Australia’s Election: Turnbull’s Time?

The Liberal party’s gamble in handing Malcolm Turnbull the leadership looks set to pay off, with analysts predicting a narrow victory for his center-right Liberal-National Coalition in Australia’s July 2 federal election. However, the bad news for the eventual winner may be dealing with a hostile Senate, with neither major party potentially able to force through reforms.

While Australians were still coming to terms with Britain’s shock Brexit vote to leave the European Union (EU), the prime minister declared on June 26 that only stable majority government and experienced leadership would deliver more jobs and economic growth for the world’s 12th largest economy.

“At a time of uncertainty, the last thing we need is a Parliament in disarray,” Turnbull said at his Liberal party’s official campaign launch in Sydney.

“[If] we falter in our plan to transition the economy, there is a real risk of Australia falling off the back of the pack of leading economies,” he warned.

Fortunately for Turnbull, Australian voters appear to have reacted to Brexit exactly as his economic-focused party might have hoped for. After starting the campaign deadlocked, the Australian newspaper reported on June 27 that the Coalition had taken a 51 percent to 49 percent two-party preferred lead over the main opposition Labor party as the campaign entered into its final week – the first time it had pulled ahead since mid-March.

“Britain’s withdrawal from the EU appears to have caused voters to switch from minor parties to the Coalition,” the national daily reported. While the Coalition’s primary vote rose to 43 percent, Labor’s was steady at 36 percent while the Greens slipped to 9 percent and other minor parties to 12 percent.

Turnbull also maintained a comfortable lead in the preferred prime minister rating, at 45 percent to rival Labor leader Bill Shorten’s 30 percent. As noted by the newspaper, “no leader has won an election in the past 30 years with a Newspoll better PM rating below 40 percent.”

A separate Galaxy poll added comfort for Turnbull, showing that his party room coup against former leader Tony Abbott last September had been essential for electoral success.

The poll commissioned by Sydney’s Daily Telegraph newspaper found that Labor would have secured a majority of around 29 seats if Abbott had remained leader, with a 53 percent to 47 percent lead in the two-party preferred vote.

Under Abbott, the Coalition’s primary vote would have dropped to 38 percent, equal to center-left Labor, but enough to see Shorten comfortably elected on preferences from the left-wing Greens.

The survey also found Turnbull had run a better election campaign than Shorten at 40 percent to 36 percent, with 24 percent undecided, according to the June 26 report.

Other polls have also shown Labor failing to win enough votes in key marginal electorates to become the first opposition in 85 years to regain government after just one term.

Galaxy polls of 14 Coalition-held marginal seats showed Labor ahead in just two and evenly split in another two, with Labor set to make gains in Queensland state but lose ground in the main population centers of New South Wales and Victoria.

Despite holding its official campaign launch in western Sydney, the survey showed Labor trailing in four key marginal seats in the nation’s largest city, home to the prime minister. And despite his Victoria base, Shorten’s party is seen falling short in two key marginal seats in the state thanks to a Labor state government dispute with volunteer firefighters.

“Labor is struggling to find traction at a time when there isn’t an enormous mood for change,” Griffith University political scientist Paul Williams told The Diplomat.

“They are up against a first-term government and a man that most Australians I suspect are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to.”

Unlike the previous election in 2013, when Abbott defeated Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Williams said this time there was no groundswell of antipathy toward the incumbent.

“Of course some are disappointed in Turnbull, but that is a far cry from wanting to get rid of him like they were before with Tony Abbott, and before him Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. There were strong movements to get rid of these prime ministers, but while there is disappointment in Turnbull there is no groundswell to get rid of him,” he said.

“Shorten’s leadership has been fairly average – his leadership alone isn’t really igniting or inspiring voters or driving them away from the Coalition.”

Political analyst Jill Sheppard said Shorten had exceeded low expectations prior to the election, but his campaigning was not translating into increased support.

“Voters and commentators thought Shorten might burn out and make mistakes during the campaign, but that hasn’t happened,” said Sheppard, lecturer at the ANU Center for Social Research and Methods.

“People now have a better sense of what he stands for and who he is, so in that sense he has probably made the most gains in the campaign – but there’s no evidence that will turn into votes.”

