Extract from The Guardian
Strategy should do for politics what shapewear does for fashion –
stay out of sight but provide a smoother and more impressive look. That
didn’t happen this week
Political
strategy is not supposed to make the headlines. It’s supposed to do for
politics what “body-sculpting” undergarments do for fashion – remain
out of sight but leave the end result looking smoother and more
impressive.
But this week the Coalition’s strategy was discussed more than its actual announcements.
Every news report about the $39bn future shipbuilding program said it was an attempt to shore up the Coalition’s vote in South Australia, where polling suggests it could lose three seats. This framing exacerbated anger in other would-be shipbuilding states. The headline in the West Australian read “Up Ship Creek – WA shipbuilders snubbed as SA gets defence contract”. Victoria’s premier, Daniel Andrews, said 1,000 jobs were being sacrificed in his state to save the education minister Christopher Pyne’s political hide.
Tony Abbott was wearing his political Spanx on the outside.
Liberal MPs see timing, as well as geographic significance, in the all-too obvious tactics. Saturday marks six months since the February leadership spill motion – when Abbott asked for six months to improve the party’s standing. Inconveniently, the slight improvement in the party’s polling since then was being blown away in the downdraft from Bronwyn Bishop’s chopper, and many Liberals saw a deliberate attempt to try to engineer some reasonable polls in time for the resumption of parliament next week.
Morale is low and anger rising again about poor, unilateral, poll-driven decision-making in the prime minister’s office. No one knows which way he’ll go on the sensitive decisions on a party room discussion on same-sex marriage. On the issue of greenhouse gas targets, word is that some in cabinet are mounting the strategy-over-substance argument that even if the Coalition adopts a tough target they won’t get political credit. Many question the prime minister’s judgment.
Stories about how and why policies are made, about tactics and insider fights and personalities are not new. Political strategists call them “process stories”. But now the process stories are undermining the message.
In an interview with Guardian Australia, the Liberal pollster Mark Textor described the “delicate balance” for strategists deciding when to deal with process stories instead of pushing on with the simple, continually repeated political message.
“Many people say ignore the gallery … which is a mistake,” he said. “Others say you have to respond, you can’t let a story go on. The truth is somewhere between those two.
“The press gallery plays an important role in telling people whether someone is politically competent, the process stories can highlight campaign deficiencies or inconsistencies in the message or the policies behind the message. And people use those signals, from someone such as yourself, to say there’s something here I need to look into further.”
He probably didn’t mean it that way but I take that as a challenge.
Tony Abbott’s current political message, you may have noticed, is that he is very concerned about “jobs and growth”. He used the phrase six times in 32 seconds in a press conference on Thursday. The “narrative” is similar to the one Crosby Textor crafted in the UK – of a government dedicated to policies that help individuals and businesses who want to “get ahead” and navigate the economic insecurities around them.
Abbott has been on-message with trademark tireless repetition. “Ships means jobs, roads means jobs, freer trade means jobs,” he said on Friday, hammering home the direct relationship with an insistence not seen since Heinz claimed the beans market.
I’m sure creating jobs is his desire, and with about 800,000 Australians without work, that’s a good thing. But here’s a process story raising a few “inconsistencies” in the message.
The Coalition has always argued the best way to boost growth and employment is to lower taxes, loosen workplace laws and cut government spending. But they’re not doing much of any of those things. Tax talks with state premiers don’t look like they’re going anywhere fast and workplace changes proposed by the Productivity Commission were treated like low-grade hazardous material.
Others argue in favour of help for new, smart businesses, which is what the prime minister was talking about when he announced a new innovation centre for Geelong – except he was standing beside his local MP, Sarah Henderson, who has openly questioned her own government’s policy on renewable energy, which is costing smart new jobs in her electorate.
Some see a role for government support to underpin industries and jobs. The Abbott government used not to believe in that. They used to believe in an end to “corporate welfare”. When the car industry announced it was departing Australia (including from plants in Geelong) Abbott said that was life, that “some jobs end, other jobs start”. That sentiment apparently didn’t apply to his own job, because now, behind in the polls, he has announced the biggest spending project in our history, aimed exactly at the areas where he is doing worst politically.
Some argue that the unemployed, especially the growing numbers of young long-term unemployed, need more help to break into the jobs market. But the government cut the $320m Youth Connections program in its first budget before implementing a new $212m program in its second. And while it gave up on the six-month wait-for-the-dole idea from its first budget, it is pressing ahead with a four-week wait for under-25s, apparently based on the same assumption – that the problem is young people not being willing to work, instead of there being not enough jobs available to them.
There are in fact many “inconsistencies of message” behind the “jobs and growth” sloganeering.
