Put under the spotlight this week, there was nowhere for the divisions in the Morrison government to hide. From moderates concerned about religious discrimination laws and a federal integrity commission, to the goofy fringe conservatives fulminating about vaccine mandates — those divisions have been a huge gift for Labor.
But credit where it’s due: the opposition, along with the Senate crossbench, did well to exploit them. Through a display of discipline and parliamentary tactical nous, Labor were able to stultify the government’s legislative agenda, and give Prime Minister Scott Morrison no breathing space.
Morrison’s highly contentious proposed religious discrimination bill, finally introduced to Parliament yesterday, was a case in point. Morrison’s rush to introduce this bill in the final weeks of the year is as much about meeting an election promise and satisfying religious conservative elements in the Liberal base as it is about trying to wedge the opposition ahead of the next poll.
Senior Labor figures like Chris Bowen warn the party is losing ground among the faithful and, like the Coalition, the opposition too has a range of views on the matter. Morrison’s speech introducing the bill yesterday was a direct pitch to socially conservative religious voters in suburban Sydney who he hopes will carry him to victory.
But on religious discrimination, it was Labor demonstrating unity, with MPs and Senators sticking to the script of “wait and see,” pushing for a Joint Select Committee containing both members and Senators to review the bill, as Morrison tried to ram it through Parliament.
Yesterday, government Senators tried to push for a Senate inquiry into the bill reporting back by February 1, much to the fury of Labor and the Greens, meaning the proposed legislation would be scrutinised during a short timeframe, when the nation’s attention was elsewhere.
While Labor and the Greens both lost motions to push back the reporting deadline, the government also couldn’t get support for its early reporting date. That means Labor can still negotiate for a full Joint Select Committee to look at the bill properly, putting a dent in Morrison’s attempts to quietly hammer it through before the election.
Key crossbench Senators Rex Patrick, Stirling Griff and Jacqui Lambie all voted with the Opposition to stop the government’s fast-tracked inquiry, a reflection both of their mood on the bill, and the government’s failure to win them over.
As all this went down quietly in the Senate, the government’s own division over whether the bill does enough to protect LGBTIQ children remained in the public eye. No swift resolution for Morrison, whose own side are the ones wedged here.
Over in the House, Labor took advantage of new Speaker Andrew Wallace’s training wheels to put more pressure on the government. Wallace struggled to rein in MPs from both sides during several feral sessions of question time.
Labor made a point of testing the Speaker’s mettle with a series of interjections and points of order, and honing in on issues around Morrison’s character. A question about the prime minister’s ill-fated Hawaiian holiday on Monday left him visibly rattled.
Yesterday, when Liberal backbencher Bridget Archer twice crossed the floor to support independent MP Helen Haines’ federal integrity commission, the government technically lost two votes. Because an absolute majority is required to suspend standing orders, however, Haines was unable to force a debate. Wallace wasn’t up to speed on this, causing more chaos.
Of course, this is all deeply insiderish stuff which could have no bearing on the next election. The final weeks of 2018, when Morrison was dismissed as a nightwatchman prime minister, were equally chaotic — and we know what happened after that. Normal people don’t care about question time or procedural motions.
It’s why Morrison returned again to the old Canberra bubble narrative in question time yesterday, as much to reassure his own side that despite the wretched week, the people who mattered aren’t watching.
“The leader of the opposition is obsessed with the games that go on in Canberra,” he said.
“He’s so focused on what’s going on down here in Canberra that what he can’t hear, what he fails to hear, is what is going on around the rest of this country and where their focus is.”
But if Labor can maintain that discipline on the campaign trail and in the policy space, and if the narrative of Morrison’s deceitfulness starts to trickle down from the Hill, the prime minister will face a challenging campaign season.
It’s notable that Morrison seems almost unable to say “parliament”. He uses substitutes such as “Canberra” instead. All right, so do many others, but it is quite something for a Prime Minister to treat parliament as an unmentionable. Morrison clearly loathes parliament, he does his best to minimise the number of weeks a year it sits and when it is in session he either looks like a soul in torment or a cornered rat. (Apologies to my fellow rats for that offensive comparison.)
