Change of government in Australia

OK, so this is the first entry for a long while, but I can't let this momentous event go...

After 11.5 years of Howard and Costello in charge, we have a new Rudd Labor government. This is a remarkable turnaround in Labor's fortunes, and a stellar achievement for Rudd, who is relatively new to Federal Parliament and was opposition leader for only 11 months. The landslide victory to Labor was entirely predictable based on the opinion polls all year, but I don't think anyone was brave enough to predict it. Howard was able to argue that there wasn't a case for change, because of the strong economy, but in the end he didn't make a strong case for re-election either. This is a landmark election, because it's the first time in modern Australian politics that a government has been thrown out in economic good times and without being actually detested by a significant proportion of the electorate. A new political rule will go into the textbooks: a fourth-term government can't rest on its laurels; it must renew itself, and its leader, if it is to win.

And fair enough. Howard has been remarkably successful, but like any long-time leader he has racked up a lot of scandals (children overboard, AWB, Hicks, Haneef and a few mistreated immigrants stand out in my mind). Many voters are not outraged by these, which explains his ability to keep winning elections despite many politically-aware people cursing him. But everyone has a limit. Even the most politically uninterested voter will eventually take a little notice as the scandals continue, especially when they're getting WorkChoices ads rammed down their throats, and they're not seeing any convincing action from the government on climate change. In this situation, many uncommitted voters will critically evaluate the alternative and end their habit of returning the current government. Kevin Rudd has played to this crowd very cleverly. He has avoided ideological fights; he has broadly supported government policies, because voters have supported them; he has bravely fought the government on economic credibility, which has long been perceived as a Liberal strength and a Labor weakness. In all, he has made a convincing case that it's safe to vote for Labor. In addition, he has outlined policies in a few areas that look to the future: climate change, education, and broadband infrastructure. The electorate was correct to reward him with victory in the election.

This election is my first victory: it's the first time in my life that the team I voted for won. I'm unashamedly anti-Howard, although the passage of time has predictably softened my frevently pro-Labor, anti-Liberal tendencies. I now see as much potential for bad policy from either party. But I estimate that the daily actions and inactions of a political party in government are much more significant than the policies that are outlined in the bluster of an election campaign. The scandals I mentioned above are more or less the key reasons I'm glad to see the end of Howard. None of them can be traced to a policy statement on the Liberal Party website. I suspect many of the voters who decided this election can relate to this, even if they couldn't articulate it specifically. This was a government that mistreated individuals and groups of people for its political gain, which to me is inexcusable.

So I'm glad Howard lost. I was even going to be glad that Howard lost his seat. I was going to feel schadenfreude at his ultimate humiliation. But then I thought, while the count was in progress and it wasn't looking good for him: is it right to take pleasure in someone else's misfortunes? Then I thought of the suffering of others that Howard contributed to and thought yes, I will celebrate the loss of his seat, if it happens. This has been a drawn-out affair. It's now 24 hours after the election result was confirmed and we still don't know who won in Bennelong. If Maxine McKew wins and Howard loses, as seems likely, it will be by a tiny margin. My mind changed again when Howard conceded defeat with a most gracious and dignified speech. He clearly accepted the decision of the people and wished his successor well. He reflected on the achievements of his government and the privilege of serving his local area and the nation, and accepted his time was up. He didn't appear the least bit humiliated at the likely prospect of losing his seat; it would be convenient for him, in fact, to be able to retire quietly and not inflict a by-election on the locals. Given all that, it no longer felt appropriate for me to gloat. So I am now celebrating the prospect of Maxine McKew, a high-profile and seemingly very credible campaigner, winning the seat rather than Howard losing it.

Kevin Rudd's victory speech was mundane and unconvincing compared to Howard's concession speech. He repeated Howard's and Hawke's promises to govern for all Australians, as if that were possible. And on the news this morning he repeated one of the key lines in a different speech. Everyone knows the guy's a nerd, but I overlooked that while I was barracking for him. Now that there's no need to barrack, it seems clear we're left with a boring nerd. I'm sure he'll grow into the role, but I hope he switches out of campaign mode soon. Labor Senator Penny Wong's performance on Insiders this morning was also insipid in the extreme.

In other news, Peter Costello has decided not to become Opposition Leader. This is a surprise and probably a shame. He's a more decent person than Howard and a formidable parliamentary performer. It's understandable in hindsight, though. Whoever becomes opposition leader is unlikely to remain in the position long enough to become Prime Minister. Costello probably also understands that renewal is required, and although he's youngish, he's part of the "old" Liberal Party that needs to be laid to rest. Malcolm Turnbull has instantly thrown his hat in the ring, and I'd tip him to win it. He has a great drive and intellect, and I see no reason he wouldn't do a good job as Opposition Leader or Prime Minister.

Finally, my party of choice for the Senate, The Democrats, have been wiped out in this election. Not one Democrat will sit in the next Senate. I think that's a shame. They've been written off as irrelevant for quite a while now, on what I think is a very shallow analysis. They lost popular support when they allowed Howard's GST to pass, with amendments, through the Senate. But Howard won government after campaigning on a GST, and they didn't see it as their right to deny him that. Although I opposed the GST (but I support it now), I respected the Democrats for that. They didn't grandstand; they applied a principled approach to reviewing legislation. I'd much rather that than see the grandstanders extraordinaire, the Greens, gain balance of power in the Senate. I believe the Parliament will be poorer without them.