Now for the Gillard tightrope walk

THE waiting is over, let minority government begin.

Not much between them ... a jubilant Prime Minister Julia Gillard with Opposition Leader Tony Abbott in Canberra. Picture: AFP

IF the new parliament operates with uncertainty similar to the way the independents chose to announce their decision to support a minority Labor government yesterday, then we are in for an unstable three years, if the new parliament lasts that long.

Bob Katter came out first and said he would back Tony Abbott, giving the main parties 74 seats each. Later in the afternoon Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor held a press conference together. They didn't co-ordinate their arrival, which left Oakeshott to perform a short solo dance for the cameras while he awkwardly waited for his colleague.

Once Windsor arrived he spoke first and quickly declared that he would back Julia Gillard. When Oakeshott spoke - despite being behind the parliamentary reforms to shorten question time answers - he took an eternity before declaring that he too would back Gillard, giving Labor its minority government status.

"Whoever said these guys aren't enjoying their time in the sun?" one Liberal MP asked. The scenes bordered on high farce but at least the decision has been made. That leaves both main parties to lick their wounds from a bruising election campaign and an uncertain post-election environment.

Now the hard work begins: making this parliament work with the unusual result that has been served up.

The returned Labor government, even with the support of the two NSW rural independents, the Tasmanian independent and the Victorian Green, only has the barest of majorities: 76 seats in a chamber of 150.

Oakeshott flagged that he has been offered an executive position of some sort and he has reserved a final decision on whether he will take it up until after he goes home and speaks with his family.

The crucial issues for Oakeshott and Windsor in deciding to back Labor were broadband, long-term neglect of regional Australia by both main parties (and the National Party for being in coalition with the Liberals), and a desire to have a stable parliament for the next three years. Stability as a mantra would perhaps have been better defined as a desire to ensure the longevity of this parliament.

Both men doubted that Abbott would be able (or want) to govern for the full three years, especially once the Greens take control of the balance of power in the Senate next July.

The fear for some voters is that the Labor-Green alliance might create radical government, but the rural independents appear to be backing their voting power in the House of Representatives as a stopgap against that.

Another stopgap might be the pragmatism of Gillard if she wants to rebuild the Labor Party brand after what has been a poor campaign. While Gillard may have grown in the prime ministership during the post-campaign period, as political analyst Peter Brent says, Labor, even now that it has been returned to government, has some important soul-searching to do, starting with what role its professional powerbrokers will play.

Had Labor not received the backing of two out of the three rural independents and been thrust back into opposition after only one term in power, following the Howard years, the blood-letting would have been particularly gory.

Now, from the government benches, the review of the campaign will be more measured, but it still must happen if Labor is to emulate previous minority governments such as those of Peter Beattie in Queensland, Steve Bracks in Victoria and Mike Rann in South Australia and return to majority government at the following election.

Otherwise, Labor could emulate the Nick Greiner minority government in NSW in 1991 - also a second-term administration - which refused to take stock of its poor electoral performance and went on to lose the next election.

The rural independents will now be targeted by a vicious National Party campaign at the next election to unseat them. National Party MPs have already started condemning their decision.

The collegial atmosphere that existed while the independents were making up their minds has been quickly replaced by conservative frustrations that independents representing former National Party heartlands could back a Labor government with a first-term track record like this one.

Windsor is tipped to retire, so a backlash against the decision to go with Labor in his electorate may not affect him. But at 40 years of age and only in his second term in parliament Oakeshott will need to counter any National Party campaign, which may not be easy.

Perhaps that's why Windsor was more direct with his offering of support to Labor, saying: "I intend with my vote, for what it's worth, to support the Labor Party."

Oakeshott was more cautious.

"Today I'll do what I have always done and give confidence and supply to government and in effect that means confidence and supply to Julia Gillard."

He also emphasised the line-ball nature of the decision.