This is a Prime Minister who barely tolerates the minimum of democratic process because he has no choice. He has no respect for it. In his dreams the executive would govern without a legislature and in secret. He has much in common with Charles I.
His choice of vocation is truly puzzling. Does it fill some dark void of the soul? Does he like the white BMWs and living at Kirribilli? *Why* is he PM?
I often wonder that.
Because – and this will surprise you – the liberal party has no one better. Once the election is over, though, they will be inundated with inept hopefuls wanting to prove the Peter Principle.
I invoked the Peter Principle under Bernard’s column today, in reference to Peter Dutton; but you’re right, it applies to the whole stinking lot of them.
I’m not at all sure SSR that he has given up on silencing Parliament. After all denial of accountability, transparency, certainly emasculation?
I agree with you, but I do see something positive in your comment when remembering what happened to Charles I. Unfortunately there was some civil unpleasantness before it happened.
And after!
Quite correct, Rat.One of their favourites is “this place”.The almost reverential tone they put in their voices when they are merely referring to the fedeal parliament.As Gilbert and Sullivan so succinctly said,”I always voted at my party’s call and never thought of thinking for myslf at all”.
I have just read a report on Crikey’s companion site, The Mandarin, on Jim Chalmers speech to The Economic Society of Australia. It sounds as though it was a thoughtful speech, laying the groundwork for Labor’s policy approach in government. If Labor follows through on this, they will be a much much better government than the current one (it wouldn’t be hard) but the full depth of the speech just got sectional interest coverage in The Age/SMH. And because of that sort of superficial coverage, there are complaints that Labor doesn’t stand for anything.
Who can dispute that there’s much more talent on the Labor side?
First they ignore you then they laugh at you then they fight you.
“…. meeting an election promise”? As if that’s actually a Morrison commitment? Check his form :- “It’s a scam!”
Where’s similar alacrity to introduce his ‘PICAC’ (“Politician’s Indiscretions Cleaned and Covered-up”?) also “promised”, to gull voters, before the last election?
How many of those “UCF/rail-way station car-parks” have been started let alone finished in 2+ years?
Morrison doesn’t have an interest in “meeting election promises” unless they suit his politics.
….. Was “Honest John” Howard intent/committed on delivering on his myriad “non-core promises”?
Kishor – please, to hone is to whet, or sharpen. To home in on is to focus.
One of the many, common malapropisms & mangled cliches – it must be the ”house style guide” as so many of the…’writers’ here use them, over & over no matter how often commenter correct them.
Tow the line, hone in on, hard road to how, damp squid and of course, the Master of misunderstood arcanery hissownself, Grundle who still uses ‘dearth’ to mean abundance, ‘enervate’ to mean energise and various others when his vorpal blade gets out of hand…and onto the page.
Spoken words are also important. I cannot get over the number of leading Liberals who utter the following: ‘beyuns’ aka billions, ‘gunna’ aka going to, and ‘beyuls’ aka bills. I may have to activate the ‘subtitles’ option when watching the ABC news. Apparently some of these people were sent to expensive schools by their beneficiary trust accounts.
And what about ‘vunerable’?
What about Erstraya? The majority of both places have trouble with that one.
Apparently Morrison has signed us up, at a secret figure, to several nucular (nuc-you-lar) submarines. President Dubya Bush couldn’t pronounce it either. The latter used to entertain whenever lambasting terrorists as it sounded like ‘tourists’. He could not abide tourists.
How about Straya?
It assaulted our ears too frequently during the DeadCat Cake election of 1993.
By, arguably the most – if not best – educated/credentialed (sic!) Opposition, or party, leader since Whitlam.
Not even a hint of an apostrophe to start the word.
One I notice from politicians and journalists alike is “industrelations” for industrial relations. I suppose it saves time but, as my grandmother used to say, what will you do with the time you save?
If you have to write fast, though, you have to use fast phrases.
Accurate ones would be favourite.
Otherwise it’s just filler – which seems to be the main aim, esp in radio/TV interviews when there is limited time and the waffle is intended to run out the clock.
As Clive, when he was Joh’s booster, taught him – in those far off days (broadcast quality) tapes were very short.
Please add “dribble”for when they mean”drivel”, but then again a lot of them do “dribble” their “drivel”.
And unchartered waters for uncharted waters.