If Palmer is the answer, Australia is in big trouble

CLIVE Palmer has turned Karl Marx’s dictum about history repeating itself on its head.

CLIVE Palmer has turned Karl Marx’s dictum about history repeating itself on its head. With the PUP leader, first comes farce, then tragedy. We are by nature fearful of the consequences that flow from his crazy outbursts. The latest Clive bomb is much more serious than rants about the CIA, Chinese spies or electoral conspiracies. In a speech to parliament on Monday, the MP for Fairfax railed against Tony Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme, a flawed policy that invites censure, including from The Australian. But Mr Palmer became unhinged when he argued the scheme was designed to benefit Peta Credlin, the Prime Minister’s most senior adviser. “Why should Australian citizens and businesses be taxed, and working women discriminated against, just so that the Prime Minister’s chief-of-staff can receive a massive benefit when she gets pregnant,” he said. This is beyond the pale and has been judged as cowardly by many in the political class.

Certainly, Ms Credlin wields great influence, even though she is not an elected official. Yet that is entirely beside the point. Mr Abbott’s signature policy was first detailed in his 2009 book Battlelines, 18 months before their working relationship commenced. In any case, as a ministerial staffer, Ms Credlin would qualify for federal public service parental leave. It is well-known in Canberra circles that Ms Credlin has sought IVF treatment. Typically, Mr Palmer has refused to apologise. But where is Labor’s fabled handbag hit squad or the pioneering femocracy in denouncing this grotesque and abject intervention? Doesn’t this count as full-blooded misogyny? Such criticism seems only to attach itself to Mr Abbott for winking, looking at his watch or assailing Julia Gillard for her many policy reversals and Labor’s failings. Apparently, a dinosaur like Mr Palmer is beyond reproach and reconstruction.

Still, the man who mentors senators who will hold the balance of power next month demands scrutiny, particularly of his hard-edged business practices, sharp political methods and heterodox policy positions. Unlike the ABC, which celebrates his antics and feeds his fight for voters with the Coalition, we have reported on Mr Palmer’s interests in the round. Behind the persona of a colourful populist there lurks a very experienced political manipulator with retrograde ideas; if implemented, such measures would delay repair to the budget, impose costs on taxpayers and ultimately harm our prosperity. For instance, PUP’s Tasmanian senator-elect Jacqui Lambie argues the four big banks should be taxed more, neglecting a couple of things. First, bank dividends flow to virtually all Australians via their superannuation accounts. Second, the discomfiting fact that Mr Palmer’s key business interests have paid virtually no company income tax in recent years.

Mr Palmer first expressed his strong political views via donations to the LNP in Queensland. He may have thought that his businesses would be favoured in some way. That did not happen. Mr Palmer admits he became disillusioned when in 2012 the Newman government chose Gina Rinehart’s rail corridors to service future coal projects in the Galilee and Bowen basins. The truth is that his rival presented a superior, more detailed proposal. Again, Mr Palmer failed to do his homework. As well, as West Australian Premier Colin Barnett warned last week, the Queenslander’s aggressive litigation strategy aimed at his project partners has hurt relations with China, our largest trading partner.

Most worrying, however, is Mr Palmer’s abysmal grasp of economics. Fixing the budget is the nation’s top priority. Along with the Greens, PUP does not understand the scale of fiscal consolidation required or the cures international bodies are prescribing. Mr Palmer says the budget is ideological, based on a lie. As debt is low by OECD standards, no action is needed. The International Monetary Fund’s most recent take on Australia showed we would have the third largest increase in net debt and the highest spending growth among 17 rich countries. Thus without action, the nation faces 16 consecutive years of deficit — and the consequent rise in debt and debilitating interest payments. Mr Palmer has a talent for generating controversy and soft coverage. It’s no comfort to her, but Ms Credlin merely joins his trail of human wreckage. But if Mr Palmer brings to parliament his recent form, deal-making and deep convictions, the national toll would be horrendous.