Howard is failing the nation on water policy

It is likely that with the passage of time the Howard Government will be regarded as the most cashed up, yet careless and incompetent government since federation.

For anyone who has it in for John Howard his response to water reform and climate change has been a godsend.

Such as it is, Howard owes his reputation as a smart political operator to quick responses to political problems. The response and the form it takes are poll driven. Solutions have been constructed and packaged to allow maximum spin: they are designed for immediate effect.

This is the way policy has been cobbled together for the past ten years. The media and opposition have gone along with this flawed method of governance. Long term vision and wisdom have been marginalised by fear of the poll.

Turnbull is Howard’s man on water. Heffernan would like to be but even Howard sees through him. Those with ambition that work with Howard have to dumb down: Turnbull is no exception. Without foreseeing the consequences Howard has grabbed ownership of water and with Turnbull as his mouthpiece has decided to spin the issue.

As the problem gets worse they will take increasing criticism. This will have an electoral impact and will not advance Howard’s standing or Turnbull’s ambitions.

Following the water summit on November 7 Howard appointed a group of public servants to report to him on solutions to the increasingly dry argument of water flows in the Murray-Darling. Pity them if they can’t make it rain. On past form if they don’t deliver Howard will throw them to the lions.

There are no quick fixes to a problem that has been staring Howard in the face since he became prime minister in 1996.

A smart move by Howard would be to take water (and climate change) out of the political arena and establish a well resourced organisation that he, and the rest of the country, can take advice from.

But Howard is not smart. He has reinforced this time and again with references to his great friendship with George Bush and his acceptance and defence of Bush’s policies including those relating to climate.

His cunning and mendacity should not be mistaken as an intellect of depth and substance. Due to a less than average opposition and media he has been able to get away with outrageous spin coupled to a dearth of facts.

The issue of water, coupled as it is to climate change, is held to be important by too many Australians for Howard and Turnbull to get away with crude and superficial spin. Electors are angry, Howard has had plenty of time to focus on the issue and put in place mechanisms to address the need for sustainable water supplies.

Spinning has politicised the issue of water. Turnbull is silly to run with poorly researched and ill thought through proposals. Such an approach to policy formation demonstrates a lack of judgment and contempt for the electorate.

If Howard doesn’t start to handle this issue openly, honestly, and with commonsense he will cop it from electors and historians alike; but if he does it will be the equivalent of Saul converting to Paul.

Given the pressing need to address the distribution, allocation and conservation of water it is imperative that Howard establish an independent national authority to do the research and science and advise on sustainable best practice. Howard has been an acquirer of power and influence but with the issue of water there are no political points in owning it. As hard as it may be Howard must let go. Water is an issue which cannot be spun or solved politically; to do so is to drink from a poison chalice.

Howard should be under no illusion as to the importance of water to Australians; it surpasses concern of terrorism. A Newspoll in early November found 86 per cent of Australians believed the government should be doing more to address climate change and a poll commissioned by the Lowy Institute in October had similar findings.

I stood as an Independent against John Anderson in the elections of 2001 and 2004. In both campaigns I raised the urgency of addressing the issue of water. In October 2001 I said:

Government policies in relation to water are ad hoc and bogged down in the duck shoving between state and federal governments … Water and water usage is a national issue and should be addressed as such. There is a need for a National Water Authority … The issue of water has the potential to become the single biggest domestic issue over the next 50 years unless it is seriously and comprehensively addressed on a national basis.

John Anderson scoffed and refused to acknowledge the sustainable use of water as an urgent national issue and referred to the proposal to establish a National Water Authority as a socialist idea. No one in the government or opposition picked up on the issue during either election campaign.

Maintaining spin as the core of problem solving will likely see Howard spin himself out of office; spin lacks integrity, it amounts to lying.