Federal election 2016: Shortenomics is Bill’s bogus plan

Illustration: Tom Jellett

Bill Shorten has a simple yet very seductive message for ordinary Australians: you can have it all and you don’t have to pay for any of it.

You want billions more for health, no questions asked, no price signals necessary? Shake down the Apple tree. Or Google and it will come.

A few more billions for education? So what if Australian kids continue to fall behind on the basics, despite the extra billions already spent; they still deserve to have the full Gonski. The big end of town will provide.

You have to hand it to Shorten. It seems to be working a treat. He has put his issues — health and education — firmly at the top of the campaign agenda and the increased campaign exposure has improved his personal ratings.

Never mind that Labor’s numbers don’t add up.

Even allowing for the government’s inclusion of the contentious $19 billion from the restoration of foreign aid cuts in its list of Labor’s spending, it still leaves a trifling $48bn shortfall across the forward estimates.

The government’s list ran to 10 pages, covering more than 100 commitments, and the foreign aid promise was the only one seriously contested at a very shouty press conference by opposition finance spokesman Tony Burke.

Even if you give Labor the benefit of the doubt and apply a 50 per cent discount factor to the government’s list (and both Scott Morrison and Mathias Cormann allow the worst case scenario is $67bn and best case $32bn), it still leaves a black hole big enough, you would think, to swallow whole the opposition and its promises.

Never mind that Morrison’s budget had tax strikes against multinationals raising $4bn across four years, while Labor claims it will raise $1.7bn during the same period. This is another minor detail, as is Labor’s pledge to “forgo” the company tax cut to pay for the rest of its ever increasing spending, skated over in the so-called analysis of Labor’s policies.

The notion that without a strong economy nothing is pos­sible has been set aside by the Labor leader as he fashions his own brand of economic management. Let’s call it Shortenomics. There is nothing subliminal about its message. It is overt and it offers a clear choice: live it up now and leave the bills for later, the complete opposite of Malcolm Turnbull’s message that we must all live within our means. No contest which sounds like more fun.

Shortenomics also reinvents language to explain away gaps or inconsistencies. Shorten describes his tax increases as “saves” and the government’s tax cuts as “spends”.

He could be Humpty Dumpty, saying to Alice: “When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” The exchange that follows in Lewis Carroll’s classic says it all. Alice: “The question is, whether you can make words mean so many different things.” To which the ill-fated egg said: “The question is which is to be master — that’s all.”

Whether Shorten has a great fall or becomes master on July 2 remains to be seen, but the government will continue to press Labor to get economic management up as the No 1 issue, believing that while there has been blowback as a result of its own tactics on Tuesday, it finally succeeded in getting the focus on costings.

While some interviewers show little interest in pursuing Labor on the economy or spending, those who do ask get befuddled by Shorten’s fog of words or seem too willing to accept what he says.

We are indebted to Mark Latham for pointing out this gem from the Seven Network’s Weekend Sunrise on May 8, hours before the election was called, where Shorten was asked: “On the point of growing the economy, you know, what is the Labor plan there?”

Shorten: “The way we will grow the economy, is we’ll make sure that we have highly skilled workers in the future — that’s our kids, making sure they get the best education. You grow the economy by making sure that when people are sick, they can get to a doctor without having to pay a big co-payment fee up the front. We’re going to fight to keep bulk billing, because if you’ve got an efficient healthcare system where people get the treatment when they need it; if our schools and TAFEs and universities are generating people, middle-class kids and working-class kids and adults retraining, if they get the chance to have the skills then they will compete for the jobs of the future.”

It sounded completely implausible, not to mention completely loopy to rope bulk billing into an economic plan, but the interviewer actually took it seriously. “Righto,” Andrew O’Keefe said. “So it’s about creating, you know, the playing field in which people, therefore, can bolster the economy through their own efforts?”

Seductively simple and completely loopy. Before too long bulk billing will fix global warming too.

In contrast to the Prime Minister’s penchant for explaining everything in great detail, often to protesters who bail him up in front of cameras, the Opposition Leader has crafted a breezier, devil-may-care personality to accompany Shortenomics. Usually it works really well, providing better visuals for the nightly news, but he got a bit too carried away with how well it was going last Friday night in Woy Woy when he joked that additional road funding could just be whacked on the “spendometer”. Talk about laugh.

The fact is, however, that Shorten has succeeded in shoring up parts of Labor’s base, which is no mean feat considering where he was late last year, and considering the threat from the Greens on the left and Malcolm in the middle.

Turnbull does not face that kind of existential threat, although sections of the Liberal base remain hostile.

Broadcaster Alan Jones and Turnbull had a spectacular falling out two years ago, but as well as having many mutual enemies, they have many mutual friends. Their mutual friends were anxious to see the relationship repaired for both their sakes.

The resulting civil interview yesterday, where Turnbull stayed firm on the superannuation changes while explaining at length their impact, can only help the Prime Minister.

Shorten’s claim later that Turnbull had conceded the changes were retrospective but “who cares”, and had “left a cloud over everybody’s superannuation” were not true.

Neither are his claims the government plans to privatise Medibank.

But his extravagant assertions went unchallenged while journalists frothed at Turnbull over his claims on Labor’s spending.

The format for Sunday night’s debate between the leaders — a rare time in a long campaign when voters will pay attention — should also suit Turnbull better, allowing him to, politely, crisply, take issue with Shortenomics, although as Liberals are keen to point out John Howard never won a single debate but still managed to win four elections.