Victorian voters deserve a new government, fresh start

Daniel Andrews has voted early, casting his ballot at a city pre-poll venue. Mr Andrews, with Cath, and their two eldest children Noah and Grace, voted at a polling booth near parliament on Thursday evening. Picture: Instagram

Voters have every right to feel exhausted about the state of politics in Victoria and uncertain about how best to move on from the turbulent years of the pandemic.

Daniel Andrews has been a commanding presence over both the affairs of the state and lives of citizens in a way that could not have been expected at the time of the last election in 2018, when he won a resounding victory.

Mr Andrews has used his strong majority and the emergency powers of a crisis to bolster an autocratic style that has tested the bounds of democracy. When combined with Labor’s reckless financial management and inability to deliver projects on time and within budget, or accept responsibility for its gross failures of governance, the choice for voters is clear. Victorians deserve a new leader and a fresh start.

Mr Andrews’ opponent, Matthew Guy, has been given a second chance to convince voters the Liberal Party deserves to be elected to office in Victoria and that he is the best person to lead the state. Opinion polls suggest Victorians are turning away from Labor but may not yet be confident the Liberals deserve their vote.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and Opposition Leader Matthew Guy. Picture: Ian Currie

Whatever the result, the state would be best served by a decisive victory rather than the perilous prospect of a Labor-Greens alliance. In their choice, Victorians must be guided by the performance and deficiencies of both sides.

It is true to say the pandemic produced extraordinary conditions and great uncertainty that had to be managed without a full understanding of what might lie ahead. Mr Andrews imposed harsh restrictions on his state, including heavy-handed policing to enforce extended lockdowns, the full social and emotional cost of which is not yet known.

The evidence is that the lockdowns have been particularly traumatic for business owners forced to close and children and young adults denied social contact at the time in their lives it was most needed. The results of that are to be found in the crisis now facing mental health authorities.

At that time, we editorialised that “citizens were being traumatised by overzealous officials (who) lack confidence in their ability to manage even a minor scare”.

In retrospect, the tough measures imposed by Mr Andrews and his health bureaucrats did not produce better health results than those in other places where lockdowns were less extreme.

To compound the offence, Victoria’s extended lockdowns were due in large measure to failings by the state government, notably in hotel quarantine from decisions for which no one has been held to account.

The Coate inquiry into the hotel quarantine bungle that cost 800 Victorian lives found the Andrews government “irresponsible and incompetent” but could not establish who was to blame. Mr Andrews refused to accept responsibility as leader.

There is also a pattern in the fact Mr Andrews has been embroiled in four Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission probes covering dealings with the firefighters’ union, Casey council land deals, a health services training contract and branch stacking. We know the Premier has appeared before IBAC in secret on at least three occasions. His arrogance is also on display in his decision to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese Communist Party on its Belt and Road Initiative, outside the scope of state authority and against the national interest.

Neither side has sought to highlight the pandemic in the election campaign, judging perhaps that voters wished to focus on the future instead of the past. Many people could feel fully justified, however, in venting their anger in the privacy of the ballot box. Financial management and cost-of-living pressures are the issues front of mind for voters today. On this score, Mr Andrews has presided over a dramatic increase in borrowings, with state debt now equal to the combined debt of NSW, Queensland and Tasmania.

Mr Andrews’ almost eight years in office have delivered some lasting public benefit, most obviously the removal of many level crossings, and royal commissions into family violence and mental health. Victoria is a better place for these policies.

Labor can also argue that it has embarked on an ambitious state building program including roads and tunnels, but it has shown itself to be a poor manager of infrastructure delivery, with projects running over time and over budget.

Labor’s big-ticket item for this campaign is an outer-suburban rail loop, not properly costed, that has the potential to become a financial disaster for generations, just as hefty public sector pay rises delivered under Labor have baked in a recurrent expenditure time bomb for state finances.

Unfortunately for voters, Mr Guy does not come to the economic fight with clean hands. He has set out a spending program exceeding that of Labor but he has at least shown policy courage by shelving Labor’s plans for a suburban rail loop and redirecting those billions into the government’s weakest suit, health.

Mr Guy has yet to lay out a credible strategy for returning the budget to surplus and driving down state debt. On the positive side, where Mr Andrews is promising to renationalise parts of the state energy industry, Mr Guy has pledged to take the biggest energy step that matters and restart exploration and production of gas.

The Liberal Party has a lot riding on Mr Guy’s performance. Nationally, attention will be on how the state Liberals perform in seats that fell to teal independents at the federal poll. The results in Hawthorn and Kew, state seats that sit within the federal seat of Kooyong, will give an indication as to whether teal candidates who pushed into blue-ribbon Liberal heartland federally could be one-term wonders.

At the start of the campaign, we said Mr Guy must present clear policies rooted in principled beliefs to let voters know the Coalition offered a credible alternative. There are legitimate questions on whether he has the capacity to be the premier Victoria needs and deserves.

Mr Guy is also facing a probe, initiated during the campaign, into office staffing. If he wins, he must show he has matured and learned from his failures, especially the 2018 election loss, and lead with integrity.

Mr Andrews is a known quantity. His autocratic style has been terrible for Victoria and will leave lasting economic and emotional damage. He stretched the bounds of acceptable government in his management of the pandemic and has refused to accept responsibility for clear failings under his watch, some of which had deadly consequences. For this alone, voters would be justified in sending him the clear message that leaders must be held to account.