise. Whether he likes it or not, and to use the phrase he employed midweek, he is the part-time curator of the Labor museum.

Both Shorten and Abbott are Act Three in the Kevin Rudd-Julia Gillard tragedy and Shorten must help shape it, lest Abbott retells it all his way.

Of all the speeches delivered this year, the Opposition Leader gave one of the most significant when he rose on Wednesday to announce Labor would support emergency legislation to ensure offshore detention wasn’t unravelled by High Court decree.

Shorten used the opportunity to acknowledge the terrible mistakes made by Labor in the past on asylum seeker boats while asserting part-ownership of the arrangements reached with Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

Equally audacious, given Labor’s awful record, was when Shorten said the loss of 600 lives at sea was attributable to the coalition and the Greens when they voted down the Malaysian people-swap deal in 2011.

“We will never forget the deal that the Liberals and the Greens did, teaming up to defeat the Malaysia arrangement,” Shorten said.

“And we will never forget the 689 lives that were lost after that vote. My fear is that the truth is, the coalition opposed the Malaysia arrangement...not because they thought it would not work. They opposed it precisely because they were afraid that it would work.”

Shorten urged the Government not to take Labor’s support lightly and stop baiting the Opposition or questioning its sincerity.

“When you feel like taking a shot at us to pull some lever, to push some focus message, to bring out the lesser angels of the Australian nature, all I say to you is: remember this moment because every person over our side will,” he said.

“I will ask that we should make a decision that the moment of co-operation here could be a turning point in our national debate.

“These decisions are not reached easily. I understand that. But I can ask all of us, including the Government, no more dehumanising, inflammatory language.

“No more false bravado and faux toughness. Let us no more use the world’s most vulnerable people as a prop for politics.”

A strong speech in an otherwise ghastly fortnight for Shorten.