Queensland premier hopes to win over angry voters by saying tough decisions were necessary to keep the economy strong

When Tony Abbott faces voters again, his pitch will have to be pretty similar to Queensland premier Campbell Newman’s. All those “tough” decisions were necessary to keep the economy strong. The Coalition offers certainty versus a return to “chaos” under Labor.



It’s a pitch designed to shift voters’ thinking away from their anger and deep disappointment with the Coalition incumbents and onto the alleged risks of the Labor alternatives, to recast heavy-handed decision-making as “strength” – which voters might not like, but can at least rely on in “uncertain times”. Newman used “strong” and “strength” dozens of time in his appeal to voters as he called the election, and the word “strong” is gratuitously included in the name of key Queensland government policies.

Like the federal Coalition, the Newman government adopted a crash-through approach in its first term - plummeting in the opinion polls after unpopular budget cuts, public service job losses, privatisations (now rebadged as long-term leases), controversial laws targeting bikies and clashes with the judiciary.

And, like the federal Coalition, Newman insists the reward is an economy better than it would otherwise be and a bright economic future just around the corner.

This means the Queensland election isn’t only an indicator of Tony Abbott’s unpopularity - measured by just how few campaign appearances he can make beside Newman - but also a test run for the federal government’s whole political strategy.

There are, of course, a few obvious weaknesses in the plan.

The promised economic benefits of all the budgetary pain are not evident yet. Federally, a surplus remains at least six years away, the deficit will be around $72bn over the next two years and national unemployment is predicted to hit 6.5%. The Queensland economy ranks fifth in the country, according to Commsec’s latest State of the States report. The state has the highest unemployment rate in the country, equal with Tasmania, at 6.9%.

Nor are the promised benefits from the unpopular asset leases tangible, or even detailed. Queensland’s Strong Choices plan proposes long-term leasing of ports, water pipelines and electricity transmission and distribution businesses to raise an “estimated” $37bn, but the scoping studies won’t be released until after the election, so this estimate is difficult to check. Of that, $25bn will be used to pay down debt and $8.6bn will go to the Strong Choices Future Investment Program - bolstered by the bonuses paid under the federal government’s asset recycling plan.

But exactly what “strong” future investments are to be funded is yet to be announced or scrutinised - although $3bn has been set aside for roads and $2bn for public transport. Most of these announcements are likely to come during the campaign.

So voters will have limited information to weigh up the effective privatisation of existing assets in order to fund new things, including public transport projects from which the federal coalition withdrew funding, and education and hospitals, from which projected commonwealth funding has also been cut.

The East West Link - bolstered by $3bn in federal funding - was supposed to be former Victorian premier Denis Napthine’s trump card, and that didn’t work out so well. And when its cost-benefit analysis was finally released - after the Coalition lost the state election - it turned out to have a benefit of 47c for every public dollar outlayed, a detail that might have been handy when Victorian voters were making up their minds.

Billions in road spending around the country is a key part of Tony “I want to be known as the infrastructure prime minister” Abbot’s re-election plan.

The upside of the Queensland - and possible also the federal - Coalition’s re-election strategy is that the popularity of their Labor opponents is mostly a function of being the only obvious alternative rather than of having a charismatic leader or an inspiring alternative plan.

Re-styling policies the electorate has judged to be punitive as necessary demonstrations of strength, while colouring relatively unknown opponents as an unnecessary risk, seems to be the Coalition’s best strategic shot.

If it doesn’t save the Newman government from a big voter backlash, that’s bad news for the federal Coalition too - whether Abbott campaigns in Queensland or not.