Jacinta Allan must avoid the Joan Kirner mistakes

Cartoon: John Spooner

Following Wednesday’s leadership vote, Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan became visibly emotional about the fact she had become only the second female leader of the state, after Joan Kirner. To succeed, Ms Allan must appreciate the similarities of Kirner’s elevation and her own, and learn the lessons of Kirner’s failure to rebuild the state after inheriting a financial catastrophe from John Cain. Like today, in August 1990 when Kirner took office the Victorian budget deficit was out of control. The state’s financial institutions were on the brink of collapse because of poor lending and rising interest rates. The failure of the State Bank of Victoria was a key factor in the defeat of the Kirner government. The big warning for Ms Allan is that attempts by Kirner to restore financial discipline were stymied by opposition from within her government and from an irate trade union movement.

Ms Allan takes the financial reins with a post-pandemic balance sheet that is the worst in the nation because of the legacy of mismanagement from Daniel Andrews. Rather than cut back, the May budget extended the pain to businesses and landholders with new imposts. State debt is still rising. Much of the debt is being spent on projects that are of particular benefit to militant trade unions. Before the vote on Wednesday, an attempt had been made to cement the control of Mr Andrews’ Socialist Left faction in the new regime. This would have guaranteed a continuation of the government’s profligate ways, but it was thwarted when the Right faction put up a candidate, threatening to force an extended process to choose a new leader.

Joan Kirner and Jacinta Allan in 2007. Picture: Tony Gough

As John Ferguson writes on Thursday, the clear expectation was that Ms Allan, 50, would follow Mr Andrews as Premier. But Labor’s Right faction has woken to demand that more democracy and modernisation are needed in the wake of Mr Andrews’ resignation as leader after 13 years of crushing authority. Ferguson argues that across the party there is a deep sense that the days of a premier destroying debate and limiting power-sharing are over.

Breaking the stranglehold of the Socialist Left is a good start. But from her first moments as Premier-elect it was clear that Ms Allan remained under the thrall of the “fabulous Daniel Andrews”. It is incumbent on her colleagues to insist Ms Allan deliver a fresh approach. This is by no means certain. The new Premier takes the reins with considerable baggage. She oversaw the bungled Commonwealth Games bid that caused great reputational damage for the state and hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation. She is closely linked to Labor’s Big Build project that is over-budget and has helped put the state’s finances into disarray. Ms Allan cannot be presented as a fresh alternative to Mr Andrews because she was firmly at his side.

Neither should the party assume that Labor’s win at the state election last year justifies a continuation of the wasteful policies of Ms Allan’s predecessor. The only comfort the new Premier can draw on is the fact the state opposition has shown itself incapable of putting up a good fight. But this will not always be the case. A change of leader also provides an opportunity for the Victorian Liberal Party to reset. It too must look to the lessons of the diabolic financial times of the Kirner era. That environment produced Jeff Kennett, who used the disarray to take harsh measures for the benefit of the state. State Labor must clip the wings of its new leader to ensure she does not continue to make the financial mistakes of her predecessor. The Victorian Liberals must look to the future with a new sense of possibility and purpose.