The tightening of the election race was evident in Anthony Albanese’s swing back to making an attack on Scott Morrison his primary message at the National Press Club, in his last speech of the campaign. And he looked pretty comfortable in doing that.
Our election closely resembles American elections in one key respect – it’s essentially two campaigns against, rather than any campaign for.
The incumbent is horrible! The alternative is dangerous!
These are the two predominant messages from the respective sides of politics.
Apart from that, it’s a more or less interchangeable set of unaffordable spending promises.
Albanese’s speech was disappointing in making almost no mention of national security. The questions were disappointing too. There were a couple about foreign policy, but nothing on our defence force or the massive force structure decisions an incoming government will have to make if it’s serious about providing for Australian national security.
Plans for the Quad
In the thrust of foreign policy answers, Albanese was generally sound, bipartisan and sensible. If elected he will make the effort to attend the Quad summit next Tuesday. He won’t pass up a priceless opportunity to meet and establish head of government relationships with Joe Biden, Fumio Kishida and Narendra Modi.
His next overseas visit as Prime Minister would be to Indonesia, bearing out Labor’s commitment to increase the emphasis on Southeast Asia.
Similarly, he expects the relationship with China to be “challenging” no matter who wins on Saturday. And he reiterated that Labor would not take a backward step in defending Australia’s values and interests in its relationship with Beijing.
Both parties agree that the problems with Beijing come about because of China’s massively increased aggression under Xi Jinping.
Turn down the rhetoric
Nonetheless, some of the exaggerated rhetoric on China has clearly been driven by electoral considerations. No matter which side is victorious, it would be a good idea to turn the rhetorical volume down on Australia’s side.
While it was a generally sensible and confident performance by Albanese, he nonetheless said some silly things and some things that are just wrong.
The Government was perfectly justified in keeping the AUKUS agreement secret from Labor until the last minute, even though it needed bipartisan commitment, The fact that Canberra, Washington and London kept the whole deal secret, even after their surprise trilateral heads of government meeting at the G7 summit in the UK, is in many ways the most impressive element of the whole agreement. It’s certainly a sign that all three capitals take it seriously.
It would have been untenable for the Government to keep most of its cabinet, and most senior elements of the national security bureaucracy, in the dark on AUKUS but brief the whole Labor leadership group.
Climate 'wars’
Similarly, Albanese is just wrong to claim that Australia suffers any serious diplomatic penalty because it is not whole hearted enough in its commitments on climate change.
Australia has committed to net zero by 2050 and reduced its emissions more substantially than most nations. At the same time much of Europe, in the wake of Ukraine, has reversed many of its climate change actions, while the biggest emitters, such as China, are emitting their heads off and continuing to increase emissions.
Albanese says he will end the climate wars. That hasn’t been the case in other countries and won’t be the case in Australia.
Renewables don’t produce lower energy costs overall or there would be no need to subsidise them. So climate action in Australia will either lead to higher energy prices and reduced export income from fossil fuel and agriculture exports, which will fuel a backlash, or it will lead to disappointment among committed Green religion true believers that the action was not strong enough after all.
This is still an election which has ignored crucial issues and involved often bipartisan elements of fantasy – that money is limitless, that net zero can come without costs, etc.
One consolation: at least neither side is fantasising about China.
