ANALYSIS

SUNDAY will mark two years since the election which made Tony Abbott Prime Minister, and six months and 26 days since he announced “Good government starts today” in a bid to keep the job.

Rarely has the distance between triumph and troubled times been so short, unless you are Kevin Rudd, the man Mr Abbott replaced with a pledge of stable administration.

Many voters, and even some of Mr Abbott’s colleagues, do not believe the promise of September 7, 2013, or the one of February 9, 2015, have been fulfilled.

It was no surprise when in 2013 the Coalition put Labor out of its six years of leadership leapfrog misery and took government with a huge majority in the House of Representatives.

Voters were not so much looking forward to a glowing Abbott future as the back of Rudd/Gillard turmoil — some of it cultivated by Mr Abbott but the bulk of ir self-inflicted.

But it did come as a shock when Mr Abbott had to defend himself against his own MPs and on February 9 this year narrowly saw off a motion for a leadership spill.

The offer of finally implementing “good government”, as if it was a casual afterthought, was given in a fearful rush by a man who described what had happened as a political “near death experience”.

The national economy is growing at just two per cent a year; in the June quarter the difference between what we earned from exports and spent on imports worsened by 41 per cent; unemployment is 6.3 per cent, a 13-year high.

The threat of political mortality lingers. A striking proof of this is the belief by some Government members is that as unhappy as the Abbott prime ministership has been, voters will refuse to elect Labor’s Bill Shorten.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton and others have thundered against leaking colleagues for damaging the Government, ignoring there is more than enough on the public record to cause harm.

Tony Abbott has not been warmly accepted by a significant part of the electorate over the past two years but leaders don’t have to be loveable. They just have to be competent, skimpy on public arrogance, and capable of communicating.

Mr Abbott has had trouble on all three counts:

ECONOMY

The 2014 Budget was a significant and early test of the Abbott Government’s competence and it did not pass. The Coalition still gets higher rating from voters for economic management but no thanks to its first economic statement. It was introduced with trumpets blaring a Budget emergency and with penalties for households in higher health and transport expenses.

The Budget emergency didn’t last long. In fact it worsened, but the Government stopped referring to it because consumers and business had been terrified into retreat just at a time when the fall-off in jobs and revenue from the resources sector required greater economic confidence. Critics of the Government consider that reduced confidence was an element in the economy’s dangerously slow growth as reported this week.

CAPTAIN’S PICKS

Suddenly knighthoods were back and there was just one man pushing for their return, Tony Abbott. It was a substantial change to national culture done without a skerrick of public consultation. Mr Abbott wasn’t happy back in March 2014 with the widespread criticism of his unilateral move, but he wasn’t finished yet. In January 2015 he topped his announcement of 10 months previous by sending an Australian gong to Prince Philip. The furious response by Australians helped fuel the leadership showdown of February.

But it’s not just cultural issues Mr Abbott has acted without a filter. He also hit cabinet with proposals to take citizenship from terrorists. The proposal was flawed, scantily explained and — as ministers made clear — unacceptable. And it was further evidence that when Mr Abbott takes his own advice he is likely to get into trouble.

CROSS BENCH

Mr Abbott’s connection with the electorate when he was Opposition Leader didn’t survive the election. And he also wasn’t able to talk to those he relied on to dominate Parliament.

In July, 2014, the new Senate was installed with eight members on the crossbench facing the Coalition, Labor and the Greens. Prime Minister Abbott knew they could undo Government legislation but made little effort to get their votes. He snubbed them, as if dealing with independents and others was beneath him.

Social Services Minister Scott Morrison has a delicate legislative dance to perform in the Senate and he is inviting as many cross benchers as possible to partner him. He is consulting and explaining personally, and getting support. In short, he is doing a Reverse Abbott and it is working. The Senate is not a happy mix for the Government, but it’s chief purpose appears to be as an excuse for the Government failing its own agenda.