Latest / The Morning Edition / Will One Nation push Labor to reshape our society?

Transcript

Will One Nation push Labor to reshape our society? · The Morning Edition

0:04
S1: We're only hours away from the federal treasurer handing down
0:08
S1: the government's much anticipated budget. All eyes have been on
0:12
S1: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese anticipated and controversial changes to taxes
0:17
S1: that benefit the wealthier members of our society. But there's
0:22
S1: an entirely different factor that will likely be swaying the
0:25
S1: government's thinking. I'm Samantha Salinger Morris, and you're listening to
0:30
S1: Morning Edition from The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald today.
0:35
S1: Political columnist Sean Kelly on what One Nation's historic win
0:39
S1: last weekend could mean for the changes to our society
0:43
S1: that the government implements or not. It's May the 12th. Sean,
0:51
S1: welcome back to the podcast.
0:53
S2: Thanks for having me back.
0:55
S1: Okay. I'm very excited to ask you this because you
0:57
S1: have been embedded in politics for Yonks you advised former
1:01
S1: prime ministers Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd. You've been writing
1:05
S1: about politics for more than a decade, so you're not
1:07
S1: easily shocked. And yet you just wrote that even though
1:11
S1: one nation's historic victory over the weekend was widely anticipated,
1:15
S1: it felt like an explosion. Why?
1:18
S3: Well, part of this comes down to a fundamental political rule,
1:22
S3: which is that you can anticipate things before they happen.
1:26
S3: But until they actually happen, it's very difficult to tell
1:30
S3: how they will actually land. You know, the atmosphere really
1:33
S3: does shift when a significant political moment lands. It's a
1:37
S3: real pain as somebody who writes a political column, because
1:40
S3: you can kind of guess at what's going to happen,
1:42
S3: but actually it's very difficult to write properly ahead of
1:45
S3: time because everything really does change. This particular moment, I think,
1:53
S3: landed differently, partly because of the scale of the victory.
1:57
S3: It was widely anticipated that One Nation would win, but
2:01
S3: the victory was really shockingly decisive. And secondly, because I
2:06
S3: think with with firsts, you know, and this is, uh,
2:10
S3: the first House of Representatives seat federally, one nation has
2:14
S3: actually won at an election or by election. They they
2:19
S3: send a signal, I think that the world has changed.
2:22
S3: The day before, um, this wasn't possible the day afterwards.
2:27
S3: It is.
2:30
S4: A win. It's a win for the rest of Australia.
2:34
S5: Yes, yes.
2:37
S4: I'm seeing the see of this proud Australians faces here
2:40
S4: in front of me. Hundreds of you. But millions are
2:43
S4: watching on TV now and I believe it's giving them hope.
2:47
S5: Yes yes, yes. People here to represent you, the people.
2:53
S4: To get our country back.
2:55
S5: And.
2:58
S3: And what this means is that we could see it
3:02
S3: happen again. And suddenly you have more one nations representatives
3:07
S3: in the parliament. And that's a really big deal. Um,
3:11
S3: you know, I find the prospect of one nation gaining
3:13
S3: popularity in this country fairly frightening. Not not in terms
3:17
S3: of the protest vote. I can understand why people are protesting,
3:20
S3: but in terms of the, uh, the way that they
3:22
S3: exploit race, uh, the racist way they approach politics and
3:27
S3: have done for decades now. You know, I find that
3:30
S3: a really frightening fact and it shifts the entire landscape,
3:34
S3: you know, as others have written, this creates this situation
3:39
S3: where it becomes very difficult at some point for the
3:43
S3: Liberal Party and the National Party to argue that they
3:47
S3: will hold government without the support of One Nation. And
3:50
S3: you could already see senior liberal figures, uh, tiptoeing towards
3:54
S3: that on the weekend saying, well, you know, we'd have
3:57
S3: to be in coalition with whoever, whoever's there to be
4:00
S3: in coalition with. And that puts the Liberal Party in particular,
4:04
S3: I think, in a really difficult position, because that while
4:06
S3: that may well appease voters in regions like Farrer or
4:11
S3: electorates like Farrer, it will alienate voters in a whole
4:15
S3: bunch of other electorates that needs to win.
4:17
S1: And so tell us, so which senior figures, you know,
4:20
S1: have said that they would work with One Nation?
