The PM needs to do some heavy lifting on policy, and soon

As Kevin Rudd’s true character was eventually revealed to the public, Labor hopes Scott Morrison will suffer the same fate.

Illustration: Eric Lobbecke

Two years ago on Saturday the same-sex marriage legislation passed through the federal parliament. Two days later it officially became the law of the land.

While Malcolm Turnbull as prime minister celebrated the change, having been a long-time advocate for same-sex marriage and voting for it, it’s a different story for our present Prime Minister. Even though Scott Morrison was a cabinet minister at the time — supporting the cabinet decision to put same-sex marriage to a plebiscite so the people could have their say — when it came to honouring that popular vote in the parliament he walked out of the chamber. A lot of people don’t realise that he did.

A handful of MPs voted against the bill for a variety of reasons. A small number walked out of the chamber. The only cabinet ministers to do so were Barnaby Joyce and Morrison.

Even the leader of the conservative faction of the Liberal Party, Peter Dutton, did his cabinet duty, staying and voting for the plebiscite. With the exceptions of Morrison and Joyce, every cabinet minister honoured the collective cabinet decision to let Australians decide.

Morrison has been asked repeatedly during the past two years why he chose to dishonour that plebiscite by vacating the chamber. Each time he refuses to provide an answer. Presumably the answer is simple: because of his faith. His church believes homosexuality is a sin, thus Morrison could not bring himself to vote for laws legalising the marriage of two gay people. He put his faith above his cabinet duty.

At one level it is not surprising a leader who wants to remain prime minister won’t engage in that sort of admission. After all, nearly two-thirds of Australians disagree with Morrison’s world view on the matter. But if beliefs matter, you would think the Prime Minister would have the courage to clearly state his reasons for doing so.

Not answering questions Morrison simply doesn’t like is one of his core traits. Think of The Wall Street Journal report that the Prime Minister sought an invitation for his pastor, Brian Houston, to attend the White House state dinner in September, only to be knocked back by the Americans. Or refusing to explain why Turnbull had to go. Or not answering direct questions whether he believes it is fair for children to be rejected from schools based on their sexual orientation.

To greater and lesser extents all politicians avoid directly answering tricky questions, or questions that risk putting their values at odds with what most Australians think. The public expects this.

But Morrison takes it to a new level, not even crafting non-answers that pretend to be answers. He just ignores and moves on, dismissing the question as “gossip” or “inside the bubble”. It is brazen stuff.

Labor believes Morrison has several traits the public won’t like if they start to notice: obfuscation, arrogance, a dismissive attitude, a bullyboy persona, even a penchant for payback. Put bluntly, Labor MPs don’t like Morrison, with a ferocity similar to the dislike Liberals had for Kevin Rudd. In Rudd’s case, in time the public saw the same person Liberals (and many Labor MPs) had long seen.

Will that happen with Morrison? At this stage in the political cycle it is hard to tell. I don’t know the man well enough to know how true Labor’s views of Morrison are. While I have always had a high regard for John Howard, plenty of journalists and politicians older than me who were around during the 1980s and 90s do not. Behind closed doors he was a crafty politician capable of outflanking his opponents. Some saw Howard as dishonest on asylum-seeker boats and the war on terror.

However, such opinions never trickled into the public sentiment; not the mainstream anyway.

Even when Howard left parliament — losing his own seat in the process — his preferred prime minister rating was still over 50 per cent. It just became a case that his time was up.

What will Morrison’s fate be?

Labor believes he is no Howard, in so far as his negative attributes are stronger and his depth on policy issues is more shallow. Even some of Howard’s sharpest critics acknowledge an authenticity to his persona.

Labor’s key strategists think they can continue to chip away at Morrison’s character to a point where the public will lose faith in him, where Morrison’s temper will get the better of him.

Working in Labor’s favour is the heightened level of cynicism in the modern political era, alongside a shift towards shorter careers at the top.

But Morrison is good at his craft, perhaps for the reasons Labor wants to expose him. And having been vanquished in May, Labor has a long way to go before it is level pegging in the political contest.

Morrison has an abundance of energy for politics, similar to Howard. As a former marketing man and party official, Morrison understands presentation. Unlike Turnbull during the 2016 election campaign, on the campaign trail this year our new Prime Minister was adroit at measuring out his media conferences and his picture opportunities.

This is another similarity between Rudd and Morrison. Like Morrison, Rudd was very good at the soft front marketing of politics. However, he ultimately didn’t do any heavy policy lifting in government. That was left to Julia Gillard as prime minister — whether people agree or disagree with some of what she did.

Morrison may well be able to spin his way to another election victory in two years. He may even get away with not answering questions for some time to come.

But, ultimately, prime ministers need to make hard decisions. And the weakening economy needs brave policy responses. Morrison as treasurer wanted to be brave and reform the GST, but he couldn’t convince Turnbull. There is plenty that can and should be done to boost the economy. What we don’t yet know is whether Morrison is bold enough to do it.

Peter van Onselen is a professor of politics at the University of Western Australia and Griffith University.