Morrison’s election tactics don’t come cheap

With up to $600,000 of taxpayer money being spent each day on “public interest” broadcasts, it’s clear that our PM hasn’t been paying attention to the failures of his predecessors, writes Paul Williams.

I’m anticipating this federal election, like any political tragic, as eagerly as a kid at Christmas.

But not everyone is so keen. I’ve been asking acquaintances and bewildered strangers alike of their impressions of events this week and I doubt I’ve ever heard such cynicism in my 35 years election-watching.

A lot of that cynicism leaks from last week’s eye-watering $301 billion Budget.

Almost $160 billion will go to lower and middle income tax relief over 10 years, $100 billion for infrastructure, almost $4 billion for natural disasters, over a half a billion dollars for new apprentices, plus hundreds of millions more for national security, waterways, small business, carers and schools. And all gifted while forecasting a Budget surplus.

MORE FROM PAUL WILLIAMS: Our political system isn’t broken

Few will argue with the logic or generosity of those goodies. But, anecdotally, many taxpayers feel the one-off energy bill supplement of $75 for singles and $125 for couples on welfare is a bridge too far. Not only are they complaining it’s too little far too late, they’re cranky at the crassness of what smells like a cheap bribe.

A lot of cynicism has been directed towards Prime Minister Scott Morrison following the delivery of his government’s budget last week. Picture: Hollie Adams/The Australian

As Renaissance political philosopher Machiavelli wrote in The Prince 500 years ago, “Of all the things [a leader] must guard against, hatred and contempt come first, and liberality (lavish generosity) leads to both.”

MORE FROM PAUL WILLIAMS: One Nation belongs somewhere, but not parliament

Maybe that’s why I’m hearing how Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg overplayed their hand.

A few even ask why, just five years after the “fiscal crisis” Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey so seriously flagged before imposing painful austerities, the Coalition is now handing out goodies faster than the Easter bunny on a double espresso. The central question therefore remains: Why didn’t the Coalition quarantine Australia’s recent $13 billion windfall — won largely on the back of healthy iron ore revenues (in turn owed to China’s own artificial stimulus and an industrial accident in a Brazilian iron ore mine) — and bank it in one of our future funds? China’s economy, already slowing, according to the World Bank, won’t always need or want our minerals. How will Australia pay its bills in 10 years’ time?

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s budget has been met with mixed reactions. Picture: AAP/Lukas Coch

Even squirrels know eating the sweet nuts in spring and saving nothing for winter is a fatal madness. And so does Morrison’s Cabinet. So why the casual cash splash? The Coalition is desperately seeking the mantle of superior economic manager at a time when voters are thrashing it for internal chaos. But a combined perception of vote-buying while squandering our future nest egg will seriously damage any Coalition claim to responsibility.

But there’s another source of voter disillusion: the exploitation of taxpayer money to advertise — on television and elsewhere — certain themes and issues few would describe as urgent. The reason? To make the incumbent government look like it’s got its finger on the pulse of those constituencies likely to swing away from it.

MORE FROM PAUL WILLIAMS: Our pollies need to learn the art of the apology

Passed off as “public interest” broadcasts, these adverts over the past couple of weeks have cost the Australian taxpayer up to $600,000 a day. And they’ll continue until Morrison calls the election. It’s not illegal — and Labor has done it plenty of times too — but it is unethical. It’s time this disgraceful practice was ended.

Voters are growing wearing of the guessing game surrounding the upcoming election date. Picture: Kym Smith

Last, voters are growing weary of the perennial game of election date guessing. Personally, I don’t see a problem: in Westminster systems, government leaders traditionally held the right to advise the Crown when the PM will dissolve the parliament, with the Crown obliged to accept that advice.

Left over from the English Civil War, it stands as a reminder that parliament and the people are a nation’s boss, not some asinine aristocrat accidentally born into the right family.

MORE FROM PAUL WILLIAMS: There’s only one way to fix our broken political donations system

But that doesn’t mean PMs should cynically exploit this power. If they do, there’s an electoral price to be paid for allowing election speculation to build up then fizzle, as we saw on the weekend. Liberal PM John Gorton copped it in 1969 when he failed to call an expected election in 1968, just as Labor’s Kevin Rudd suffered when he missed his chance to call a double dissolution over climate change — the “great moral challenge of our time” — in 2010.

But for me and countless other voters there’s an even bigger moral challenge: the need for Australia to offer longer-term economic strategies without election bribes and taxpayer-bought adverts.

There’s a political cost involved, but integrity never comes cheap.

Dr Paul Williams is a senior lecturer at Griffith University