4:22
S3: Well, there's actually been a bit of contradiction on this.
4:25
S3: I think Tim Wilson came out and said this first up,
4:28
S3: that you'd have to be in coalition with, with, uh, whoever, uh,
4:32
S3: it turned out you needed to be in coalition with.
4:34
S3: But then it seemed to me he slightly tried to
4:37
S3: walk those comments back a little bit later, or at
4:39
S3: least placed the emphasis somewhere a little bit bit differently
4:42
S3: and say, of course, you know, we want to be
4:44
S3: in government in our own right, but the coalition doesn't
4:47
S3: seem entirely clear on this, I think. And you can
4:50
S3: understand why this is the fundamental division. This was the
4:53
S3: division you saw over the question of whether or not
4:55
S3: they should give their preferences to one nation? Much of
4:59
S3: their base is telling them, you have to work with
5:01
S3: one nation. We want you to work with One Nation.
5:03
S3: We want you to give preferences to one Nation. The
5:06
S3: problem for the Liberal Party right now is they've lost
5:09
S3: so many votes and they've lost so many seats, that
5:11
S3: there are precious few people representing the types of electorates
5:15
S3: that they need to win back. So they're hearing from
5:18
S3: all of the voters that they already have, and they're
5:20
S3: not hearing enough, or they're certainly not listening enough to
5:23
S3: the voters that they need to win if they're going
5:26
S3: to win in their own right. Now, of course, it's
5:29
S3: possible that they're in the process of giving up on
5:31
S3: that possibility and that, you know, that is another significant
5:34
S3: shift to the landscape.
5:35
S1: Okay. And speaking of that political shift, you know, you've
5:37
S1: mentioned that this win shifts the entire landscape. And you
5:41
S1: also mentioned in your column, you know, that Pauline Hanson
5:43
S1: has frequently spoken of getting, quote, our country back, but
5:47
S1: that after this win, to those who aren't followers of
5:49
S1: One Nation and Pauline Hanson, this suddenly sounds dangerous. Closer
5:54
S1: to a threat. So is that. What do you mean
5:56
S1: when you say that? What is it about that phrase
5:58
S1: getting our country back? What does that mean to you
6:00
S1: in a way that you think feels like a threat
6:02
S1: to those who don't follow her?
6:04
S6: Well, who who is our.
6:05
S3: In that sentence? You know, getting our country back? Who,
6:08
S3: who does that represent? Who is the we in that
6:11
S3: equation and getting our country back, you know, back from whom?
6:16
S3: Back to what time exactly are we talking? And I
6:21
S3: think we talked about this last time, a few months.
6:24
S3: This is one of the problems with nostalgia is not
6:26
S3: everybody gets to be nostalgic. The past wasn't so great
6:30
S3: for many people. And One nation, of course, when they
6:34
S3: say these things, is a pretty clear implication that we're
6:36
S3: talking about white Australians, you know, maybe even more white blokes,
6:40
S3: but but certainly white Australians, uh, Anglo Australians, and they're
6:45
S3: taking it back from migrants. And I think to say
6:49
S3: that can sound like bluster and has for quite a
6:53
S3: long time, sounded like bluster. But as one nation's numbers
6:57
S3: have risen, it has sounded more and more like something
7:01
S3: that could actually come true in some fundamental way, in
7:04
S3: the way that we've seen it happen in America. And,
7:07
S3: you know, when we actually see results delivered, as in Farrah,
7:12
S3: it becomes possible for us all to imagine that possibility. Now,
7:16
S3: I don't think for many structural reasons that one nation
7:21
S3: in particular is about to become, you know, the governing
7:25
S3: party of this country. But I think they are opening
7:28
S3: a space in which far right movements can operate very successfully.
7:35
S1: And tell us on the day that we're recording this.
7:36
S1: So we're recording this on Monday, around lunchtime. By the
7:39
S1: time this airs, it'll be just hours before the federal
7:43
S1: budget is handed down. So how does this triumph and fairer?
7:46
S1: How does it change the atmosphere in which the government's
7:49
S1: budgets are going to arrive in.