Perhaps if there was an actual jobs and growth plan, instead of a series of panicky-looking marginal seats announcements, Tony Abbott wouldn’t need so much obvious “strategy” to sell it.
But this week the Coalition’s strategy was discussed more than its actual announcements.
Every news report about the $39bn future shipbuilding program said it was an attempt to shore up the Coalition’s vote in South Australia, where polling suggests it could lose three seats. This framing exacerbated anger in other would-be shipbuilding states. The headline in the West Australian read “Up Ship Creek – WA shipbuilders snubbed as SA gets defence contract”. Victoria’s premier, Daniel Andrews, said 1,000 jobs were being sacrificed in his state to save the education minister Christopher Pyne’s political hide.
Tony Abbott was wearing his political Spanx on the outside.
Liberal MPs see timing, as well as geographic significance, in the all-too obvious tactics. Saturday marks six months since the February leadership spill motion – when Abbott asked for six months to improve the party’s standing. Inconveniently, the slight improvement in the party’s polling since then was being blown away in the downdraft from Bronwyn Bishop’s chopper, and many Liberals saw a deliberate attempt to try to engineer some reasonable polls in time for the resumption of parliament next week.
Morale is low and anger rising again about poor, unilateral, poll-driven decision-making in the prime minister’s office. No one knows which way he’ll go on the sensitive decisions on a party room discussion on same-sex marriage. On the issue of greenhouse gas targets, word is that some in cabinet are mounting the strategy-over-substance argument that even if the Coalition adopts a tough target they won’t get political credit. Many question the prime minister’s judgment.
Stories about how and why policies are made, about tactics and insider fights and personalities are not new. Political strategists call them “process stories”. But now the process stories are undermining the message.
In an interview with Guardian Australia, the Liberal pollster Mark Textor described the “delicate balance” for strategists deciding when to deal with process stories instead of pushing on with the simple, continually repeated political message.
“Many people say ignore the gallery … which is a mistake,” he said. “Others say you have to respond, you can’t let a story go on. The truth is somewhere between those two.
“The press gallery plays an important role in telling people whether someone is politically competent, the process stories can highlight campaign deficiencies or inconsistencies in the message or the policies behind the message. And people use those signals, from someone such as yourself, to say there’s something here I need to look into further.”
He probably didn’t mean it that way but I take that as a challenge.
Tony Abbott’s current political message, you may have noticed, is that he is very concerned about “jobs and growth”. He used the phrase six times in 32 seconds in a press conference on Thursday. The “narrative” is similar to the one Crosby Textor crafted in the UK – of a government dedicated to policies that help individuals and businesses who want to “get ahead” and navigate the economic insecurities around them.
Abbott has been on-message with trademark tireless repetition. “Ships means jobs, roads means jobs, freer trade means jobs,” he said on Friday, hammering home the direct relationship with an insistence not seen since Heinz claimed the beans market.
I’m sure creating jobs is his desire, and with about 800,000 Australians without work, that’s a good thing. But here’s a process story raising a few “inconsistencies” in the message.
The Coalition has always argued the best way to boost growth and employment is to lower taxes, loosen workplace laws and cut government spending. But they’re not doing much of any of those things. Tax talks with state premiers don’t look like they’re going anywhere fast and workplace changes proposed by the Productivity Commission were treated like low-grade hazardous material.
Others argue in favour of help for new, smart businesses, which is what the prime minister was talking about when he announced a new innovation centre for Geelong – except he was standing beside his local MP, Sarah Henderson, who has openly questioned her own government’s policy on renewable energy, which is costing smart new jobs in her electorate.
Some see a role for government support to underpin industries and jobs. The Abbott government used not to believe in that. They used to believe in an end to “corporate welfare”. When the car industry announced it was departing Australia (including from plants in Geelong) Abbott said that was life, that “some jobs end, other jobs start”. That sentiment apparently didn’t apply to his own job, because now, behind in the polls, he has announced the biggest spending project in our history, aimed exactly at the areas where he is doing worst politically.
Some argue that the unemployed, especially the growing numbers of young long-term unemployed, need more help to break into the jobs market. But the government cut the $320m Youth Connections program in its first budget before implementing a new $212m program in its second. And while it gave up on the six-month wait-for-the-dole idea from its first budget, it is pressing ahead with a four-week wait for under-25s, apparently based on the same assumption – that the problem is young people not being willing to work, instead of there being not enough jobs available to them.
There are in fact many “inconsistencies of message” behind the “jobs and growth” sloganeering.
Perhaps if there was an actual jobs and growth plan, instead of a series of panicky-looking marginal seats announcements, Tony Abbott wouldn’t need so much obvious “strategy” to sell it.
No comments:
Post a Comment