Jeff Kennett: Why creating policy on the run must come to an end

While we are living through unprecedented times, creating policy on the run does Victorians no favours, writes Jeff Kennett.

Creating policy on the fly must end, writes Jeff Kennett. Picture: Jay Town.

We always knew 2021 was going to be a year of uncertainty. One twelfth into the year and that is proving to be the case.

On the positive side, the Australian Open is still going ahead. The challenges for the organisers are enormous, the risks for the government just as high. But hopefully we have learnt from the first period of hotel quarantine and the tragic failures of that exercise will not be repeated.

We saw the challenges and added costs associated with the AFL juggling the competition last year to complete the season. No one should underestimate the efforts of those who had to continually make alterations to games played and where to accommodate changes introduced by state premiers.

The Australian Open tennis is important because it demonstrates we must live with this virus and any that emerge in the future.

It is important crowds be able to attend the Open with the appropriate health measures in place.

The Australian Open is going ahead. Picture: Michael Klein.

If, as I hope, the Open will be free of incident, it will automatically mean other sporting events can be held, and crowds will be permitted, to one degree or another.

It will not be an Open as in the past, but it will be an event to celebrate if all those involved can complete the two-week period as we would wish.

But uncertainty hangs heavily in the air every day.

The decision in Western Australia to respond to one case by locking down Perth with virtually no notice has again created such uncertainty, not only in WA as they try to track down all contacts. The ramifications will be worse if further cases are detected.

Close cities and borders for one or even 10 cases, could greatly disrupt West Australians as well as those who have reason to travel to the state.

As our federal and state tourism bodies embark on campaigns to encourage us to travel within the country and within our own states, the fear of being caught beyond one’s state, being locked away from our home as occurred here in Victoria and other states, is a very real and growing concern that I hear increasingly.

That political leaders can close borders, or lock up communities without warning, is very much affecting how we can plan with any confidence.

The City of Melbourne is a desert. Absent of cars and people. Many companies and businesses are trying to help the city’s recovery by bringing staff back to work, in some cases three days a week, in others two. How it all pans out only time will tell.

We still do not have a promulgated national plan for dealing with pandemics.

I think given we knew little about the effects this pandemic would have on society, we have — apart from a few blatant mistakes — done extraordinary well.

Clearly, closing the country’s borders has had the greatest impact on restricting the virus, or many of its increasing mutations entering Australia.

Compared to the rest of the world, we are in a most enviable condition. However, we still do not have a person or body of people being charged with the responsibility of looking at all aspects of the pandemic last year to identify best practice for when the next pandemic arrives.

I have argued before we need a nationally appointed royal commission or an inquiry with the powers of a royal commission to identify best practice. Not to apportion blame, but to identify and establish best practice for future leaders and generations.

I do not understand when we are spending billions of dollars on so many aspects of our response to this pandemic, we are not investing a few dollars to establish a best practice aide-mémoire while our responses are fresh in the minds of those who were charged with responding.

Why is the National Cabinet so myopic it cannot see the need for such work being done on a nationally co-operative basis?

We need a level of comfort, of certainty that when the next pandemic arrives, we will be in the best position to respond.

Finally, many are commentating on the speed at which our economy is recovering, federal and state.

In Victoria that is occurring from a very low base, so while we should welcome the uplift in activity, it is much too early for anyone to feel confident about where they might be in the middle or end of the year.

We hear today some governments including ours in Victoria requesting extensions of federal help for certain sectors of the community.

Given certain states have imposed lockdowns, closed borders, restricted trade to the point many businesses have closed, it is time for the states
clamouring for more federal financial help to step up themselves and help those businesses they have identified for ongoing help.

The federal government has always been clear about the purpose and timing of JobKeeper and JobSeeker grants, and the purpose for which they were introduced.

It has been easy for some premiers to close borders and impose lockdowns, but they have done so knowing the federal government was going to pick up the financial tab for their decisions.

Demanding extension of subsidies only builds uncertainty.

Now Premier Andrews has announced he will extend Victoria’s State of Emergency until December this year.

Given how he has used those powers in the past without any consideration as to how it will affect households and businesses, could this be the new definition of uncertainty?

We need leaders who will put the longer-term interests of the community first, while dealing with the health risks now.

We need consistency of policies, so we can plan. We need certainty, not uncertainty.

Jeff Kennett is a former premier of Victoria