By calling for a new paradigm in their speeches yesterday, Windsor and Oakeshott are selling their decision as a chance for regional Australia to move into a new phase where it can vote for rural independents capable of going with the party that offers the best deal for the bush. Their argument is that because the Nationals are in coalition with the Liberals, and in the case of Queensland amalgamated, they don't adequately stand up for rural issues in the joint party room. That is something Katter agrees with.

For a new paradigm to have any chance of happening the returned Labor government will need to deliver for the regions and in particular for the electorates of the rural independents.

Before Windsor and Oakeshott announced their decision Labor Party strategist Bruce Hawker told The Australian that he believed they wanted to go with Labor but were worried about whether it would deliver for the regions as Gillard promised in the negotiations. This may need to be Labor's first order of business so it can secure the independents' support early on in its second term.

The first-term Labor government suffered from over-promising and under-delivering. It left the achievements of Labor's first-term looking less impressive and the failures more pronounced.

While some commentators have described governing with minority numbers as a poisoned chalice, it may be that the limits it places on new legislative programs helps avoid the same failing damaging the new Gillard government that damaged the first-term Rudd government.

"Bedding down what we have started will be the order of the day," is the way one cabinet minister puts it. That will involve rolling out the national broadband network, completing the building of the promised GP super-clinics, and finding a way to achieve progress on tackling climate change.

While the rural independents did discuss renewable energy in their press conference, this final point will be especially important if Labor is also to maintain the confidence of the Greens, both in terms of their lower house MP Adam Bandt and their soon-to-arrive new senators giving the minor party the balance of power in the upper house.

But the returned Labor government still has a number of hurdles to overcome. Questions have been raised about the revenue raising capacity of the renegotiated mining tax.

The rural independents weren't impressed with the hole in the Coalition's costings, which means they will be even less impressed if Labor can't bring the budget back to surplus as soon as promised.

And even if the rubbery figures attached to the mining tax are put to one side, funding the promises made to win over the various independents, including Tasmanian Andrew Wilkie, will force whoever becomes the new finance minister to find savings, which won't be easy, especially after offering a nearly $10 billion package for the regions to win over Windsor and Oakeshott.

There is also the issue of managing Kevin Rudd's return to the front bench, which will be delicate: Gillard can't afford any by-elections.

Perhaps the most significant element of the decision by the rural independents to back Labor is the opportunity it gives Gillard to define herself in the prime ministership. She didn't give herself enough time to do that before the election, and she even admitted to being captured by those around her early on in the campaign.

How she approaches her second chance could be the marker of whether Labor can make its predicament work.

Gillard's political career has been defined by ruthless pragmatism to get to where she has, illustrated only recently by the way she conducted her negotiations with the independents. She will need to find a way to stop the Coalition eating into Labor's right flank without continuing to give ground to the Greens on the left. Doing that while managing minority governance won't be easy.

The Coalition in opposition will face significant challenges too.

Abbott is secure as leader after exceeding all expectations both on the campaign trail and in uniting his party in the wake of last year's debilitating split over the emissions trading scheme.

But his personal satisfaction ratings are not high, and once the dust settles on the election result if the minority Labor government makes a good account of itself, Abbott might find that goodwill in opposition can be short lived.

Beyond the Coalition leadership it will also need to consider what to do about renewal.

Does it promote the next generation of politicians such as Kellie O'Dwyer, Paul Fletcher and Jamie Briggs, or does it risk looking like a de facto government by sticking with the existing line up in the hope that the minority Labor government doesn't hold up?

Specifically, deputy leader Julie Bishop may face a challenge from campaign spokesman and finance shadow minister Andrew Robb, who was widely believed to have had a good campaign. But with the party room due to meet on Thursday there may not be time to mount a challenge.

The independents wanted stability but that was always unlikely whichever way they went. Minority governments are hardly stable by definition: it is about minimising instability.

The best that they can probably hope for is longevity in conjunction with a host of parliamentary reforms. Labor will want to make minority government work and Gillard has been given a second chance.

Even though the public appeared sick of the campaign by its end, the closeness of the election result means that both main parties will now be engaged in a permanent campaign during this term of parliament, however long it lasts.