7:51
S3: Usually, I think, you know, of course, we don't know
7:53
S3: what will be in the budget until Tuesday night, but
7:57
S3: all the talk is of changes to taxes on property
8:00
S3: investment around capital gains tax discount and negative gearing. And
8:07
S3: what they are directed towards in the government's retelling or
8:11
S3: in the government's telling, is intergenerational inequality. So evening things
8:17
S3: up between the generations. Realistically, they are targeted at equality.
8:22
S3: More generally. They are targeted at evening things up between
8:25
S3: people who have assets and can earn income from assets.
8:28
S3: And most people in the world who have to earn
8:31
S3: from income from wages and salaries. And that is a
8:35
S3: huge gap. It is a growing gap, and that gap
8:39
S3: is part of the driver of the explosive rage that
8:43
S3: we are seeing take hold in large parts of the country,
8:46
S3: I think, and as Has demonstrated in Farrah and what
8:51
S3: Farrah says to the political class. But I think to
8:54
S3: the country at large is if you are going to
8:57
S3: do something about this rage, you need to act now.
9:01
S3: And that is a message at a political level. If
9:03
S3: you're going to stop the rise of parties like One Nation,
9:06
S3: you need to do this. And it is a message
9:09
S3: to the supporters of parties like One Nation, with the
9:12
S3: Labour Party saying, we are actually doing something about the problems.
9:17
S3: You feel we are doing something about the anger and
9:19
S3: frustration you feel and you know, labour. Labour has been
9:22
S3: trying to make the argument for the last few months.
9:24
S3: The Prime Minister has been trying to make the argument
9:26
S3: that One Nation doesn't actually follow through on its support
9:29
S3: for workers. It pretends to be the friend of workers,
9:32
S3: but then votes against things like wage rises or increased
9:36
S3: bargaining power for unions. Those arguments obviously aren't cutting through.
9:42
S3: Rhetoric is not cutting through, so the government recognises it
9:45
S3: needs to do something. And I think that does make
9:49
S3: what is rumored to be in the budget a much
9:51
S3: more persuasive proposition.
9:57
S1: After the break.
9:59
S3: Part of the question will be how much of what
10:01
S3: is announced on Tuesday night survives the next few months
10:04
S3: and makes it into legislation.
10:12
S1: And you wrote something that I found intriguing. You said
10:14
S1: that depending on how significant this budget is, and I
10:18
S1: think you probably were pointing to changes that we do
10:20
S1: expect to see to capital gains tax and negative gearing,
10:24
S1: that it could mark a turning point for the federal government,
10:27
S1: a reminder that, quote, governments can reshape the country in
10:30
S1: significant ways, that the assumptions and conventions on which a
10:33
S1: nation operates do not have to be eternal. So. So
10:37
S1: tell me what you mean by this.
10:39
S3: Well, first, it goes towards the way that this government
10:43
S3: has operated for the last four years, the way that
10:46
S3: this government has operated for the last few years has
10:48
S3: been to work in an incredibly cautious manner to work
10:52
S3: very incrementally towards change. In general, I would say this
10:57
S3: was put to me by a former Labour adviser to
11:00
S3: find where consensus already exists and then do what that
11:04
S3: consensus suggests they should do. So there's not been a
11:06
S3: lot of boldness or courage. I, you know, open question
11:10
S3: about how much leadership I think that there has been
11:13
S3: at times. This is a clear challenge to that. Now,
11:18
S3: it is true that the public has moved towards potentially
11:23
S3: embracing changes like these on property or making housing more affordable,
11:27
S3: especially for younger generations. But it also requires courage, because
11:33
S3: this has been taboo for so long, because it was
11:35
S3: seen as a major factor in the defeat of Bill
11:37
S3: shorten in 2019. Because we know a lot of people
11:41
S3: in the country do take advantage of these tax breaks.
11:45
S3: You know, there is a potential for a groundswell of rage.
11:49
S3: The government is going ahead anyway. And that that is
11:52
S3: a risk. And there is an element of courageousness there.
11:56
S3: And the element of courage comes not in it being
11:59
S3: the first absolute difficult thing that the government has done,
12:02
S3: because the government did break its promise on the stage
12:05
S3: three tax cuts in the second year of the last term.
