Forget the ‘anger and mudslinging’. Where is the contest of ideas?

In just a few days voters will begin casting their ballots to decide who will sit in the state’s 60th parliament.

Victoria may have emerged from pandemic hibernation, but as a consequence of policy decisions made by governments, we now face unprecedented challenges that need to be fixed, from our ailing healthcare system to the state’s virus-swollen debt.

The state’s healthcare system is one of several areas needing attention.Credit: Wayne Taylor

To put that in election speak; there is an abundance of meaty policy debates to be had. Yet, rather than attempting to meet these undeniable challenges, this election is fast becoming one characterised by anger, mudslinging and small target policies. A contest of ideas, it is not.

This is reflected among voters, with pollsters reporting that focus groups feel as if their support is up for sale with the promise of “freebies” from both sides.

In lieu of visionary policies aimed at addressing structural problems in our society, our politicians seem to be turning on each other, the media and institutions once trusted and respected.

While elections are adversarial processes, this campaign has developed a nasty streak.

Premier Daniel Andrews and opposition leader Matthew Guy. This campaign has included personal attacks.Credit: Eddie Jim, Jason South

Internally, MPs on both sides are angry. Angry at their leaders, angry at their party’s campaign and disappointed in the policy direction.

In the Liberal camp, frontbench MPs are quietly seething about being kept in the dark over the Coalition’s policy rollout. They are frustrated by the centralised control and annoyed by the shadow cabinet processes, or lack thereof.

The ongoing feud between the Victorian Liberal Party’s state director Sam McQuestin, who has threatened to quit, and Matthew Guy’s chief of staff Nick McGowan, can best be described as “volatile”.

Guy, who has long been known as one of the more angry characters on Spring Street, had managed (until recently) to keep his anger at bay and maintain his poise. That ended a week ago when Guy kicked off the election campaign with an angry outburst when responding to a reasonable – and predictable – question about policy costings.

A Labor ad attacking Guy who was leader when Kew MP Tim Smith (pictured) crashed his car while drunk. Smith isn’t standing for re-election.

At Labor’s headquarters in Docklands, things aren’t much better. The ongoing feud between the organisational wing of the Labor Party and Daniel Andrews’ Premier’s Private Office (PPO) has worsened, if at all possible, over the theme of the campaign. “The relationship is the most strained it’s ever been,” one Labor Party source told The Age this week.

Labor MPs also privately complain that billions promised in hospital funding isn’t going to the areas of greatest need and growth, but to places where the PPO wants to hold seats.

This internal party warfare is nothing new, but the rage and hostility is permeating into the campaign.

Labor has taken the unusual move of “playing the man” in its election attack ads against Matthew Guy which try to link the drunken behaviour of two Liberal MPs to Guy’s leadership.

In the past, there has been an unwritten agreement that such personal misdemeanours by politicians – which affect all parties – won’t be part of the campaign material. Not this time.

The Liberal Party has also lowered its tone, with its latest advertisement labelling the Premier a “prick”. Sure, it’s a play on the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy union’s ad, but is it the tone we want from the team setting themselves up as an alternative government?

We should be careful not to dismiss this nastiness from elected officials as just part of the cut and thrust of political debate. The rhetoric and nastiness from our politicians not only drives disillusionment with politics, but it sets the atmosphere in which elections are fought.

Politicians set the tone of political debate.​ Jennifer Lynn McCoy, a professor of Political Science at Georgia State University has looked at the effects of what our political leaders say during elections and the broader ramifications on democracy.

Examining 11 countries, McCoy found that when politicians delegitimise their political opponents or exploit voter grievances instead of offering policy solutions, it stimulates party tribalism. Such blind partisan loyalties deter voters from examining their biases or examining the facts and ultimately does damage to our democracy.

When this masthead revealed Premier Daniel Andrews was being investigated in a secret anti-corruption commission probe over his role in awarding two grants worth $3.4 million, his most loyal fans, fuelled by many within the party, shouted that the report was wrong, never should have been aired and was evidence of some sort of bias.

But so-called “Dan Stans” – an online army of diehard Andrews government backers – aren’t alone in their blind crusade.

Liberal Party supporters, and some MPs – have come dangerously close to fuelling wild conspiracy theories about Andrews’ fall last year as well as siding with fringe anti-lockdown protesters who have accused the Premier of treason.

This level of cuckoo has seeped into the Coalition’s campaign with Liberal candidate Cynthia Watson posting a photo of a man wearing a t-shirt demanding the elected Premier be jailed.

Disagreement in politics is normal, and even healthy, but this level of hatred is not.

There will always be those on the fringes who believe in conspiracies, distrust in our institutions and refuse to believe factual information that doesn’t align with their worldview. But elected politicians should avoid the trappings of demonising politics.

Victoria is in desperate need of policies to address the damage inflicted by the COVID years. But this election is fast becoming one characterised by vicious personal attacks not vision.

---

More from our award-winning columnists

Australia’s future: Clare O’Neil, Minister for Home Affairs, is responsible for espionage, terrorism, foreign interference, cyberwar, criminal syndicates, and more. She says the best of times in modern history may be behind us - Peter Hartcher.

The bank of mum and dad: To what degree does a parent’s income determine their child’s future income? It turns out, the apple can fall far from the tree - Jessica Irvine.

Australia as a republic: If you’re going to ask Australians to forgo the monarchy, you’re going to have to replace it with something more fitting. What if, instead of a monarch or a president, we had an Australian Elder? - Waleed Aly.