A political contest playing out over the Tasman provides a tantalising counterfactual to what might have unfolded in Queensland.
Only a month ago, the Queensland LNP twisted itself every which way, leaked against its leader, faced a revolt by old white backroom men and dared to challenge the strutting party president David Hutchinson.
LNP leader Deb Frecklington prevailed and, while Hutchinson lost in his outside-the-tent-putsch move, the parliamentary party and organisation remain in an effective stand-off — a political machine at war with itself.
As a result of this internecine strife, the LNP has moved from being the underdog at the October 31 poll to drifting outsider as Labor’s Annastacia Palaszczuk rides high on the back of steady, safe, effective handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
It is not hard to see how this thesis has evolved and taken hold in the minds of players and pundits. It’s Maslow’s theory of the hierarchy of human needs, stupid.
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy is based on the psychologist’s 1943 paper on human needs and motivation, where a rising hierarchy is satisfied as each tier is ticked off.
A basic level of need in any political calculus is safety and personal security. Meeting those fundamental requirements of individual satisfaction allows politicians to then gain permission for other promises and proposals.
Nothing fits Maslow’s hierarchy more neatly than giving people safety and security during a global pandemic — protecting them from getting sick and possibly dying. Palaszczuk has done that and, at the moment, she is being rewarded for it.
A corresponding example of a politician facing election who has also stood up in the challenge of COVID-19 is New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern.
New Zealand Labour’s Ardern, a poster progressive leader feted around the democratic world who graced the cover of Time, is taking her minority government to the polls on September 19 against a National opposition which is terrified of defeat and in constant leadership turmoil.
After registering a losing poll result of just 30% two months ago, National ditched its leader, Simon Bridges, for an apparent “winner” in Todd Muller. By mid-July, this was seen as a bad move and the opposition party switched again, this time to Judith Collins, portrayed as New Zealand’s “Iron Lady”.
Now the polls are ringing loudly again and it’s gone from a disaster to a wipeout. A weekend poll put Ardern’s Labour Party on an astonishing 61% — the highest the party has ever recorded — against National on 25%, down five points from the time they first started their game of leadership merry-go-round.
Even more confronting is the net satisfaction rating for Ardern — the Labour leader is on net 77% (with an approval number up in the stratosphere, at 85.3%).
Collins has a satisfaction number that’s positive — but at plus 8.7 it’s more than overshadowed by Ardern.
There are two glaring conclusions from these numbers — which still might be brought back to the field by the gravity of a campaign but look almost unbeatable at the moment.
It’s safe to say Ardern is the winning element in Labour’s pitch to voters. They regard her as a safe pair of hands in a time of uncertainty and insecurity and they are more than satisfied with the way she’s steered the country through this crisis.
The other stand-out conclusion is that voters do not like instability and infighting, and regard changing leaders twice in just over two months as an exemplar in that.
The other noteworthy observation is that there have been plenty of criticisms of Ardern’s government — from a failure to present a meaningful economic plan, to myriad broken promises and a distaste for celebrity leadership.
These disparate quibbles with Ardern and her government are taking a backseat to the overriding satisfaction with stable stewardship through the pandemic.
The parallels with what’s playing out in Queensland are there and we could only wonder what damage the LNP might have done to itself if they’d gone ahead with destroying Frecklington’s leadership. Even so, they have inflicted plenty of self-harm with what’s a still unresolved bout of internal bickering.
We don’t quite know where things stand right now because there is no published polling showing Palaszczuk and Labor with any kind of lead, let alone a commanding one like that seen in New Zealand.
There is every chance — and plenty of anecdotal evidence — the stocks of Palaszczuk and Labor have risen significantly in the last four to six weeks, especially on the back of a strong, unequivocal stand on keeping the state border tight and secure and the threat of a new wave of coronavirus from Victoria and possibly New South Wales.
Palaszczuk will still face a tough election battle, especially in the regions with the presence of not just the LNP but also the right-wing splinter groups (Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, Katter’s Australian Party and the remnants of Clive Palmer).
