|
March 22, 2008
In his 'One thousand days' article in The Australian David Burchell argues that there seems to be - at least on the basis of the public record - a serious strategy deficit in the Rudd Government. He says:
There is a series of initiatives in particular policy areas. Many of them are worthwhile and long overdue; some of them (the seemingly endless list of ritual inquiries into petrol prices, the rental market and the like) are fairly superficial in character. But there's no obvious guiding thread linking them together into a general rationale for Labor governance in the complex and paradoxical environment of today's Australia.
Maybe. On the one hand, there are lots of reviews and spin. On the other hand, there is co-operative federalism, health reform and addressing climate change. So how how does Burchell argue his case?
It is a strange argument. He rightly argues that Australia needs policy that's integrated, not facing in different directions. He then links this to the political persona of Rudd. Burchell says that:
This sense of strategic deficit seems to be reflected in the curiously Janus-faced public image Rudd has been crafting for himself lately. At one moment it appears the PM is the father of the nation, articulating our sense of regret. At the next he's the diligent but passionless accountant of the nation's books, stressing one more time his essential economic conservatism. But here's the trick. It seems he's always one or other of these figures: never both at the same time. He's the altar boy or the accountant, but rarely a figure of rigour and compassion simultaneously.
Burchell says that these points are not simply a problem of political style. As it stands, the Government's education revolution is almost the embodiment of Rudd's Janus-faced public personality.
One the one hand this is a so-called revolution based on doling out public funds to families, indiscriminately, to subsidise their home computer use. On the other hand it relies on a series of warm-hearted but disconnected instincts about increased funds for disadvantaged schools. Yet all the while a much more radical and integrated approach to the sector as a whole is clearly in order.
Does this Janus flaw apply to health, broadband or climate change? Burchell does not say. Education is the sole policy example he uses to make his case. Hence my judgement above of maybe.
Burchell ends by warning:
A Labor government will generally be no better than the guiding conception of itself with which it sets out on its journey. And governments that begin without a crystal-clear sense of direction are liable to drift ever further from the path. In short, Labor in government needs to define its strategy and vision far more clearly than it has so far. Soon enough it will be too late.
Does Rudd Labor lack a clear sense of direction as Burchell implies? I would suggest that the sign posts have been constructed by the Bracks Government in Victoria and the Bligh Government in Queensland----moderate reform (National Reform Agenda) within a globalized economy.
|
You say:
He rightly argues that Australia needs policy that's integrated
The 2020 summit is a good example of the fragmented approach. Each suggestion could be flagged to one and only one topic, rather than "this idea relates to domains x,y and z" (e.g. economics, infrastructure, environment, and rural life)