Art of politics has gone missing

IN 1948, former prime minister Robert Gordon Menzies wrote an article for The New York Times on the art and science of politics. "Politics is both a fine art and an inexact science," he argued. Politicians focus on the science of politics, "the discovery of what to do," but neglect the art of politics, which is the "practice of how and when to do these things." Without mastering both, nothing of lasting value can be achieved.

Today's political class -- politicians, staffers, party officials and imported so-called professionals -- are skilled in the scientific aspects of politics. Many are knowledgeable and understand key policy challenges. They are expert in using scientific tools such as focus groups and opinion polls. Some are adept at parliamentary procedure. They can write political advertisements, spin the media and carry out routine campaign functions and the basic administration of government.

What they lack is a talent for the art of politics. This includes building consensus and understanding the importance of compromise. Being able to interpret public opinion and lead it with spirited advocacy. Knowing how to grease the wheels of government to work in their favour. Having a capacity for the hard slog of policy development and consultation. Leaders who are prepared to take risks and champion a long-term agenda. Or possess the gift of oratory, able to give an inspiring speech or an interesting interview.

It is not surprising that 72 per cent of voters would not return Julia Gillard's government if an election were held now. Or that Tony Abbott has a -31 per cent net approval rating or that Gillard has a -33 per cent net approval rating. Politics seems devoid of purpose. Integrity and intelligence are in short supply, and courage and imagination have been lost. Major policy challenges are ignored, or if they are tackled, the solutions are hamstrung by being either deeply flawed, badly implemented or lacking public support. It is why most voters are disengaged and disillusioned with politics. Why party membership is in long-term decline.

It is tempting to look back on the past with rose-coloured glasses. But any consideration of Menzies or his successors such as Bob Hawke, Paul Keating and John Howard must recognise their ability to achieve concrete policy outcomes and win public support. They were able to master, each to a certain degree, the critical arts of politics. For Menzies, understanding the mind and mood of the electorate, gearing policies towards "the future" and using "persuasive language" to win "the acceptance of those ideas by a majority," is essential.

The diminishing art of politics was evident last week when all state and federal leaders failed to find common ground on a National Disability Insurance Scheme. Conservative premiers were initially recalcitrant when unable to find small sums of money to fund trials.

While two conservative states are now signed up to trials, two others are not. The Prime Minister missed an opportunity to secure a full NDIS with long-term funding guaranteed when she rebuffed the offer by premiers to provide unconditional support for a new levy.

Gillard's NDIS misstep is emblematic of her government. While there have been some achievements, too often the government has been undermined by a lack of direction, poor communication, a failure of policy design and implementation, broken promises, a retreat from Labor policy tradition and poor political management of things such as the relationship with the Greens or the Peter Slipper, Craig Thomson and HSU scandals. Labor's political class has driven the party's primary vote to historic lows. It has never ever been this bad for federal Labor and it has happened under their stewardship.

While it is early days, the conservative premiers in NSW, Victoria and Queensland also show signs of being as uninspiring and ineffectual as many of their latter-day Labor predecessors.

In NSW, Premier Barry O'Farrell is as unexciting as he is risk-averse. He has broken promises, achieved strikingly little and has lost a key staff member due to a scandal. Although new infrastructure investment is needed and key projects are obvious, O'Farrell has ruled out unveiling a plan until September. Elected with an "action plan" to "fix" NSW, he has shown little action and delivered no plan.

In Victoria, the leading do-nothing premier, Ted Baillieu, is under fire for cutting $300 million from TAFE, is embroiled in an ongoing dispute with the Office of Police Integrity and is facing talk of a leadership challenge. Trying to counter the perception he is "indecisive" and "inactive", party strategists recommended he use the phrase "decisive action" as often as he can. It is no surprise Baillieu has a -9 per cent net approval rating.

In Queensland, Premier Campbell Newman has broken promises on civil unions, surrogacy laws and public service jobs. Reports of LNP cronyism are common and a minister has resigned in disgrace. Last week, Newman said, "Queensland has been bankrupted", and absurdly compared Queensland to Spain while his Treasurer was overseas trying to get investors to buy government bonds. He won't contribute to NDIS trials despite Queensland being the lowest spending state, per capita, on disability services.

The federal Opposition Leader is unlikely to break the mould of modern political leaders. He eschews boldness and policy rigour in favour of a negativity that will diminish his ability to achieve consensus if he wins government. "No government is always wrong on everything," Menzies argued in a memoir. "To attack indiscriminately is to risk public opinion, which has a reserve of fairness not always understood."

A year after Menzies' essay on the art of politics was published, he led the Liberal Party to its first election win and ushered in a record 23 years of conservative government. While the Menzies era was hardly one of policy innovation, and his success was part due to Labor's lacklustre leadership and internal division, his political success cannot be disputed.

There is no shortage of policy challenges that require consensus-building, political dealmaking, innovation and the harnessing of public support if they are to be successfully advanced. But the absence of politicians with a genius for politics does not augur well. While there are politicians who show signs of promise, they would benefit from reading Menzies' essay. As he argued: "It is only if the art of politics succeeds that the science of politics will be efficiently studied and mastered."