The ascension of Malcolm Turnbull has made life for journalists a bit difficult. Finding a topic to fill column inches used to be all too easy: what acts of malevolent buffoonery have been committed by Abbott et al this week and what angle to I take to excoriate or defend it? It was both lazy and necessary journalism.
After the initial flurry of think pieces about what kind of Prime Minister Turnbull would be, political writing now take a bit more work. Turnbull is concentrating on policy more than personality, and considered, informed public debate rather than slogans and slanging.
It’s slower, less likely to lend itself to sensationalist headlines, angry comments and bitter partisan wrangling on social media.
It’s also far better for the national conversation and sense of identity that public debate is more thoughtful and, hopefully, thereby better informed.
The sudden change has caught many media commentators a bit off guard, the rhythm of attack and defence was too entrenched in politics and its public conduit, and it’s only the few writers like Katherine Murphy and Lenore Taylor, who were struggling to find ideas to analyse, who’ve moved smoothly through to the new standard.
Kelly O’Dwyer made her first appearance on ABC’s Insiders as Assistant Treasurer yesterday. It wasn’t’ a particularly tough interview, Barry Cassidy is no Sarah Ferguson, but she acquitted herself well. Mostly because she managed to avoid any of the gotcha moments Cassidy was aiming for. Turnbull and all his ministers have been very clear that they are considering all the options of economic policy, that no decisions have been made yet and, short of a serious misstep, O’Dwyer wasn’t going to make any announcements on Insiders. So why waste an entire interview with the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Small Business in trying to trip her into doing so? She wasn’t going to be tricked into criticizing Joe Hockey, making promises on same sex marriage or superannuation reforms, and even if she had, it would have been a flash-in-the-pan rubbish headline moment, not an actual policy discussion. Ineffectively combative interviews are detrimental to everyone involved, O’Dwyer was too guarded to get into any real discussion of policy and Cassidy wasn’t interested if she did.
BARRIE CASSIDY: And what about some of the tax concessions around superannuation at the higher end, are they untouchable?
KELLY O’DWYER: Well what we’ve said is that with our tax white paper process, everything’s on the table. We will consider all good ideas, we will look at them very, very carefully and we’re not ruling anything in or out. It’s a little bit ridiculous when you’re looking at all the options to start cutting things out and taking things off the table and the Prime Minister and the Treasurer have been very, very clear on this, that we’re going to look at all the options because all of the options interrelate. Our taxation system relates to our transfer system which relates to our superannuation system, so you have to look at all of the options when you’re coming up with a package.
Ok, fair answer, but here are the things I wanted to know after that:
Can you talk about the options that you are considering?
Who are you talking to and what background do they have?
When are we likely to start hearing about the policy outcomes?
When you say ‘good ideas’, what are you looking for that makes them ‘good’?
What do you, as Minister for Small Business, see as the target areas for government in assisting small business? What is it doing well, where does it need help?
What experience and ideas are informing your role as Assistant Treasurer and your input into the options the government is considering?
Maybe I’ve misunderstood the premise of Insiders, maybe it’s meant to be about the politics, not the policies, but if that’s the case, how is it relevant to people interested in politics? surely there has to be some investigation of policy if you’re going to understand politics?
BARRIE CASSIDY: Yeah, on the question of infrastructure, what Malcolm Turnbull is talking about or advocating for is a really massive new borrowing in that sense to try and kick-start some of these projects. This sits a bit uneasily though, doesn’t it, against the previous dire warnings about debt and deficit?
KELLY O’DWYER: What the Prime Minister has said is that when it comes to important national infrastructure, we are going to have, as a government, an open mind as to what ought to be funded. It’s not simply going to be roads, but we’re going to include rails as well. Anything that is gonna help us improve growth in our economy is something we should contemplate and the method by which we make a contribution also is something that we will carefully think about. He’s saying that simply handing money to the states to deliver on these projects is not always the best way of delivering those projects and we need to be a little more imaginative and a little more innovative.
Again, nice generic on message answer, but…
What does the government consider to be ‘important infrastructure’ and why?
What are the pros and cons of investment in road versus rail?
How does the government view its relationships with the states on infrastructure development and what is it doing to implement that?
Where is the focus for economic growth?
O’Dwyer is new to her position and the slight touch of nervousness in her interview with Cassidy is entirely reasonably, but she is one of the few women promoted to Cabinet in Turnbull’s recent reshuffle and she’s likely to be around for a long time to come. How she thinks about her role, the economy, the needs of small business and the direction of future growth are far more relevant to the national conversation than whether or not she can swat away a gotcha question. Interviews where she is concentrating more on not getting tripped up than explaining those things do her and her constituents a great disservice.
If Turnbull’s vision of a more intelligent public discussion is going to eventuate, we need the facilitators of that discussion to let go of the old model as well.