Timid political leaders don't deserve our vote

NUCLEAR power, industrial relations reforms and size of government: three policy areas in which both sides of politics need to show more spine.

NUCLEAR power, industrial relations reforms and size of government: three policy areas in which both sides of politics need to show more spine. The major party positions reflect how weak politicians' convictions have become in this country: part of the decline of the political class.

The opposition gives in-principle support to at least having a debate about nuclear power in Australia, but it is so weak it is not prepared to argue the case unless there is bipartisan support.

Just imagine if reforming parties of the past had been so timid. Liberals need to decide if they are a party of economic liberalism that encourages business investment or an old-fashioned conservative outfit that opposes reform.

If the Liberals are weak on nuclear power, Labor is positively archaic.

With notable exceptions such as Australian Workers Union secretary Paul Howes and Resources Minister Martin Ferguson (when he isn't bound by cabinet solidarity), senior Labor figures simply won't countenance the idea of nuclear power. Never mind that it is a primary energy source for major developed nations such as the US, France and Italy, and far cleaner than coal, not to mention more cost-efficient than renewables, as highlighted by the Productivity Commission report on pricing carbon.

Not only is Labor not prepared to debate the merits of nuclear power,but the WA division of the party on the weekend reaffirmed its opposition even to uranium mining. That means it opposes WA tapping into its rich uranium reserves (Australia has more uranium than any other country), even for export to countries that already use nuclear power.

Liberalising industrial relations laws is a sure-fire way to improve productivity and business competitiveness for Australian companies in a difficult global environment.

But neither major party has a penchant for IR reform. Labor at least has the excuse that it was elected to abolish Work Choices, giving it a democratic mandate to fulfill its ideological predisposition to oppose progressive IR reforms. But what is the Coalition's excuse?

John Howard built his policy reputation taking on the old-fashioned IR club, and in doing so shaped the philosophical approach of the modern Liberal Party. Tony Abbott was part of that team, a workplace relations minister, no less.

Yet he and the upper echelons of his frontbench spend more time refuting the idea that they will liven up debate about IR reform than thinking of ways to do so that might not detract from the opposition's electoral competitiveness.

Big government is something Kevin Rudd was in part elected to fix. He was quick off the mark in criticising Howard for letting the size of the public service swell during the second half of his prime ministership. It was an inauspicious ending to the life of a Liberal government. By the time Howard finished his tenure as PM, the public service was larger than it was in Paul Keating's time.

Despite Rudd's pledge, less than four years after Labor was first elected the size of the public service has grown by 20,000. No wonder Wayne Swan is having difficulty balancing the books.

If that growth hadn't happened, the surplus target for 2012-13 wouldn't be so wafer thin.

When governments pursue a nanny state philosophy it necessarily requires an enlargement of bureaucracy to interfere in people's lives.

Shadow treasurer Joe Hockey's comments on the ABC on Monday night that he would make 12,000 public servants redundant on winning government should be welcomed by those of us who prefer small government over bloated bureaucracies, but we should be cautious in seeing his off-the-cuff remarks as Coalition policy.

Abbott was more sanguine during his budget reply speech last year ahead of the election and, if his timid approaches to nuclear power and IR reforms are anything to go by, he is sure to be timid about cutting jobs ahead of the next polling day as well.

So there you have it. Three policy areas of vital importance to Australia's international competitiveness, three areas in which both major parties are shackled either by outdated philosophical principles or policy timidity born out of a desire for power for its own sake, rather than for reform.

As the next election gets closer, business will be increasingly asked to donate to each side. My advice would be to save your money until our leaders learn to show the sort of leadership that business (and the community) can be proud of.