12:08
S3: It comes about partly in the complexity of this change,
12:12
S3: by changing a number of elements of taxation in relation
12:15
S3: to housing and at the same time continuing to engage
12:19
S3: in other policy elements around housing in terms of supply,
12:22
S3: building more homes, investing in infrastructure around homes. The government
12:27
S3: is dramatically intervening in the housing market. It is reshaping
12:31
S3: the housing market, and most particularly, it is reshaping the
12:35
S3: assumption in this country over the last 20 or 30
12:38
S3: years that the right to invest in housing and make
12:42
S3: money from investing in housing is more important than the
12:45
S3: right to live in a house, the right to potentially
12:48
S3: own a house and have that element of security in
12:51
S3: your life. And I think Australians, you know, are waking
12:55
S3: up to the fact that that is a perversion of
12:57
S3: public policy and the government is grasping that. And what
13:00
S3: is interesting about that is partly in relation to the moment,
13:05
S3: but it's also interesting in terms of what it opens
13:08
S3: up for the government. Does this mean that the government
13:10
S3: now recognises that it has the potential and the ability
13:15
S3: to intervene in markets, to reshape markets, because realistically, that
13:18
S3: is a significant way that governments can reshape the society
13:22
S3: in which we live. I think, you know, any analysis
13:27
S3: of the economic problems confronting the country at this point
13:31
S3: end up taking into account privatisation. They end up taking
13:35
S3: into account oligopolies, the existence of rent seeking, dominating businesses.
13:41
S3: And this move is the first sign that the government
13:46
S3: is potentially willing to take on really big questions like that.
13:50
S3: I'm not saying they will, but it's the first time
13:52
S3: you've thought, well, well, maybe.
13:54
S1: And I'm just curious, you know, because you have been
13:56
S1: a labor insider, you definitely have your finger in that
13:59
S1: pie to, so to speak. So are you hearing conversations
14:02
S1: in terms of just how far elbow might go in
14:04
S1: this regard? Because we know that famously elbow has been
14:08
S1: quite cautious. His treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has been very outspoken about,
14:12
S1: you know, having greater ambition. He told our mastheads just
14:15
S1: this week, I'm an impatient person, and I saw with
14:18
S1: great interest that journalist Samantha Maiden on insiders a few
14:22
S1: weeks back about Chalmers, she said they say nobody puts
14:24
S1: baby in a corner, but Jim's been put in a corner.
14:27
S1: He's only been allowed to play with the big toys
14:29
S1: very rarely. He's sort of been chomping at the bit
14:31
S1: to make change, so I don't know. Do you think
14:33
S1: those factors together, in addition to whatever you might be hearing,
14:37
S1: could we be seeing even greater change ahead, do you think?
14:40
S3: Look, I have no sense of what will come after this.
14:43
S3: And I think, you know, fairly, the government is absolutely
14:45
S3: focused on the budget. And I think in a way,
14:47
S3: they'll be very frustrated with the fact that people, you know,
14:51
S3: like myself are already saying, well, what's what's next? Uh,
14:54
S3: you know, they absolutely will not want people to bank
14:57
S3: these changes and just move on and fair enough. You know,
14:59
S3: I do think this is a potentially really significant set
15:03
S3: of changes and it could be a really significant debate ahead.
15:07
S3: You know, I spoke at the start about the way
15:10
S3: that you can't know what something will feel like until
15:14
S3: it actually happens. We can't know what this announcement will
15:17
S3: feel like until it actually happens. And that cuts in
15:19
S3: a couple of different directions. We can't know how big
15:22
S3: it will actually feel. Um, the stage three tax cuts
15:25
S3: felt like they were going to be controversial. The conservative
15:29
S3: wing of the press came out very hard against them,
15:32
S3: but people were behind them. And the the controversy faded
15:35
S3: very quickly. And it really was. And it felt at
15:39
S3: the time like that would really encourage the government to
15:41
S3: go on and do more. And and it didn't. You know,
15:43
S3: we've had to wait another two and a half years
15:46
S3: for something of this significance to happen. So we might
15:50
S3: all be getting excited about this. And then, you know, nothing,
15:54
S3: nothing follows it. But the other point is that things
15:57
S3: could end up being much more difficult than they currently seem.
16:01
S3: You know, there's, there's this kind of assumption that this
16:03
S3: has been talked about in political columns for quite some
16:05
S3: time now, and everybody knows it's coming. But the truth is,
16:08
S3: voters don't really know something is coming until it comes.
16:11
S3: And when this policy is announced, there will be ferocious opposition.
