You may wonder why anyone would waste time writing about this man, erased from the top job by his own party, and discredited in multiple ways by commentator after commentator. For me, the reason is twofold. First, he is still confronting us day after day in the media, and just as importantly his successor is doing so poorly that some want Abbott to return.
He lies in wait hoping to do so. All the while his appalling legacy hangs like a dark cloud over his party.
I looked for an adjective to place in the title. Some of you might have chosen: catastrophic or disastrous or dreadful or tragic or devastating or destructive or ruinous or shocking or scandalous or appalling or dreadful or outrageous or deplorable or shameful or contemptible or despicable or disgraceful or woeful or even loathsome. While any or all might be applicable, âcalamitousâ seemed to me to be the most appropriate. The Free Dictionary defines âcalamitousâ as
âhaving extremely unfortunate or dire consequences; causing ruin or destructionâ. That description seemed to me to fit Abbott better than any of the others.
Abbottâs calamitous legacy is everywhere to be seen.
We need go no further back than the recent COAG meeting to feel the drag of the Abbott legacy on deliberations at that forum. PM Turnbull and Treasurer Morrison are encumbered by the ball and chain of Abbottâs decision, at the time of the 2014 Budget, to cut around $80 billion of funding to the states: $30 billion from schools and $50 billion from hospitals. I will not burden you with the convoluted arguments around this except to say that Labor claimed $80 billion was removed, while the LNP claimed it was never in Julia Gillardâs budget anyway. Despite denying the Budget had been cut, Abbott claimed he would achieve $80 billion in âsavingsâ over 10 years by reducing forward spending on schools and hospitals. Work that out if you can. If you want to probe deeper into this sorry tale, read the ABCâs
Fact check: Does the federal budget cut $80 billion from hospitals and schools?, and look at the conclusion:
The debate over the $80 billion figure - whether a cut or a saving - is hot air.â
Hot air or not, the premiers and first ministers are livid that this money, needed to run their schools and hospitals in the coming years, will not be forthcoming from the federal government, leaving them in a dire situation. Turnbull decided on the risky strategy of offering them the capacity to raise tax themselves to fund these essential services, announced it just a few days before COAG, provided no documentation for this momentous change before or at the meeting, and received the anticipated thumbs down. Now Morrison is out declaring that the PM âcalled the premiersâ bluffâ, and they chickened out! Believe that if you can. The premiers are insulted and furious. What a way to encourage consensus!
All this serves to reinforce the sad fact that Abbottâs calamitous budgetary legacy hangs like a rotting albatross around the governmentâs neck.
And itâs not as if Abbott regrets any of his actions; indeed he is out and about insisting that he was right in his decisions, all of them, and that Turnbull is now following his policies and taking them to the election. This has forced Turnbull onto the back foot, declaring that his government is all about
âContinuity and Changeâon which subject 2353NM has written such cutting satire.
Letâs look deeper into budgetary matters.
Abbottâs fiscal legacy is the aftermath of his 2014 Budget, which is still causing anguish for the Turnbull government. Several measures designed to reduce spending are still held up in the Senate and are unlikely to be passed. The unfairness of that budget still hangs like a bad smell around the Coalition, even among its supporters. Hockeyâs bluster about âending the age of entitlementâ for those on âwelfareâ, while puffing Cuban cigars, still sticks in peopleâs craw.
Yet Abbott tells an audience in Japan that he wears that budget as âa badge of honourâ! He is unrepentant; he would do the same budgetary damage again.
And he lies in wait to do so.
This week we saw the re-emergence of the Hockey/Abbott âwe must live within our meansâ mantra. Turnbull and Morrison, hoping this homely metaphor would resonate with voters, didnât bother to explain how that applies to the federal budget. Perhaps they hope it will remind voters of the old virtue of saving before buying, or of using old-fashioned layâby, notwithstanding the fact that homeowners certainly do not use this approach to purchase the new home. They borrow heavily and pay it off of later, just as governments ought to do.
The LNP wants voters to believe âliving within our meansâ equates with cutting expenditure, assiduously avoiding any hint that âmeansâ = income = revenue, and that increasing revenue would have the same result.
