The term “working families” is, in the political fashion sense, definitely the new black. It was to the 2007 election campaign what “It’s Time” was to ’72: it seamlessly married the dominant theme with the prevailing mood. What it did was to wedge the master wedger, John Howard – which is no mean feat.
Families had become Howard’s code for his hypocritical stance of social conservatism – an imagined bulkwark against homos-xuality, contagion from refugees, moral decay, drugs, and general permissiveness and decadence; in fact, anything remotely progressive.
This was hypocritical because Howard’s IR policies were causing immense damage to the families he was supposed to be defending – loss of job security, loss of shift penalties, extended hours and loss of public holidays, not to mention the rampant casualisation of the workforce and the exploitation which that has involved.
Howard was snookered when the familes took account of “working”.
Greg Combet was the first I can remember using it repeatedly, and it formed the cornerstone of the ACTU’s campaign. It was taken up by Julia Gillard (every second sentence) and Kevin Rudd (every third sentence).
Tactically, it was brilliant.
But it also has resonance far beyond these shores.
Presidential hopefuls in the Democratic Party, Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards, are peppering their public utterances with the term, and a Working Families Party has been formed in the US. Last week, it had two members elected to the Hartford City Council in Connecticut.
The party is taking the lead in protests in New York this week against yet another round of train and toll fare increases.
Something is happening out there.
Yeah, but it left us bludging families feeling very left out in the cold. A neglected constituency. If we could be bothered voting things are really gonna change.
Tony, I’m sure there would be great therapy for you in a nice psyche ward somewhere. But no, that would cost the tax payers money and why should they expend a cent on a decadent moron like you.
Democracy really does not suit lefties, does it Venise? It must be difficult trying to sell an intellectually & morally bankrupt ideology that was built on malice & envy. No wonder left loves spin as its true motives are unpalatable to decent majority.
I bet Libby did really well at school & uni. Can’t think, has limited knowledge base but trained to sense a right wing view and attack. Did you know homosexuality was listed as a psycho disease until Gough era, a Roman Emperor was a transsexual – not new.
Libby, he’s too far round the twist to listen to you. Read “comments”, Abjorensen: Has the Liberal brand become political poison? Take two steps back from your screen. And you will see a deeply disturbed person. I’m completely serious. Trust me!
Cheers.