This is a style of politics that might play well in Singapore, but as the electors of Gippsland showed Jeff Kennett, does not impress contemporary Australian voters. Incredibly, Beattie gave support to Kaiser’s point of view, despite the obvious fact that high profile independents Wellington and Cunningham exert considerable and admitted influence over the government.
Kaiser also described Lutton as a Labor traitor, as though swinging voters would care about this. On top of this he and Beattie have been preaching the text that a Labor loss would lead to unstable government with independents in a position of power. Yet electors like nothing better than to see politicians squirm. With a viable independent in the field in their electorate this approach is more likely to make them vote for him on the basis of "keeping the bastards honest".
There are a number of ramifications of these campaign moves. Both by-elections will be decided on issues more to do with style than substance. Lutton will be the challenger in Woodridge, and the Liberal Party if it is smart, will make sure that it runs third so that its preferences will favour Lutton. A direct mail personal appeal from its candidate, admitting defeat and urging her supporters to give preferences to Lutton would be a smart move. Electors find issues like Law and Order (40%), Job Creation (33%) and Drugs (19%) important, but these will be used by the political operators to flesh out the personality issues.
Advertisement
The City Country Alliance will not poll well. Lutton will scoop its vote in Woodridge, and by virtue of his high profile deprive Heather Hill of the publicity she needs to overcome the obvious shortcomings of One Nation and its successors in Bundamba.
Labor candidates Kaiser and Miller will win Woodridge and Bundamba comfortably. Kaiser’s two-party preferred vote, which should have been at least 70%, is likely to be in the mid 60s, but Miller may well win an absolute, but reduced, majority. This will provide Peter Beattie with a valuable mid-term shock. The Labor machine should also be concerned about the way this campaign has been run. Kaiser was its campaign director, so perhaps some of the campaigning gaffes have been caused by the shift to new management. I suspect the problems lie deeper than that.
Queensland Labor won its reputation as an outstanding campaign machine courtesy of the Fitzgerald Inquiry, which so tarnished the National Party that even the metho drinker under the Storey Bridge could have fallen over the line in front of it. It also had an outstanding Campaign Director in Wayne Swan, now the Federal MP for Lilley. Since that 1989 election it has run substantially the same election campaigns. Things move on and campaign strategies need to move with them. When it plays the under dog it does so with a bullying swagger that may run well internally, but which is dissonant in the electorate. It has some hard thinking to do, or the Beattie Government may become the Goss Government Mark II, despite the obvious differences of personality between Beattie and Goss. A good performance in government can easily be undone by an indifferent performance in the campaign.
At this stage, the big winner appears likely to be David Watson. He has been running the campaign from his own office with little assistance from the Liberal organization. The Liberal Party’s campaign budget is reputed to be so skeletal that party officials are not even polling the electorates, preferring to run down to the corner store to read the Courier Mail’s published poll results. Watson picked the superannuation issue, has shown a hide of boiled leather, and he has been competent and consistent in his enunciation of campaign themes. The Liberals should finish second in Bundamba. Vale One Nation and City Country Alliance. By running third in Woodridge he will actually do more damage to Beattie, as Lutton will command more two-party preferred support than a Liberal ever could in this seat.
These are no Bass or Canberra by-elections, but they indicate that the next State election could be much more interesting than current statewide polling figures suggest.
Note: Since writing this article I have asked David Watson how he intellectually justifies his position on D'Arcy's superannuation. His response is that the offences, if proved, would bar someone from becoming, or remaining, a Member of Parliament. Had D'Arcy been tried and found guilty around the time of their alleged commission then he would have been ineligible to become an MP and would never have become entitled to the superannuation. Watson argues that Parliament is therefore justified in confiscating the benefits retrospectively. 2/2/00
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.