Queensland's LNP is no opposition, let alone alternative government

LNP and its role as the Opposition

If projects are fully funded, if they're in the budget if they're underway, good governments and good oppositions honour those commitments. I've repeatedly said that I want Queenslanders to know that I believe in in good governance. And if something's in a budget, if it's underway, people deserve the right to know that there's that stability. David Crisafulli, Leader of the Liberal National Party (LNP) Queensland Opposition at a press conference on 4 June.

In making this statement the Queensland LNP Opposition has endorsed the Labor Government's 2024-25 Budget before even being presented to Parliament for debate and approval. It is almost unprecedented for an Opposition in Queensland and Australia. It is a fundamental abrogation of an Opposition's role in a Westminster system of democracy where it is expected to:

• hold the government to account by scrutinising its budget
• highlight wrong spending and taxing priorities
• expose misallocation of funding
• propose alternatives, and
• provide the electorate with a clear indication of what it would do if elected.

More importantly, in Westminster democracies Oppositions serve a distinct role of being not just a critic of the government but more importantly, being the 'government in waiting' or the 'alternative government'. It thus has a duty, a role, and a responsibility to detail and explain how it would govern, how it would do things differently if elected. That means reviewing and responding to a government's annual Budget, its key vehicle to implement its policies, its political agenda, and its ideological disposition.

This role of the Opposition is particularly important in Westminster democracies unlike in the United States where a president might be elected in November, but constitutionally does not take the reins of office until inauguration the following January. By contrast in Westminster democracies once an election result is clear on Saturday night, the very next day the Opposition becomes the government. The Opposition is expected to hit the ground running – to have its ministry ready to be sworn in and to start governing and initiating its policy and political agenda. It is a case of opposition one day, government the next.

The whole, wonderful basis of having a formal, recognised and publicly funded Opposition in Westminster democracies is, as the famous 19th century writer Walter Bagehot wrote, is so "the nation is forced to hear two sides – all sides perhaps, of that which concerns it". And what can be more important to any nation or in this case. A State like Queensland, but to hear an Opposition's views and critique of a incumbent government's budget?

Thanks to the LNP's full endorsement of the Budget before even seeing it, Queensland voters will only hear one side of the Budget – the Miles Government's side, the Labor Party's side.

The LNP's endorsement of the Miles Labor Government's Budget before it has been presented to Queensland Parliament is a fundamental rejection of the Westminster system of Government – the very system that the 1989 Fitzgerald Commission Report emphasised needed to be adhered to for the sake of responsible, democratic government and indeed good governance.

It means all programs announced by the Miles Labor Government in the 2024-25 Budget including the forward estimates for the following three years, are fully endorsed by the LNP.

It means that when the Opposition gives its Budget Reply speech then it has nothing to say – it agrees with the budget.

It means the Opposition, has apparently no policy response to the expected Budget deficit and growing State debt.

It means endorsing all announcements made and budgeted for – including those for projects that the LNP have stated they have previously opposed like truth commissions and treaties.

It means accepting continuing allocation of funding over the next four years for projects that have already been shown to be exceeding original estimates or being of questionable value.

It means accepting the Miles Government's announced $26 billion over four years for the State's transition to zero emissions.

It means accepting the Government's current tax levy on the mining industry which has aroused criticism from the sector.

It means accepting the existing size and number of the current departmental structures of having 19 ministers and 8 assistant ministers and the existing high levels of ministerial and media staff.

It means accepting current levels in the Queensland Public Service employment which and conditions of employment has been growing greatly in recent years.

It means accepting in key areas like education where Queensland is not reaching its required share of spending under the School Resourcing Standard for the State school sector until 2032.

It means accepting the Miles Government's decisions to reject the March 2024 Quirk Independent Review of Brisbane 2032 Olympic Infrastructure Games even if these decisions are neither cost nor policy effective.

And so it goes …

It means Queensland does not have an effective Opposition.

Why has the LNP adopted this strategy?

All this is explained by the LNP's 'small target' strategy where it is making no specific policy statements and has been focusing on four issues – youth crime, hosing affordability, the cost of living, and health related issues especially concerning ambulance ramping. The LNP promises it will "do better" without telling us how.

This low target strategy is based on the premise that these days Oppositions do not win elections, but rather governments lose them because of their mistakes, maladministration and just sheer longevity in office – the 'it's time' factor. The same low target approach was made by the federal Labor Albanese led Opposition in the run-up to the 2022 elections when it defeated the nine year Coalition Government.

The key driver of this strategy in Queensland is that the LNP is operating under the shadow of the last LNP government in Queensland led by Campbell Newman that won spectacularly in 2012 but fell just as spectacularly in 2015 where it lost 35 seats. This was primarily because of its severe and rushed cuts to public expenditure and the public service and other controversial issues concerning health, law, public service appointments and the courts. The LNP lost more seats at the 2017 and 2020 election and so now needs 14 seats to win office.

Labor is now way down in the polls and the LNP is way ahead so it can be argued that the LNP strategy as most recently reflected in its no comment Budget approach is working.

Perhaps – but there are dangers in both policy and political terms.

What might go wrong?

First, if the LNP continues with its low target approach and does not indicate its priorities then it will have no mandate for any of its own initiatives, Nor will have any mandate to correct the excessive pre-election spending spree of the Miles Government. Such increased spending is what most governments do prior to an election. Seeking to reduce such overspending and waste and to make room for its own policy initiatives is what most new incoming governments have to do. Failure to act means accepting the outgoing government's priorities, and having no fiscal room to implement its own agenda. The alternative is to increases taxes to pay for its agenda and promises.

So, the LNP's recent Budget strategy largely precludes it from taking corrective action – or does it? Is it, once safely in office, going to junk its endorsement of the Labor Government Budget and start a round of needed cuts. Politically – this is danger, danger! Or perhaps it has no spending priorities and no agenda?

Second, by agreeing to so much of the Labor Government's agenda as reflected in the 2024-5 Budget, including where the LNP has previously indicated disagreement, then there is a risk of upsetting its own voting base – its core supporters. No wonder the major parties are suffering a decline in their primary vote and traditional supporters shift to minor parties.

Third, the LNP stress on 'stability' (see Crisafulli quote) supporting the Miles Government Budget is confusing 'stability' with inertness, ineptitude, policy laziness and political cowardice – of having no policy agenda and being a do nothing government like the one term Liberal government in Victoria (2010-2014).

The last word on what an Opposition should do should, as always, rest with Robert Menzies, the founder of the Liberal Party and who won seven elections (1949. 1951, 1954, 1955, 1958, 1961, 1963) in a row and who spent eight years in the political wilderness (1941-49), six as leader of the federal opposition. Menzies certainly warned against opposing 'for opposition's sake' and to 'choose the ground on which it is to attack'. Nevertheless, he stressed that the "chief objective of an Opposition should be to make voters feel the Opposition, in both personnel and ideas, is as different as possible" to the incumbent government. Menzies in Opposition opposed the then dominant Curtin and Chifley Labor governments concerning their referenda proposals, bank and airline nationalisations, continuing war regulations and restrictions, expanding public service, increasing centralisation and over zealous support of public housing.

So where is the LNP's 'different policy agenda'? What have they learnt after nine years in opposition to develop and articulate an alternative policy agenda and political narrative to give voters not just a real choice, but more importantly to ensure the there is a Liberal agenda, based on Liberal principles, being implemented and leaves a long lasting and positive mark on Queensland?