Campaign Foibles

“Oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them” is an old adage, and Turnbull’s move to call a 55-day election campaign, the nation’s second-longest in history, was seen as politically risky. Unlike the previous poll in 2013, when both major party leaders were experienced campaigners, Turnbull and Shorten have led their respective parties into battle for the first time.

“Long campaigns help oppositions – a four week snap double dissolution poll in November or December last year would have wiped Labor out,” Williams said.

Sheppard said the marathon campaign was “all negative risk” for the Turnbull government.

“I don’t think you can do anything that consolidates voters behind you, but what you can do is stuff up,” she said.

Sheppard said the campaign had seen a “tighter, more disciplined party organization on both sides…and that takes away from the potential train wreck of a new campaigner, because it’s so tightly controlled and they know what they are going to say every day.”

But despite the best efforts of the party managers, the media did manage to extract some fun out of a campaign in which the public showed little apparent interest.

Among the lowlights for the major parties were embarrassments over various candidates who failed to survive the glare of the political spotlight.

On the Coalition’s side, a massage therapist was forced to resign as a Liberal candidate for a Victorian seat after his business connections to a Melbourne brothel were revealed, while a Western Australian candidate, Sherry Sufi, was also forced to quit over a video showing a row with a former boss.

Labor had its candidate problems too, with Christian Kunde forced to quit the electoral race in southwest New South Wales after being linked with a radical Islamic group, while Western Australian candidate Chris Brown was dumped over not disclosing past convictions.

Both leaders have had their share of embarrassing moments too. The prime minister drew criticism for hosting an alleged homophobic Muslim cleric at a Sydney dinner, while Shorten was forced into a back flip over previous pledges to overturn welfare cuts.

Turnbull commenced the campaign by declaring the election was a choice between his party’s “national economic plan for growth and jobs” or Labor’s “higher taxing, higher spending, debt and deficit agenda.”

Highlighting the Australian economy’s relatively high GDP growth rate of around 3 percent compared to other advanced economies, Turnbull promoted the benefits of free trade deals, business tax cuts and extra infrastructure spending.

In contrast, Labor pitched its “100 positive policies” with an emphasis on its traditional strengths of education and health, including protecting the national health system Medicare from alleged future privatization by a Coalition government, as well as reducing tax incentives for property investors.

“Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberals will cut local schools and destroy Medicare, while recklessly spending A$50 billion [$37 billion] on a tax break for banks and big business. A Shorten Labor Government will save Medicare, improve schools, invest in job-creating infrastructure and protect middle and working class families,” Shorten said in a June 25 media release.

Yet the humdrum of carefully targeted spending announcements spread across the country turned more negative late in the campaign. Labor warnings over the future of Medicare (dubbed “Mediscare”) forced Turnbull into dumping plans to outsource back office operations of the government-run scheme, with the Liberal leader counterattacking with warnings over an influx of refugees under Labor.

Labor’s release of its election costings showing a A$16.5 billion deterioration in the budget deficit over the next four years also drew attacks from Treasurer Scott Morrison, who said it would make the economy “more vulnerable at a time of uncertainty and volatility.”

#Ausvotes

Social media has also formed part of the election battleground, with Facebook hosting its first ever leaders debate and otherwise obscure candidates using the technology to raise their public profile. In Sydney, former TV show host James Mathison used Facebook to launch his campaign against Abbott in the Sydney seat of Warringah, with his video reportedly attracting more than 720,000 views.

Twitter users also joined the fray, using the hash tag #ausvotes. Among the political banter, highlights have included the #faketradie row over a Liberal TV advertisement featuring an apparent building worker criticizing Labor for its plans to curb property tax concessions.

“Within hours, Fake Tradie had his own fake Twitter account. Tweets included: ‘Time for smoko. Popping over to the shops to pick up a meat pie, a chocolate milk, and a couple of investment properties,’” reported the Adelaide Advertiser.

Williams said all parties were “blitzing” social media, albeit more due to a fear of a rival gaining an advantage than on any certainty over its influence.

“People still get most of their political information from the television news. Of course they do get news feeds on their Facebook pages, but it takes some effort to tune in and watch a Facebook debate,” he said.

“Election campaigns are really just about appealing to that 30 percent of [undecided] voters in the middle. I think the role of social media in voter switching is questionable, but it has become a necessary part of modern campaigning.”

