Photo: The leaders' debate took the heat out of what had been a pretty terrible week for Kevin Rudd and the ALP. (AAP: Alan Porritt)
Throughout the leaders' debate on Sunday evening, both Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott chose to play a defensive game almost from the start. There was no real passion and not even much conviction, writes Mungo MacCallum.
In spite of the breathless anticipation by the media, the great debate was not only inconclusive, but something of an anti-climax - neither leader performed to his potential and there were was no real biffo.
Supporters of both sides claimed victory but most impartial observers scored it as a nil-all draw, without even the prospect of a penalty shoot out to settle the issue. But in one sense at least it could prove a circuit breaker; it took the heat out of what had been a pretty terrible week for Kevin Rudd and the ALP.
Even his final preparations had been disrupted; while Tony Abbott was jogging through Sydney with City2Surf runners dressed in gorilla suits (a subtle tribute to the Opposition Leader's legendary hairiness and customary swagger?) Rudd had to deal with yet another internal crisis. Having already dumped his candidate for the seat of Forde to make room for Peter Beattie, he lost another couple as the party's preselections for Kennedy and Hotham respectively jumped and were pushed as revelations of past bad behaviour came to light. It was not the confident build-up he would have chosen.
And it came at the end of a very ordinary start to what, even at five weeks rather than Julia Gillard's projected 26, was a longer than usual campaign. The only highlight had been Peter Beattie, and that too had its downside: hadn't Rudd promised to return the control of pre-selections to the membership? Yet at the first opportunity, he was parachuting in the celebrity candidate to end them all. Not an entirely good look.
The Beattie announcement at least gave Labor a much needed fillip; the party was going backwards in the polls, now definitely a couple of points behind, and Abbott had not only overtaken Rudd on the measure of trust, but was miles ahead on economic management and was rapidly closing the gap as preferred prime minister. As Rudd admitted more than once, if an election had been held that weekend, Abbott would now be moving into the Lodge.
Labor was looking bogged down with Rudd reduced to a blatant scare campaign about Abbott raising the GST and imposing it on items now exempt, like food - what would this do to the price of a jar of vegemite? It was quintessential old politics of the kind which Rudd affected to despise; his only solace was that Abbott was going down the same path, using a visit to the Brisbane Ekka with two of his long-suffering daughters to foreshadow an inquiry into pink batts.
It had become frankly embarrassing, even for Graham "whatever-it-takes" Richardson, who used his weekly column in the Australian to implore:
"Will Kevin Rudd, the great campaigner, please stand up."
Rudd, said Richo, was looking listless, almost irritable; where was that fabled charm?
For those with long memories, there was an echo of the 1974 campaign, during which another great campaigner, Gough Whitlam, failed to gain traction in the first week: another supportive journalist made the same plea and in the second week Whitlam obliged, causing it to go down in history as "The week Gough pulled his finger out." Labor supporters hoped for a rerun nearly 40 years later, and therefore placed perhaps unrealistic expectations on the pivotal event which would kick off week two: the first, and, it appeared at that stage, possibly the only, great debate.
As it turned out, both Rudd and Abbott chose to play a defensive game almost from the start. After the usual homilies about the wonder and beauty of Australia, they explained that there could be problems ahead as the mining boom wound down its investment phase (an event which Abbott, absurdly, blamed on the carbon tax and the mining tax) and that they, and only they, were fitted to manage them. For much of the time they appeared to be going up and down on the same spot and making little or no progress, much like the horses I used to back. There was no real passion and not even much conviction.
But there were what are now called announceables: Rudd promised a gay marriage bill in the first 100 days with Labor having a conscience vote and asked Abbott to guarantee the same for his party; Abbott, ducked and promised a decision on a second Sydney airport in his first term, a pledge which did not even meet Anthony Albanese's commitment to start construction within the same period. Tackled with the question posed by the former Treasury head Ken Henry of the continuing need to revive revenue by either cutting spending or raising taxes or both, the two indulged in a wafflethon.
However Rudd executed one minor coup by admitting, again, that Abbott was ahead, and likely on the present figures to become Prime Minister on September 7. Surely, then, he had to spell his costings and the saving he had made would make to pay for them? Abbott's response was bluster and denial; for my money this was the nearest either got to landing a serious blow. So I gave the edge in content to Rudd, along with a fairly clear win on manner: Rudd spoke directly to the camera while Abbott kept glancing shiftily from side to side, eyes narrowed in a rather sinister way.
But who cares what I thought? With the ABC the only principal channel showing the debate, not too many of those in the marginals are likely to have been tuned in, and will get their news, as usual, from the pro-Abbott tabloids and shock jocks. To capitalise, Abbott wants any future debates in an all-in public forum, which would suit his demagoguery; Rudd wants to retain the more measured approach where the questions are asked by experts.
The impasse may mean no more debates at all, which would be a pity. Sunday's effort was far from riveting, but it was the nearest we are likely to get to a direct comparison of the two men seeking to lead us for the nest three years and beyond. Come to think of it, they may not even be the two we would choose for the contest. But hey, that's democracy, Australian style.
Mungo Wentworth MacCallum will be writing weekly for The Drum throughout the campaign. He is a political journalist and commentator. View his full profile here.
Leaders' debate a soft landing after a hard week - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
EmoticonEmoticon