Hollow political rhetoric breeding cynicism

THE inability of our leaders - and some commentators - to understand a few basics about English is more than a little frustrating in the debate about Labor's broken promise on a carbon tax.

Tony Abbott is claiming Julia Gillard lied when, five days out from the last election, she said: "There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead." Gillard has certainly broken a promise. But lied? I doubt it. Unless he has an insight into her thought patterns at that time, he can't possibly know whether she was lying. Lying suggests an intent to deceive, which we can't know was present in the Prime Minister's mind. That's not to diminish the significance of the broken promise, but Abbott and others shouldn't inflate it either.

Equally, listening to Gillard and her coterie of ministers claiming that she hasn't broken a promise on a carbon tax - because she is putting a price on carbon - takes political spin to a new level.

What's the difference? The price on carbon they speak of comes in the form of a tax on carbon. Anyone spruiking a difference between the two should be embarrassed with the slipperiness of their language.

Does anyone wonder why the public loses faith in its politicians? It's because their rhetoric might as well be torn from the script of a political satire. It would be funny if it wasn't a core part of the decline of our political class.