I watched Barnaby Joyce’s recent Sky News Australia interview with Andrew Bolt in dismay.
Not because of its widely (dare we say, eagerly) quoted status as a ‘train wreck’, but rather I fear this uncomfortable exchange will once again derail the long-lost political habit of evolutionary policy.
That is … policy tested and refined in the ruckus of the public forum rather than being edited in the seedy half-lit rooms of some anonymous focus group.
I would much prefer a policy to survive two years of scrutiny before being taken to an election than one released on the eve polling booths close.
Everyone knows that in recent decades, politicians have made an art out of avoiding answering questions. ‘Pretend you heard a different question!’ is not a joke, it’s the preferred coping mechanism of poorly informed MPs and Senators. Even Prime Ministers and Treasurers.
The best way to avoid a masthead calling you out for lying, misleading, or ‘changing your position’ is to say nothing of significance. Motherhood statements and vague aspirations cannot be blamed for failing to manifest. They had no definition to begin with. No verifiable purpose. At best, they are modelling fantasies that undergo electoral amnesia as soon as the votes are cast.
Everyone in business knows the difference in communication between the salesman and the tech guy trying to deliver the project. One sounds convincing, the other is believable. It is an important distinction.
Think about it.
What does an ‘Australian value’ look like when it’s written into policy? No one knows. And no one is going to find out because it’s a vibe, not a policy.
This is not only a Labor problem. The Coalition do it too.
It was only a few weeks ago that I lost an hour of my life listening to the Shadow Treasurer refuse to answer why he doesn’t use the term ‘mass migration’. The poor journalist tried to prompt him. To no avail. In my view, the entire press conference was a waste of time and I closed the video none the wiser about what the Liberals wish to offer me, personally, as a voter.
The Liberals need to realise that if they’re not offering handouts (like Labor) then they have to present tangible things, such as tax cuts and genuine changes to employment law.
Every time someone tries to corner the Liberals on economic detail, we are told the election is still two years away. It’s too soon for policy. They do not know what the economic mess will be so there are no firm plans.
Well, I’m sorry, but it’s too late for this sort of politics. I was told once, and I have no idea if it’s true, that conservatives keep their policy cards close to their chest until late in the election cycle to stop rival parties stealing their ideas. Aside from this being unforgivably dumb, it comes with the side effect of no one knowing what those ideas are.
Say what you like about One Nation, but at least there is something in writing to argue about.
Which brings us to Barnaby Joyce’s interview about a brand new One Nation housing policy regarding non-citizens owning property. Joyce either made a mistake, wasn’t sure, or the policy was adapted after criticism. He rang his party leader, Pauline Hanson, to clarify. Then he issued a correction.
Oh no! Drag the scaffolds over! How can you trust One Nation!
As the Liberals like to remind us, we are two years out from an election and this is a policy in development.
‘This shows a couple of things,’ said Andrew Bolt, after the interview was aired.
‘One Nation is literally making up policy as it goes along, and the second, Joyce initially assumed One Nation’s policy on non-citizens owning property here was the most extreme interpretation of Hanson’s ambiguous statement. And my moral dilemma? Well, I could have played you the calls that Barnaby made in our studio to clarify things and got a big media splash and lots of clicks. But that of course, would be unfair to Barnaby, I had indicated our interview was over. On the other hand, I could have saved Barnaby some embarrassment with some editing … but then I would not have been straight with you. So showing what I’ve shown, let the chips fall where they may, and you can decide for yourself, is One Nation ready for government?’
Read the comments where this clip is posted. The ‘chips’ fell with the former fish and chips shop owner, with people praising One Nation for having a policy, and with Barnaby for doing the right thing and clarifying. It’s something an honest person would do, rather than meaningless waffle we’re used to from major party politicians.
After all, you can’t ‘correct’ something if you have nothing to say.
To explore policy for a moment, Australians at large support the global standard of restricting homeownership. Our lax laws have disadvantaged Australians and there is a very real problem to solve. Would we need to have this discussion if it wasn’t for Labor and the Coalition’s reckless mass migration policies? No. But here we are. Winding back the clock is not easy and remains up for discussion. These are real people we are talking about, whether they are Australians or not. I suspect the best way forward is to shut the gate and then go after foreign companies and citizens who own property but are not permanent residents. See how that works. If more is needed, look at short-stay permanent residents with the obvious exclusions on those who have been here five years or more. The issue will sort itself out eventually with residents either returning to their country or origin, becoming citizens, or transitioning into rentals.
As for those politicians having a crack at Barnaby, glass houses, warned several commentators. Those who dismiss the Paris Agreement as a ‘piece of paper’ can have nothing to say on this. Nor can political parties who misled the entire nation on tax policy at the previous election. These are errors orders of magnitude worse than a policy wobble.
I have a theory that detail-avoidance behaviour, common to most Western politicians, evolved to cope with an increasingly powerful centralised press. The media can, and does, have influence over the democratic process, although they are being forced to share that power with billions of online voices on social media.
There are plenty of incentives to turn a politician’s awkward answer into a viral click-fest. Between video clips and the dozens of articles it spawns, money is made from the spectacle of a flailing politician.
Politics has always had an element of spectacle.
It is why those with charisma and charm rise above the sensible and smart.
However, politicians are human and the parties, particularly conservative ones, are paranoid.
The ABC’s presence as an apex predator in Australia’s media landscape probably has a lot to do with the meek, de-balled, intellectually shallow pool of so-called ‘talent’ that we’ve been stuck with for far too long. These are the political leaders who, in the past, have either avoided or had to be dragged to public election debates.
In summary, it is perfectly fair play to parade Barnaby’s mistake from one side of the news cycle to the other. He is a veteran political figure and he can handle it. I am not worried about Barnaby.
What worries me is that this public flogging will scare off his younger and less experienced peers who need to be blooded in the public square to hone their skills and – finally – start to rebuild that old Westminster tradition of robust political debate.
The quality of policy will never improve if it is never debated.
And so, I hope this is written off as growing pains for One Nation, because they are building something new and they carry with them the last hope of millions of conservative voters who have nowhere else to turn.
Flat White is written by Alexandra Marshall. If you would like to support her work, shout her a coffee over at donor-box.