However, in the southeast, Palaszczuk could benefit from support on a scale Labor has not seen since the glory days of Peter Beattie.
This would not only open up a range of opportunities for Labor but put the LNP on the defensive in seats the conservatives would have thought were in the bag.
This election just keeps getting more interesting.
This article was first published on InQueensland.
Atkins as usual – “Helpful Winning Hints for the Limited News Party”.
I can’t see any Qld Premier losing ground by keeping us cockroaches out.
Strangely the Sydney shock jocks were playing hard ball with her a few months ago, total personal and made up attacks, who would believe it, but I was wondering why given that few of them are syndicated up to Qld. It seemed mostly to be playing up to the conservative locals here, as always, and perhaps also to support Gladys. Unfortunately Gladys is now locking down Vic while having a go at Palasczuk locking out greater Sydney, which is a damn difficult argument to make stick.
With subsequent events, dear boy, events, Palasczuk is looking prescient by maintaining a fairly strict border regime.
I think she will be a shoo-in assuming nothing drastic happens. I don’t see her opening the state too early, and those windbags calling for that a few months ago are looking pretty stoopid.
All those that sought to pressure Palaszczuk to open borders a few weeks ago – Littleproud, Birmingham – while SA border was closed!, Morrison had a roundabout swing, Palmer, Hanson and I suspect Hunt had a go but he can’t help himself, he couldn’t get a proper shot at Andrews; all did her a favour.
Outsiders telling us QLD’rs what we should do, or how we weren’t being smart according to their wishes!
Call themselves politicians but they haven’t heard of strong QLD parochialism …..really? What on earth did they think they would gain? Or was thinking not a major factor?
QLD ALP must have thanked them all, and Yes, like the psychopathic CEO’s and IPA who frothed that we must re-open everything for the economic benefits, they are all now publicly smeared with their own stupidity.
I’m pleased to see any journalist highlighting the chaotic and unworkable tribal divisions that erupted only a couple of weeks ago and continue between the QLD LNP HQ Executive old guard and Frecklington and what are strangely called LNP Progressives.
To see the LNP commission a survey that found Frecklington unpopular, and leak it to the press to undermine her, then it was revealed that some of the LNP Executives were on Clive Palmer’s payroll – WTF!!!!!!!
Then we have Dutton emerge from his cave to ask the QLD LNP Prez to resign, which he did……but he got confused and only resigned from Palmer’s payroll! I mean, you couldn’t make this up for a political novel.
For all those who lost their money betting on Shorten to win, Trump to lose, put your money on the QLD ALP to be re-elected.
I am in total agreement with what Dennis Atkins has to say regarding the position of the two main party leaders in the upcoming Queensland election. However, Frecklington carries a lot more baggage than the above article relates.
The more things change, the more they stay the same has never been more true than in the case of the policy vacuum that is Deb Frecklington the nominal – in the sense that the LNP has left it either too late to dump her or is so bereft of talent that they have one with ability with which to replace her, leader of the LNP. Like a fish that has just been caught and tossed into the boat Frecklington thrashes about desperately trying to discern the direction of the wind (popular opinion) on any and all issues as a desperate way to gain votes and just survive.
Of late Freklington’s creative policy writing team has come back to the old faithful ‘get tough’ on juvenile crime policy via support for mandatory sentencing. It’s just like reaching back into your collection of golden 45’s and deciding to play one of your favourites. However, as stated above Freklington’s creative team has tried to run on every populist issue that they think of that will buy them a vote.
And to be fair they (the creative team) have even been thinking out of the square as when they decided to attack Palaszczuk’s dress sense – a really deep issue and then they felt they were on a sure winner over Palaszcuk’s lack of having her own children. Then first it was open the Queensland border to later become keep the border closed and go at it even harder after the disaster of Victoria.
All such flip flopping shows is that Freklington lacks substance and passion for any issue and hence like a tree blowing in the direction of the prevailing wind ‘stands’ for nothing.