As voters struggle to achieve their modest goals, they can be excused for feeling resentment rather than motivation
There’s a reason why the cohort of voters colloquially known as “Howard’s battlers” have a semi-mythical status in contemporary Australian politics.
This group of working and lower-middle class Australians had
traditionally voted Labor, but for much of Howard’s reign they kept the
plain-talking and mostly uninspiring PM in office. This group was also
instrumental in Howard’s end when it flocked back to Kevin Rudd and
Labor in 2007.
Howard had little of the charisma or gravitas of his previous prime ministers, but he was a canny political operator who knew how to connect with the majority of voters who made up working class and middle Australia. It would be an oversimplification to say his appeal was grounded in those voters aspiring to do better in life, but that desire nevertheless played a significant part in the former PM’s success.
That’s why, a decade later, a very different Liberal prime minister is trying to tap into a similar group of voters to revive his political fortunes. It’s also why his opponent is trying to use the very same group to bring the PM down.
Even before Labor’s deputy leader Tanya Plibersek mentioned in an interview last week that the term “aspiration” was a mystery to her, Malcolm Turnbull and his ministers had been accusing Labor of denying workers the motivational benefits of personal income tax cuts and trumpeting that only the Coalition understood the aspirations of such everyday Australians.
“Stick with me if you want to get ahead”, the PM was essentially promising voters.
"The opposition couches its approach in terms of equity and fairness rather than resentment. But the effect is the same"
The difficulty for Malcolm Turnbull is that aspiration ain’t what it used to be. Despite their aspirations, working and middle class voters haven’t seen a decent pay rise since before the Coalition regained office in 2013. There are more than a million Australian workers with fine aspirations who are underemployed. And the once traditional aspiration of owning a home is now out of reach for most of the middle class voters working in and around the nation’s biggest cities.
Under these circumstances, an aspiration to get ahead could prove to be a source of frustration and resentment rather than motivation. Considered in this way, we can see why Labor is deploying the “politics of envy” to combat the Coalition – just as Turnbull is trying to ignite and tap into positive energy from Australia’s motivated aspirationals, Shorten is hoping to draw on the negative energy of those who are resentful about not being able to achieve their modest goals.
Of course Labor doesn’t pitch it quite like that. Taking cues from the democratic socialists Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, the opposition couches its approach in terms of equity and fairness rather than resentment. But the effect is the same.
This duality will feature heavily in the federal election campaign and is being trialled in the five byelection campaigns that are currently underway.
More than the four other seats being contested, the outer suburban seat of Longman just north of Brisbane is the most suitable testing ground for the battle of aspiration. Longman’s voters are classic Howard battlers: they’re tradies, labourers, clerical workers and service providers bringing home a median household wage of around $65,000. The unemployment rate in Longman is also higher than the national average. So it’s a fair bet the two sides of aspiration will feature strongly in the lives of its residents.
Of course Longman is also the tightest of the five byelection contests, with the seat being extremely marginal after Labor snatched it with the help of One Nation preferences in 2016. Queensland is also likely to be the state where the federal election is won or lost, with almost half the Coalition’s seats in that state designated as marginal.
When the tealeaves are read following the byelection decision in Longman, we may have a better understanding of what the new generation of “battlers” actually aspire to, and where they think their best interests lay. Will it be with the parties of “progress” offering more and better jobs through a “stronger” economy, or the party of “fairness” promising better schools and hospitals by reining in the excesses of the “rich”?
If it’s the latter, Howard’s playbook on aspirational politics will need a significant rewrite.
• Paula Matthewson was media adviser to John Howard in the early 1990s. She is a freelance writer and communication strategist
Howard had little of the charisma or gravitas of his previous prime ministers, but he was a canny political operator who knew how to connect with the majority of voters who made up working class and middle Australia. It would be an oversimplification to say his appeal was grounded in those voters aspiring to do better in life, but that desire nevertheless played a significant part in the former PM’s success.
That’s why, a decade later, a very different Liberal prime minister is trying to tap into a similar group of voters to revive his political fortunes. It’s also why his opponent is trying to use the very same group to bring the PM down.
Even before Labor’s deputy leader Tanya Plibersek mentioned in an interview last week that the term “aspiration” was a mystery to her, Malcolm Turnbull and his ministers had been accusing Labor of denying workers the motivational benefits of personal income tax cuts and trumpeting that only the Coalition understood the aspirations of such everyday Australians.
“Stick with me if you want to get ahead”, the PM was essentially promising voters.
"The opposition couches its approach in terms of equity and fairness rather than resentment. But the effect is the same"
The difficulty for Malcolm Turnbull is that aspiration ain’t what it used to be. Despite their aspirations, working and middle class voters haven’t seen a decent pay rise since before the Coalition regained office in 2013. There are more than a million Australian workers with fine aspirations who are underemployed. And the once traditional aspiration of owning a home is now out of reach for most of the middle class voters working in and around the nation’s biggest cities.
Under these circumstances, an aspiration to get ahead could prove to be a source of frustration and resentment rather than motivation. Considered in this way, we can see why Labor is deploying the “politics of envy” to combat the Coalition – just as Turnbull is trying to ignite and tap into positive energy from Australia’s motivated aspirationals, Shorten is hoping to draw on the negative energy of those who are resentful about not being able to achieve their modest goals.
Of course Labor doesn’t pitch it quite like that. Taking cues from the democratic socialists Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, the opposition couches its approach in terms of equity and fairness rather than resentment. But the effect is the same.
This duality will feature heavily in the federal election campaign and is being trialled in the five byelection campaigns that are currently underway.
More than the four other seats being contested, the outer suburban seat of Longman just north of Brisbane is the most suitable testing ground for the battle of aspiration. Longman’s voters are classic Howard battlers: they’re tradies, labourers, clerical workers and service providers bringing home a median household wage of around $65,000. The unemployment rate in Longman is also higher than the national average. So it’s a fair bet the two sides of aspiration will feature strongly in the lives of its residents.
Of course Longman is also the tightest of the five byelection contests, with the seat being extremely marginal after Labor snatched it with the help of One Nation preferences in 2016. Queensland is also likely to be the state where the federal election is won or lost, with almost half the Coalition’s seats in that state designated as marginal.
When the tealeaves are read following the byelection decision in Longman, we may have a better understanding of what the new generation of “battlers” actually aspire to, and where they think their best interests lay. Will it be with the parties of “progress” offering more and better jobs through a “stronger” economy, or the party of “fairness” promising better schools and hospitals by reining in the excesses of the “rich”?
If it’s the latter, Howard’s playbook on aspirational politics will need a significant rewrite.
• Paula Matthewson was media adviser to John Howard in the early 1990s. She is a freelance writer and communication strategist
No comments:
Post a Comment