ANU’s Sheppard said social media had helped boost enrolment among younger voters, although “changes in media consumption haven’t made a big difference yet.”

“Social media gets caught up in so much minutia…it would be a foolish party that spent too much time thinking about what social media is saying,” she said.

The Rise of the Minors

Both Sheppard and Williams said the minor parties had been the major winners of the drawn-out election campaign, pointing to the Greens and the party of South Australian senator Nick Xenophon as successes.

“The Greens have run a very good campaign and have had a very good time in office under the leadership of [Richard] Di Natale…I think they will pick up a second seat in the [lower] house,” Williams said.

Sheppard said Xenophon’s party “seems to be going gangbusters…He is a pro campaigner, he loves stunts and retail politics and that certainly seems to be paying off.”

Other independents expected to perform well include those with a media profile, including Queensland lower house member Bob Katter, Queensland senator Glenn Lazarus, and Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie, all of whom have attempted to broaden their influence by forming their own political parties.

Anti-immigration campaigner Pauline Hanson has also been rated a “reasonable” prospect of returning to Parliament, due to changes to Senate voting rules and the full-Senate election.

The rise of the minor parties has sparked warnings about the prospect of a “rainbow Senate” frustrating the major parties’ promises, regardless of the outcome on July 2.

“For a double-dissolution election intended in part to clear out the Senate and its legislative roadblocks, the central economic policies of both [major] parties – the Coalition’s $50 billion company tax cut and Labor’s negative gearing plan – are endangered even before the winning party is announced,” the Australian Financial Review’s Fleur Anderson said.

According to Anderson, a range of proposals including plans for education funding, same-sex marriage and superannuation could all face difficulties in the upper house, regardless of which party holds the traditional reins of power in the lower house.

In a June 25 report, Anderson suggested the Coalition could secure 32 seats, Labor 26 and the Greens nine in the Senate, with up to nine independent crossbenchers, including those from the Xenophon party.

“With 39 votes needed to pass legislation, the Coalition will have to get the support of either Labor, the Greens or seven members of the crossbench, including the Xenophon bloc,” she said.

“Labor faces an even more daunting task if it wins the election. On every occasion it is challenged by Coalition senators, it would need the help of the Greens and four of the crossbenchers.”

Turnbull’s comments over the Senate perhaps reflected his concern over the practicalities of stable government post-July 2.

“When it comes to the minor parties, be they Lambie, Xenophon, Lazarus or Hanson, if you only really know the leader of a minor party, but you don’t really know their candidates, and you don’t really know their policies, then don’t vote for them,” he said.

Asked to predict the result, Williams said a narrow Coalition victory was the most likely outcome, with the second-most likely prospect a potential hung Parliament led by Turnbull or thirdly, Shorten.

“The least likely scenario is a Labor majority – there will be no Labor landslide and no Coalition landslide,” Williams said, noting Labor’s low primary vote.

While refusing to predict a winner, Sheppard said “what matters is where the votes are concentrated…there are huge variations between states and electorates.”

Looking further ahead though, Williams had a more problematic prediction for believers in stable government.

“My prediction is neither Shorten nor Turnbull will lead their party into the 2019 election…Rather than the dumping of a prime minister in their first or second term being the exception, it may in fact become the rule, and we may see more of parties dumping prime ministers,” he said.

Williams said Shorten would need “an extremely close result to hang onto the leadership,” otherwise he could expect to face a challenge from a rival Labor candidate such as “[Tanya] Plibersek, [Chris] Bowen, [Mark] Dreyfus, Tony Burke or Anthony Albanese, who could run rings around a tired looking Malcolm Turnbull.”

“Then the pressure would be on the Coalition to replace Turnbull,” he said, with potential candidates including Treasurer Morrison or Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.

A Shorten victory would mark Australia’s fifth leadership change in six years, while a successful result for Turnbull would hand the Liberal leader his first electoral mandate. The winner however would face the challenge of global uncertainty caused by Brexit, China’s economic transition and a new U.S. president, along with domestic challenges including managing the fallout from the end of a mining boom.

For a nation that has enjoyed a 26-year economic winning streak, politics suddenly appears to have become a lot harder in the so-called “lucky country.”