Kevin 'Mini-Me' Rudd is no John Howard

Paul Kelly’s recent article in The Australian (“Winning ways of Kevin Rudd”, July 28, 2007) also pointed to a number of other policies where Rudd has adopted the Coalition Government’s line. Rudd is a self-declared fiscal conservative who “upholds an independent Reserve Bank of Australia, gave endorsement to the entire Costello May budget, supports Howard's migration levels and, like Howard, loves the Australian flag”.

No wonder Labor voters are getting excited; Rudd’s finally adopting the policies that made them vote for Howard.

Putting aside the unhappy plight of those voters who value an actual choice at the ballot box, if Kevin Rudd is just a copy cat version of John Howard, why not vote Rudd? Why not have the change of government that some voters feel is in the air? Why not give the new kid on the block a go?

In pointing out the similarities between Rudd’s policy agenda and the Coalition Government, the media has overlooked some key differences that put Rudd and Howard - Labor and Liberal - poles apart.

This is true both on specific policy grounds, and on the basic qualities that define the men and the parties. Let’s look at each in turn - specifics first.

Rudd has opposed a number of major Coalition policies and will shelve various Coalition reforms - most particularly in economic and tax matters.

Labor is eager to shelve industrial relations reforms implemented by the Howard Government. It will remove WorkChoices or radically scale back the reforms the legislation introduced.

No doubt, Rudd will also fail to continue the Coalition’s trade liberalisation. Comments made by Labor Party representatives and trade union officials after Ford Australia announced the closure of its Geelong factory confirm this. The Australian Manufacturers Workers’ Union demanded intervention by the PM to save jobs. Rudd responded with protectionist rhetoric, saying "I don't want to be prime minister of a country where we don't make things any more. And making things means still having a viable automobile industry in Australia."

The only way to do this would be to protect the economy, stop free trade and expose Australian consumers to higher costs of an inefficient home market or the burden of heavily taxed imports. You cannot claim to be in support of free trade and then expect government intervention to save jobs when faced with the inevitable costs of comparative advantage. But, true to his real ideology, Rudd’s first reaction was “intervene” and protect.

Rudd will no doubt raise taxes on the rich or even on corporations - he has to raise extra revenue in light of the spending pledges he is making. Australia already struggles to be competitive in terms of global comparative tax rates. Australians are among the most highly taxed people in the world. The Coalition Government does not get off “scot-free” on this issue. It has had more than a decade to implement tax reform that would bring this competitiveness. But it has done do some things well and is more likely than the ALP to take action in the future to produce a more competitive environment.

The Coalition has broadened the tax base and simplified taxes. By minimising the number of taxes, and lowering tax rates in general, the Coalition ensured that all Australians share a fairer burden in paying their share of tax.

By eliminating one of the tax brackets the Coalition was able to remove some of the disincentives to earn created by “bracket creep”. With a higher salary, individuals can enter a higher tax bracket which nullifies the financial benefit of the promotion. Why take on more responsibilities, if your remuneration is whittled away by being pushed into a higher tax bracket?