Principles, posturing and policy - COAG 2007

Premier Iemma from New South Wales concurred that considerable progress had been made across several important areas. Beattie believed the national health accreditation “is a very significant advance and I am delighted to have been in the COAG that made that decision”. Carpenter from Western Australia thanked Howard for a “very good meeting professionally conducted”. Premier Rann focused on climate change but acknowledged the Commonwealth’s initiatives in this area. Councillor Bell was praiseworthy of Howard over the funding of local government and support given to climate change monitoring and research. And so it went.

Even Premier Bracks, who was most adamant about the carbon emission targets agreed to by the states prior to COAG, believed that out of his ten points, eight were achieved and that it was a “good day ... but could have been a great day”.

Significantly, the media correctly highlighted that the $7 billion for the National Reform Agenda demands made by the premiers and other requests were not achieved, yet all premiers agreed it was a successful outcome. This just shows the difference between the theatre of COAG and the practical realities of political negotiation and the necessary compromise that underpins all policy development.

So there we have it. COAG continues to be largely driven by the Commonwealth’s agenda and to reflect the widening net of national policy developments and priorities. At the political level the April COAG did not ambush Howard whose professionalism and lack of grandstanding again shone through and created considerable goodwill. Will Kevin be as successful if and when he becomes prime minister?