Supposedly the Labor Party lacks vision, leadership and an ability to engage the community. This is touchy feely garbage which ignores the realities of our Westminster forms of government and the interaction of the media with both the government and opposition. If Labor wants to get in faster they should wish for a recession, or alternatively make some sensible democratic choices such as term limits on the Executive and fixed term elections.

Natural Party of Government

The term, or the concern that a party is becoming the natural party of government is journalistic and partisan hubris. Also the notion that the so-called left, or the so-called right are in disarray and permanent chaos is also hubris. The Westminster system gives undue power to the Executive, which is informally invested in the Prime Minister. Incumbency is the biggest differentiator in an election - the churn rate is exceptionally low. Prime Ministers are more likely to lose their position to something other than an election.

When the Liberals under Menzies dominated parliament for twenty three years, there was the assumption that Labor was permanently unfavoured by the electorate. This ignored Menzies ability to wedge at election time, as well as the effect of Democratic Labor Party. It also ignores the work of the post-Menzies governments of Holt, Gorton and McMahon in modernising the pre-1950s policies and world-view of the Menzies government.

We then had Whitlam come in with a revolutionary zeal, and fall to both an incompetent cabinet before the bunyip aristocracy reclaimed "their" government through the Governor-General. If Whitlam's time in government shows anything, it is that external economic factors, as well as an opposition who has been too long out of power are damaging for an aspiring government. Then we get Fraser again, who applied 1960s economic principle to an economy that was on the edge of booming into the information age.

The common folklore over Fraser losing the 1983 election was that it was a "drover's dog" election where the local drover could have put his dog up for election and beating Fraser. But was it? Bill Hayden, who announced he was going to step down as Labor, commented;

Fraser meanwhile, had made the most disastrous decision of his whole political career. He rushed out to Government House, without a prior appointment being made, to call a double dissolution. If only he had waited, the course of our political history might well have been quite different, something he has acknowledged to me in private conversation.

The media then made sure the Liberals were in permanent disarray, running through Peacock, Howard, Peacock, Downer, Howard, Hewson, to Howard again. Labor with the power of government fell in behind the Prime Minister, until Keating decided to make a claim for the position. I recall that there was mention of Labor being the natural party of government since they obviously understood economic reform better than previous Liberal governments. And now we have the Liberals ten years in. The slow oscillation of Westminster government continues with all the advantages that incumbency offers.

The states are no different. They are all multi-term Labor governments. The closest thing to term limits the States have is NSW's ICAC. It ousted Greiner and probably weighed in on Carr's decision to retire from the Premier position.

The Waitocracy

John Howard and Kim Beazley are the same politician. They are both products of the Australian waitocracy. Howard has been remarked upon as lazarus with a triple bypass because he survived several leadership changes before becoming Prime Minister. The lesson there is that winning elections is the only thing that gives a party leader any legitimacy and authority under our present system. Howard was as much in the wilderness between 1983 and 1996, as Beazley is now.

Both pursue small target political campaigns. Howard was fortunate that Keating didn't have a Tampa or 911 in 1996 that he could whip the electorate into a frenzy about. All government's have used the power of government and the public purse to wedge, discredit and politically isolate their opponents. The Howard government is currently using taxpayer dollars to sell a policy that was not formalised legislatively until recently, and will most likely come into constitutional contention. But this is not unique for an Australian government. Taxpayer dollars have been purloined all through Australian history to attack oppositions.

There is no natural party of government, there is only incumbency. This is the best indicator of past and future election performance. We participate in a system of slow oscillation, that rewards those already in power, not only with ongoing terms, but an entropy of all power toward the centre. The Westminster is not a strong system. It is weak in checks and balances, and needs procedural additions to protect democracy.

There needs to be, at the minimum, the addition of;

• Fixed term elections.
• Term limits on the Prime Minister and Premier positions.
• Citizen Auditors.

This will be a start in defeating the waitocracy.

cam

More Reading on Opposition

• Opposition
• Waitocracy
• Incumbency
• Churn Rate
• The Natural Party of Government
• The Cost Of Opposition
• Liberal Groupers