In a year in which the government’s explicit highest priority — the vaccine rollout — has gone badly wrong, Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s inability to effectively lead has become ever more apparent.
Major problems in the rollout have been allowed to drift and worsen. The issue of purpose-built quarantine facilities to replace inadequate hotel quarantine has been allowed to fester. The COVIDSafe app — remember that? — is wholly useless. The consequences of mistakes made last year in the sourcing of vaccine supplies have gone unaddressed.
But Morrison’s one strength — his once-unerring feel for messaging — has also deserted him. The “Scotty from marketing” tag always contained within it a paradox: Morrison might not be capable of getting things done, but he was outstanding at selling things to voters. Now even that skill has gone at a moment when we need a convincing national leader to drive vaccine uptake and provide reassurance as, once again, millions of Australians are locked down.
This week — which began with Morrison’s cack-handed and unilateral attempt to expand use of AstraZeneca by younger people and erupted into a full-blown fight between the states and the Commonwealth — has been a low point for a man once universally regarded as a canny salesman.
Part of the problem is that his previous knack for the right message has disappeared. But there’s also a deeper problem: Morrison has undermined his own credibility. His incessant lying has damaged him, his refusal to accept responsibility for virtually any aspect of the handling of the pandemic has looked reckless, and his tendency to disappear when things go wrong and there’s political heat looks cowardly.
But we’re not playing for normal political stakes here. The stakes now are enormous: the health of millions of Australians, Australia’s economic recovery, our capacity to rejoin a world that is opening up much faster than we are likely to. Morrison, lacking both the capacity to deliver results and the ability to reassure Australians, is too great a risk to remain as national leader.
The options to replace him, in a cabinet of historical awfulness recently made worse by the return of accused sexual harasser Barnaby Joyce and incompetent rorter Bridget McKenzie, are limited to Josh Frydenberg and Peter Dutton. While Frydenberg has proved competent at turning on the fiscal spigots and has made the right calls about the level and timing of stimulus, the Victorian MP lacks the cut-through and communication skills needed to give certainty to Australians in a time of peril. Many Australians have no idea who he is.
Dutton, on the other hand, has a poor ministerial record. At Home Affairs he presided over an extraordinary series of bungles and stuff-ups, often in major programs. To be fair though, many of the stunning scandals in the portfolio have been down to poor quality departmental leadership and lack of judgment among officials of that department. Few of the many auditor-general reports identifying disasters in that department had any origin in, or even connection with, Dutton’s office.
On the positive side, Dutton has cut-through and clarity in the way he communicates. No one is ever under any confusion about what he thinks; he is willing to speak clearly and bluntly when need be, no matter how violently people may disagree.
Crikey has long criticised Dutton in his previous roles. And, of course, he is a bogyman of the Twitterati and the left. But at this moment, from a poor set of options, on balance he would do a better job of providing reassurance to Australians than anyone else in the government.
Dutton would also arrest what is an increasingly alarming slide back into state power, with the state leaders now wielding more power than at any time in recent decades, and dictating key elements of national policy. He would more effectively reverse this centrifugal flow of power away from Canberra than Morrison, who appears blithely unaware that he is barely first among equals when it comes to real power in pandemic Australia.
John Howard famously said that the times would suit him when it came to the prime ministership, and how right he turned out to be. The parlous times in which we find ourselves would suit someone like Dutton much more so than Scotty from marketing.
Do you agree Australia is in such dire straits that Peter Dutton is the answer? Send your thoughts to letters@crikey.com.au, and don’t forget to include your full name if you’d like to be considered for publication.
You’ve got to be joking! It would be better for the government to collapse completely than for this soulless, empathy – devoid, dictatorial man to be in charge.
Uh Henk, Mr P H is impervious to flattery; try elsewhere for grants…
It’s a bit of a tossup Henk, as to which has the most of those 3 conservative attributes you mention. The only differences detectible is that the one in charge presently gets a lot of those from outside influences whereas the one as the article suggests as his replacement seems to have them from deep inside. Although are there any differences at all. Maybe it’s only in their desires for the top job. What choices to present us with, Bernard.
So Bernard, your solution is to replace Morrison . . . with an Australian ‘Duterte’!??
I think he’s worse than that. Duttons’ trajectory is much the same as Heinrich Himmler’s was in the late 1920s. Back then Himmler was gathering under his control all civilian Security and National and State Police Forces.
But Himmler was clever.
Do not underestimate Dutton he is as cunning as a sewer rat
And the verbs in German come at the end.
To suggest the Gestapotato is to copy the Suntan Kid (dec.) in the 1990 election when he tried “The Answer is Liberal” which begged the rejoinder, “It must have been a really, really dumb question“.