In last weekâs
Crikey Bernard Keane points out: â
âŚthere's been no talk at all of âliving within your meansâ while government spending as a proportion of GDP went from 24.1% of GDP in Labor's last full year to 25.6% of GDP in 2013-14 and 2014-15 and then to 25.9% this year. Nor was there talk of âliving within your meansâ when the Abbott repealed the carbon price (cost: $6.2 billion over four years), the mining tax (cost: $3.4 billion over four years) or tax and superannuation changes announced by Labor but abandoned in December 2013 ($3.6 billion over four years, and much more over the long term), significantly exacerbating not merely the government's short-term fiscal position but crimping long-term revenue growth as well.â
Itâs simply rhetorical claptrap designed to frighten voters into believing that Coalition members are prudent and ever-reliable stewards of the economy who will not waste taxpayersâ money, while Labor members are profligate spenders determined to tax us to the hilt to give the community the healthcare and education it needs: â
Every time Bill Shorten opens his mouth it will be to tax you moreâ. Obviously, this will be an election slogan.
Since we began with the COAG skirmish on healthcare and schools funding, letâs look at Abbottâs legacy there. It still blights the Coalition.
New health minister Sussan Ley is still grappling with Abbottâs intention to emasculate Medicare, to introduce a co-payment, and to reduce spending in an area that inevitably will demand more as the population ages and as medicine offers more treatment options. Her introduction of âhealth care homesâ has puzzled doctors. Professor Brian Owler commented: â
Iâm president of the AMA, Iâm a brain surgeon with a PhD, but I canât keep up with the governmentâs planning processâ.
In response to Bill Shortenâs promise to improve and properly fund healthcare, Ley is sounding desperate as she shouts at him telling him that he must
âput up or shut upâ.
The cost of the NDIS frightens the LNP, so their response is to restrict its development, always looking for âsavingsâ instead of doing what is required: raising more revenue to support this essential service that the people want and need.
After assuring us that he was on the same page as Labor over the Gonski reforms, Abbottâs legacy has been to obfuscate about the funding of years five and six, a position recently adopted by Turnbull, who is now talking about abandoning the funding of public schools and focusing federal funding on private schools!
Abbottâs legacy lingers, and he lies in wait.
Letâs look now at Abbottâs calamitous legacy in the vexed area of immigration policy.
Abbott (or was it Peta Credlin) thought that political capital could be accrued by demonising asylum seekers who came uninvited by boat. He learned that from John Howard. âStop the boatsâ became one of his infamous three word slogans, with which he flogged Labor mercilessly, claiming throughout that this would solve the problem of boat arrivals created by Labor. Not wanting to be seen as encouraging the arrivals, Labor allowed itself to become entangled in a web of derogatory dialogue about people smugglers and âillegalsâ, as Abbott termed boat people.
Abbottâs legacy is continuing antagonism towards asylum seekers among a significant proportion of the electorate. This has spilled over into anti-Muslim sentiment and the formation of Anti-Muslim groups such as the far right-wing United Patriots Front, who unveiled a âStop the mosquesâ banner at the Collingwood AFL game last weekend, and a political group calling themselves Party For Freedom, which is opposed to multiculturalism and open borders, which was responsible for picketing and riots at the Halal expo in Melbourne this week.
Abbottâs extravagant language directed at Islamic State, his incendiary use of the term âTeam Australiaâ to divide Australians into them and us, and his provocative stance towards Muslim leaders accentuated the antagonism. He set a fire of hatred that still burns in the heart of many Australians. He could have taken an accommodating line, as did Malcolm Fraser who had to manage thousands of boat people from Vietnam. Fraserâs approach resulted in the cheerful integration of these Vietnamese immigrants into our society. Instead, Abbott preferred hostility, antagonism and the divisiveness this entails.
This is Abbottâs calamitous legacy. Yet he lies in wait.
He not only defends his divisive âstop the boatsâ immigration policy, he has been abroad promoting it to anyone in the Eurozone who will listen as the way to solve the immigration crisis in Europe and the Middle East. The misery that so many asylum seekers suffer in detention is testimony to Abbottâs hard-hearted, punitive policies, but politics keep him on this hateful track.
Take now his calamitous attitude to climate change.
At times climate change skeptic, sometimes outright denier, always coal and oil advocate and renewables opponent, Abbott has gifted his do-nothing-to-curb-the-use-of-fossil-fuels legacy to Turnbull, who accepts the reality of anthropogenic global warming and knows what ought to be done about it, but is lumbered with the Abbott/Hunt Direct Action Plan that holds little promise of reducing our carbon footprint or meeting our emissions targets. Yet there is Turnbull lamely advocating it. Meanwhile, one thousand kilometres of the Great Barrier Reef has already been bleached, and more is threatened.
Turnbull knows that if he puts a foot wrong, Abbott is lying in wait, aided and abetted by a coterie of deniers, who would have this man back in a flash.
