Erin Molan: Breach of trust means it’s over between Labor and myself

I wasn’t asking a lot of you and I don’t think I’ve been needy. All I expected was probably the most fundamental element to any successful relationship - honesty, writes Erin Molan.

Dear Labor government,

I’m breaking up with you, and, yes, this is a little out of left field given we were never in a rock-solid committed relationship but let me explain...

I didn’t vote for you so you may contemplate that you are quite within your rights to determine that you don’t owe me a thing.

But you’d be wrong, because your promises at the last election didn’t come with a caveat and, furthermore, there’s always that stock standard platitude that is trotted out by every grinning election night winner: ‘We are going to govern not just for the people who voted for us, we’re going to govern for all’.

So your promises weren’t just for those 32.58 per cent of Australians who gave your candidates their precious number 1 ballot, they were to every single Australian, including me.

Regardless of the nature of our relationship — maybe it’s more a ‘situation ship’ (some hip young person term for a less structured partnering) — we had an understanding, we had well-articulated and recognised defined boundaries.

I wasn’t asking a lot of you and I don’t think I’ve been needy. I still let you hang out with your friends, including some of whom I’m really not that fond, and all I expected was probably the most fundamental element to the success of any relationship — honesty.

A matter of trust.... Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Picture: Martin Ollman

The preservation of trust is critical to the survival of any association and we are no different. In the interests of full transparency, I’d like to share that I had even started to really warm to you. I like your leader, a congenial, relatable and naturally engaging fellow. He’s been very decent to me. And your performances on the world stage, for the most part, have been impressive. I knew we’d argue, that you would eventually say and do things I might not agree with, develop policy in areas I didn’t see as a priority, and that’s a healthy state but what I am not willing to compromise on is you breaking a promise.

There was no mincing of words before the election. ‘No changes to super’ you said, over and over.

Now I know that what you are proposing will only affect 0.5 per cent of the population and it’s only those really rich, elitist types who will be impacted (and they can afford it right?)

‘It doesn’t mean anything’ you keep trying to tell me, ‘it’s not a significant change’ you suggest.

‘I had dismissed the speculation around super as just that – speculation’ says Erin.

I’d counter that 0.5 per cent isn’t a significant proportion of Aussies saving for their hopefully healthy, active and enjoyable golden years but a tax rate increase of 15 per cent to 30 per cents more than significant, it’s a doubling. Put another way, multiplying the current tax rate by a factor of two. Anyone want to see official interest rates double next Tuesday? Anyone consider a doubling of the cost of bread an insignificant change?

This is all about something called ‘principle’. To be honest (to borrow a phrase....) I was caught unawares by this – I had dismissed the speculation around super as just that – speculation. Knowing the sacrosanct nature of election promises, I had imagined that if these squillions were on your radar, if these billions of dollars were a twinkle in your eye earmarked for more ‘worthy’ distribution, you would have been much, much more careful in what exactly you had promised?

I would have expected pledges along the lines of ‘there will be no changes to super unless, after careful consideration, current tax concessions are deemed unsustainable’. Or perhaps, ’there will be no changes to super arrangements unless interest rates continue to rise, cost of living pressures become the focal point of ordinary Australians’ existence, and we are desperately seeking pots of gold anywhere to boost more popular government spending’.

Calculating the family budget seems to be getting harder and harder

Like the vast majority of ordinary Aussies I don’t have anything close to millions in super, but our potential post-retirement quality of life is not the point here. Unfortunately, broader superannuation policy is not the point either. In any relationship, the consequences of a breach of trust are far-reaching and add a dimension of uncertainty and apprehension to the feelings of the betrayed party going forward.

Let’s keep it really simple . If we can’t trust you on this then how can we trust you on anything else? And how can we not fear that the relevance and application of forthcoming ‘stings’ will involve more ordinary things that affect us all?

You won’t worry about our break-up, I’m sure. You don’t really need me, I know that. You’ll move on quickly too while I eat ice cream and drown my sorrows.

I can assure you though that I’m not alone. Trust encompasses so many things like character, ability, strength, truth ... and those things mean something different to each individual who has judged that trust in your government is now not warranted, or at least severely shaken.

In fact I have no doubt that those who voted for you, those who believed they were in a much more committed relationship than me, will feel this betrayal even more.

Who knows where to from here and perhaps we both have work to do? My own track record in relationships is far from perfect (clearly... a quick google will tell you that!) but it remains my firm belief that you have a far greater challenge ahead in this space than I do.

Yours sincerely, Erin.