If true, then John O’Brien’s character was an optimist.
Nothing wrong with being soulless, obviously god isn’t answering any of Scotty’s prayers.
You don’t for what Scotty is praying.
I hope he finishes up with a big tub of cheap margarine ..
I don’t blame her. 😉
Henk you stole my opening words but you’re forgiven 🙂 Dutton is the last person I’d want to see in charge.
The states are effectively running the show with Morrison’s bunch not doing much more than hand out cash. Unfortunately that is often as inequitably as desired in order to assist certain “mates”. By comparison with any federal minister at the moment, Albanese’s Press Club speech and questioning today breathed unexpected confidence in demonstrating a degree of understanding, honesty, and maturity totally lacking in Scomo’s group of bandits. The next election may well decide how long a viable version of our nation survives. Sorry but Dutton would not improve things.
Who’s more important… Jesus or God? Dutton would never challenge Morrison. All that kerfuffle around SM becoming PM over Turnbull while PD created the diversion which was as it was devised.
SM needed clean hands to call his position a miracle. SM is the liberal leader period. Unless or until some other scenario arises. Stooges.
I’m not inclined to argue with the conclusion that there’s nobody on the government front bench who would be any better than Dutton. In fact, I see Dutton as someone who would, as they say, make the trains run on time. Or, failing that, he would ensure anybody complaining about the trains was disappeared, tried in secret and kept in offshore detention forever.
“Il Dutte”
He has the shaven dome but lacks the jaw line.
Big points for pugnacity & pomposity though.
“… an increasingly alarming slide back into state power, with the state leaders now wielding more power than at any time in recent decades…”
Is it alarming? I used to think Australia would be better off without the states, but current conditions seem to prove the states are a strength of the system. When the federal government is run by clowns, crooks and incompetents with no oversight or opposition to restrain them we should be very grateful the states provide the resilience necessary to preserve some semblance of proper government. How bad would things be if the Morrison gang was all we had?
Absolutely! Peter Dutton as Prime Minister is a horrifying thought, and I am very very pleased that the States are in charge of doing the things that keep us alive, like running health systems.
Horrifying, yes. And yet I’m thinking more competent than scomo. But that’s a low bar.
That’s the difference between ‘organised crime’ and ‘disorganised’ – which is preferable, or least deleterious?
I don’t find it alarming. And thinking Australia would be better off without the states is a futile waste of mental energy. Australia is a federation – a federation of the states. Without the states, the federation couldn’t exist. Constitiutionally it would be easier to get rid of the federation than the states. Anyway, I’ve always seen the federal / state division as being a good thing – it keeps the pollies occupied with fighting each other and gives them less time and energy to devote to rorting us.
We seem to agree about the worth of the states. But I’m not convinced by your claim that federation makes it so hard to do away with them. Yes, it’s fair enough to say completely replacing the constitutional arrangements with something wholly different is way too hard to contemplate, but that’s not how these done typically. The preferred method is to keep the facade while gutting the internals. So, for example, England is still a monarchy after more than a thousand years, but in modern times the monarch has only a little very constrained personal authority over government. The way to centralise federal power in the Australian system is obvious because we have seen it happening for over a century; just use federal law and federal control of revenue to bring the states to their knees. A concerted effort to remove all state ability to raise revenue or legislate on anything more than trivial local matters would finish the job, and there’s no reason, given past judgements, to think the High Court would, at long last, find any constitutional objection to this process.
That is possibly true. But the ultimate brake on federal power is the ability of states to secede. WA’s succesful secession referendum was thwarted by the British government but, nearly a century later, it seems likely such an action could succeed now. Of course, if a state did manage to secede while Dutton was PM, there’s a chance the commonwealth would simply invade and annex it.
For those with some memory, the promise inherent in GST (a misbegotten child of euroid distaste for income tax and obscene wealth) was “..to remove all state ability to raise revenue” – stamp duty, sundry licensing fees and other levees… how dud that workout?
Both still apply, wotta surprise.
That’s more or less my point – the federal government knows that’s an essntial step to removing any indpendent power from the states. The attempt to do it when GST came in was botched, but that hardly invalidates the principle. The next time will no doubt be more thorough.
On the other hand, leaving the states the option to impose the irritant of their own taxes is a good way of annoying the voters at that level.
Few state governments, always short due to federal strictures (even when of the same party – could be a hint there) can resist the temptation.
Plus there is always the ption of privatisation until there is nothing left of the tax-payers’ “family silver”.
You really have to be joking WillDRW. Scomo’s bunch have rorted more than all previous governments combined. It their only A rated endeavour.