Abbottâs calamitous legacy in the field of communications is legend.
Look at what heâs done to the NBN. âDemolish the NBNâ was his command to Turnbull, not given because we did not need fast broadband for a myriad of reasons, commerce and health care to name but two, but because it was a Labor initiative.
Excruciatingly, Turnbull put himself through fiery hoops to placate Abbott but still save the NBN. As a result we now have a substandard multi-technology FTTN system that uses outdated equipment and ageing copper wire, that is not as fast as promised, is rolling out slower, and looks like being more expensive than Laborâs FTTP system, which experts insist should have been the target from the beginning.
Abbotâs destructive NBN legacy is still playing out, and is inhibiting what Liberals repeatedly insist our economy needs: âjobs and growthâ.
I could go on for many more pages, so letâs conclude with Abbottâs legacy on two social issues: marriage equality and the Safe Schools program. He remains opposed to them both.
Although in favour of marriage equality, Turnbull has meekly gone along with Abbottâs delaying tactic of a post-election plebiscite, which he knows is Abbottâs way of maiming it, and perhaps killing it off altogether.
Abbott, always lurking in the background, has announced that Safe Schools, which is already doing so much to reduce gender-related bullying, should be defunded.
Abbottâs calamitous legacy on social issues haunts Turnbull. Abbott lurks on the backbench where he lies in wait.
When heâs not sitting on the backbench, heâs overseas soliciting photo-ops with such celebrities as Japanâs Shinzo Abe, Britianâs David Cameron, President Poroshenko of the Ukraine, US Secretary of State John Kerry, and even Henry Kissinger. Back home, heâs all over the place, never averse to a pic with group after group, and now heâs on his annual Pollie Pedal. Heâs not sitting back like a vanquished leader: heâs promoting Abbott wherever he can! Take a look at his
Facebook page.
>
Among the conservative clique that still supports Abbott, he talks about âthe second Abbott governmentâ, which he insists âwill be better than the firstâ!
Although an Abbott comeback still seems fanciful, he certainly believes in it, notwithstanding the recent ReachTel poll of 743 voters in his Warringah electorate, where almost two-thirds of respondents, including half of all LNP voters, said he should quit parliament at the coming election.
The calamitous Abbott lies in wait, ready to attack. His storm troopers are ready. They know that a winning strategy is to first weaken the enemy, then mount a surprise attack.
The commercial shock jocks, incensed by PM Turnbullâs refusal to appear on their programs, are spreading adverse publicity about him, which is weakening him. Several of the LNPâs traditional supporters in the media are writing columns critical of Turnbull. Softening him for an attack is proceeding apace.
Close to Abbott is a group of offended conservatives. These men meet in the so-called âmonkey pod roomâ. They are urging his return and planning for it. Eric Abetz is still angry about his demotion. He says he has so much to offer. Kevin Andrews is angry and again has offered to stand should the party wish to replace Turnbull. Cory Bernardi is so angry about how the conservative clique is being treated by Turnbull that he is talking of forming a new conservative party. George Christensen is angry about the Safe Schools program and is echoing Abbottâs hostility. Government House Whip Andrew Nikolic remains a fervent Abbott supporter. Although Turnbull won the leadership contest 44 to 34, when Andrews stood against Julie Bishop for deputy, he garnered 30 votes, an indication of the strength of the conservatives in the Liberal party.
Following a discordant week for Turnbull and with the latest
Newspoll of 51/49 TPP to Labor reflecting voter discontent with the LNP, the troops are contemplating an attack on Turnbull.
Meanwhile, Abbott lies in wait, believing he is the man for the top job, while still mouthing sanctimonious words of support for his adversary.
Nobody knows what the weeks ahead will bring. Despite the improbability of a second Abbott government, in the crazy and unpredictable world that federal politics has become, nothing is impossible. The vengeful wrecker intends to show that this is so.
All the time the calamitous Abbott lies in wait.
What do you think?
What are your views about Abbottâs desire to return to the top job?
Will there be a second Abbott government?
We look forward to reading your views and your comments.
For Facebook users, we have a Facebook page:
Putting politicians and commentators to the verbal sword â âLikeâ this page to receive notification on your timeline of anything we post.
There is also a personal Facebook page:
Ad Astraâs page â Send a friend request to interact there.
We also have twitter accounts where we notify followers of new posts:
@1TPSTeam (The TPS Team account)
@Adastra5 (Ad Astraâs account)
Current rating: 0.3 / 5 | Rated 15 times