16:15
S3: There will be ferocious opposition from various lobby groups. There
16:18
S3: will be ferocious opposition from the opposition. The Prime Minister's
16:22
S3: broken promises will get a lot of air time, and
16:27
S3: he's on the record on a lot of occasions saying
16:30
S3: he won't change these two taxes. So that debate could
16:33
S3: be very significant. So really the challenge for the government
16:36
S3: is not just in the announcement, it is prosecuting the argument.
16:40
S3: And because they've been so cautious for the last few years,
16:43
S3: the truth is that this is a government very inexperienced
16:46
S3: in making significant arguments. It's a government that is incredibly
16:49
S3: inexperienced at making complex arguments that announcing complex policies. So
16:54
S3: part of the question will be, how much of what
16:56
S3: is announced on Tuesday night survives the next few months
16:59
S3: and makes it into legislation.
17:01
S1: Interesting. Okay. Well, Sean, just to wrap up, I have
17:04
S1: a question I wanted to ask you because you also
17:07
S1: wrote that one nation's historic win in fairer might signal
17:10
S1: that labor is already too late. Tell us about that.
17:15
S3: Well, this this is the bleaker side of things you
17:18
S3: could say. This budget is going to represent a turning point.
17:23
S3: And that labor will clearly be saying to voters, we
17:26
S3: hear you, we understand your frustrations. And voters will say, well, well,
17:29
S3: thank you. Okay. Our trust in government is to some
17:31
S3: extent restored. Um, or it could be that this government
17:34
S3: and perhaps the governments before it as well, Um, have
17:38
S3: missed the moment that actually it was the last 1015
17:42
S3: years that change really needed to happen and that the
17:46
S3: fact that One Nation is securing the types of victory
17:49
S3: is it is now securing suggests that that downward trend
17:54
S3: away from major parties, away from trust in government is
17:57
S3: just on a slope that is speeding up and can't
18:01
S3: be slowed. But, you know, we will we will get
18:04
S3: some sense of that over the next couple of years.
18:06
S1: And just to be clear, when you say that if
18:08
S1: Labor's already too late, what you're talking about is too
18:11
S1: late to stem the tide of the far right fire,
18:13
S1: that is, as you've written now, raging.
18:16
S3: That exactly that, you know, it is possible that more
18:23
S3: measures to tackle, uh, you know, the economic injustice in
18:26
S3: our society needed to happen under the previous Liberal government.
18:29
S3: But it is also possible that there was there was
18:31
S3: a final chance in the early years of this labor government. Um,
18:35
S3: you know, the other thing to remember is that there
18:37
S3: was an inflationary crisis in the first term of this government,
18:41
S3: and now we're heading back into another period of inflation.
18:45
S3: And I think it is hard to overstate how angry
18:49
S3: that is likely to make people. Interest rates are rising again.
18:54
S3: You know, the first time frustrated people, the government really
18:57
S3: fell in the polls this time. You know, people might
19:01
S3: just really throw their hands up in despair. And that
19:03
S3: could lead to a very bleak electoral mood.
19:11
S1: Well, Sean, it's always great to have you on and
19:13
S1: have your insights. So thank you so much for your time.
19:16
S3: Thank you.
19:26
S1: In other news today, homeowners can no longer expect that
19:30
S1: their property is worth as much money as it was
19:32
S1: even a few months ago as the auction market weakens
19:36
S1: to levels last seen in the 2022 downturn. One nation's
19:41
S1: thumping victory in Fairer on Saturday has pollsters and politicians
19:45
S1: surveying seats across the nation, asking which other seats are
19:49
S1: most likely to fall to one nation. And there's a
19:53
S1: movie out with Talking Sheep and Hugh Jackman. While audiences
19:57
S1: are usually skeptical of this combination, The Sheep Detective, a
20:01
S1: family friendly murder mystery, is leaving adults sobbing. You can
20:06
S1: read more at the age.com.au or smh.com.au. Today's episode was
20:14
S1: produced by Josh towers. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills,
20:18
S1: and our podcasts are overseen by Lisa Muxworthy and Tom McKendrick.
20:22
S1: If you like our show, follow the Morning Edition and
20:25
S1: leave a review for us on Apple or Spotify. Thanks
20:29
S1: for listening.