Imagine how much more effective their rorting could have been if there were no state governments and Scummo and his gang of robber clowns had full control of the country
As rorters go, the feds are pretty good at it. I don’t see how they could screw any more money for themselves out of any system we had.
Ha ha. True!
They’ve inspired the states to be out and proud rorters themselves. Remember Gladys telling NSW there’s nothing wrong with her pork barrelling because it’s not illegal?
In NSW’s case, even more than all the other states, corruption has long been part of the fabric of government. Really, very little has changed since the days of the Rum Corps
Berejikilian a Teflon coated crook, ICAC got rid of 10 Liberal MP’s and a Liberal Premier….but Labor…..Labor Labor….
https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/berejiklian-illegally-shredded-documents-detailing-pork-barrelling-report-finds/
Labor? People like convicted criminal, Eddie Obeid, you mean? NSW Labor pollies are no less dodgy than the Liberals. And of course, the old NSW Labor motto was “vote early, vote often”.
Except of course in NSW… nothing but rorts from Berejiklian and her cronies.
Less time & energy to “devote to rorting”! Mmm… that certainly hasn’t worked with this government
Agreed.
The option of seceding is open to all.
As is, explicit in the preamble to Federation, the option for Aotearoa to join should the fancy take them.
Personally, I’d rather join them.
and we have Christian Porter and his elite group of low lifes..they have category of there own
Thankfully his (self delusional) god given right to defecate wherever and whenever he likes has put paid to his ever getting the PM’s gig.
Oh, I don’t know. His day might well come round in that very inadequate gene pool known as the LNP.
https://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2021/07/01/christian-porter-to-be-charged-with-the-rape-of-katharine-thornton-in-a-private-prosecution-led-by-an-experienced-legal-team/
At least it’s something for Kate.
State Power seems to be the only bulwalk against “learn to live with Covid” as seen in most of Europe and the Americas. Thank god for the states!!
Remember how bad Boris’s UK was 12 months ago? That’s how bad Australia would be if Australia’s states were as powerless as UK’s counties.
That’s why the US has mid term elections, to reduce the complacency of sinecure.
I can certainly see the strength of your argument here. Like you, I have in past thought we would be better off without the states in our federation. Unlike you, I still hold this view. I suspect that if the states had been done away with and the mid-tier of our current governance replaced with what is now the municipal local govt you could very easily replace this strength of the federated system (holding a shockingly incompetent federal govt to account) with the feelings you attribute to the states in this case. Stating it another way, I think that the current feeling of relief for the states you experience now would be the same you may feel toward the municipal govt if the constitution did away with the states. Additionally, a benefit of removing the states would actually be also the removal of the outdated and parochial colonial mindset. There may be less bickering between differing governments.
I can see your point about some of the failings in the state governments. But I would never claim the states are “holding a shockingly incompetent federal govt to account”. They have no means or authority to do any such thing. All they are doing is keeping (some of) the wheels turning in the absence of any competence or leadership from the Commonwealth. When you add in the way Morrison shamelessly takes the credit for anything that still works, evenm if he has tried to break it, the states are doing the opposite of holding him to account – they are, willingly or not, giving him cover.
I apologise, re the attribution about ‘holding them to account’ – I read that further above and thought that was your post. I stand by the point though and agree with your own. A terrible side-effect of the apt handling of the virus by the states has consistently covered for shocking lapses at the federal level that i do not think is appropriately understood by the average punter. One reason also perhaps for Morrison’s deathly quiet this week after the AZ ‘announcement’ and the reason for it; his increasing panic about being held publicly accountable for a terrible vaccine roll out and lack of quarantine
…”the apt handling of the virus by the States” … Sorry but it was Berejiklian, Hazzard etc in NSW whose wholesale stupidity and incompetence allowed the damned virus into Australia in the first place…oh yes, and the ABF depending on which version you prefer….with their mishandling of the Ruby Princess and assorted other cruise ships.
Yes, my thought too. Why “alarming?”
Actually, I don’t want to be ‘reassured’, and if I did, the emergence of Dutton as leader certainly wouldn’t do the trick. What a useless, incompetent and venal bunch we have as our government. Rather than dramatic and essentially useless leadership changes, how about they just all get to work doing their jobs instead of pocket lining, beggaring about and grandstanding. And of course, let’s remember – they were re-elected and are likely to win power again at the next election. Australia votes, indeed.
I daresay they see lining their own pockets as the most important job.
Accurate
Bernard. July 1st has just gone mate. April 1st is 2 months ago.
Correction 3 months
If Peter Dutton were in control, April 1 can be any time he wants it to be.
And there would be no more ABC to set the record straight, apart from anything else.