Off The Record 2010 Federal Election Campaign

Special Edition: Election Eve

That was the election that was

Political orthodoxy, the published polls, and gut feeling say Labor will be returned to power tomorrow. However this campaign has been anything other than orthodox. As many commentators have stated it’s a campaign between two opposition leaders, with Labor surrendering many of the benefits of incumbency in removing Kevin Rudd and installing Julia Gillard as Prime Minister in June.

Both leaders have had very few slip-ups of their own doing but have lost momentum at crucial times. Tony Abbott struggled to effectively sell his broadband policy and lost valuable momentum, but it was the leaks against Gillard from within her own Party that have probably been the most damaging moments of the campaign so far.

Both leaders failed to really cut through in their campaign launches, but Abbott missed the bigger opportunity to capitalise on the calamity of Labor’s second and third weeks. Gillard’s ‘web-health’ policy announcement during her launch speech played well to the ALP’s policy strengths, supporting her forward-looking rhetoric and highlighting a perceived weakness in her opponent.

The live debate was a dull dead heat, while the two ‘people’s forums’ in Rooty Hill and Red Hill were evenly split.

There is clearly an anti-Government swing on in Queensland and NSW, and although it is now a cliché, it is true that ultimately the campaign will be decided by the uniformity of that swing in those two States.

The Labor brand in both States is clearly damaged. In Queensland, the removal of Kevin Rudd has not played well, while Gillard was clearly taken aback by the strong cynicism in Western Sydney following her announcement of the Parramatta-Epping rail line. The ALP now probably regrets its decision to muddy the waters in the campaign between State and Federal issues in NSW.

Countering this is strong support for the Government (and the progressive side of politics) in Victoria and South Australia – partly due to the Gillard home town factor – which may see as many as four seats change hands from Liberal to Labor. WA could go the other way with Hasluck and Swan (notionally Labor) in play for the Coalition.

The Greens are on track to attract their highest level of support at a Federal election and are now favourites on the betting markets to win the seat of Melbourne. That the Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate after 1 July 2011 is the only certainty going in to tomorrow’s election.

The Coalition campaign has built some momentum in its final days but OTR still thinks Labor and Julia Gillard will fall over the line with a four to six seat majority.

The best of times…

The PM’s performances have been strong throughout the campaign so it is difficult to pinpoint one single best moment, however, Australians got to see the “real Julia” in the television programs Q&A and The 7PM Project, and she continued to build on these strong performances.

Tony Abbott’s victory at the “people’s forum” at the Rooty Hill RSL was a moment of strength for the Opposition Leader. His decision to literally meet people at their level played out well, setting the tone for his contribution to the question and answer session. While the margin of victory was close it showed that Tony Abbott could hold his own as a creditable alternative Prime Minister.

… the worst of times

Veteran journalist Laurie Oakes’ airing of inside cabinet information that Gillard had questioned a pension increase and paid parental leave marked the low point of the Government’s campaign. A second leak that she had reportedly sent a staff member to represent her at National Security Committee continued to provide an unwelcome distraction for the PM and overshadowed the Government’s campaign message for a number of crucial days.

The Coalition’s campaign launch was a lost opportunity for Abbott to continue to build momentum over the course of the campaign. The absence of any detailed policy coupled with a focus on personality was supposed to show the Coalition as a safe pair of hands. Instead it provoked questions about the Coalition’s policy strength. Tony Abbott’s admission later that he was not a “tech head” only encouraged the perception that he was not across the detail of his own policies.

Return engagements

It’s safe to say there has not been an Australian election in living memory where so many former party leaders played such a central role. Like once great actors who can’t bear to leave the stage, in 2010 Kevin Rudd, Mark Latham, Bob Hawke, John Howard, John Hewson, and even Andrew Peacock all took turns at upstaging the young ingénues who had taken their roles.

The most tragic player was clearly Mark Latham. Rarely has an ex-politician’s desperate and transparent need for relevance been so unmatched by their ability to achieve it. No doubt he’ll think he accomplished what he set out to do, shining the spotlight on what he now says is an empty and meaningless process. But Latham looked like a buffoon and a bruiser, and ended up committing the cardinal sin of being boring.

The best return engagement was John Hewson, whose appearances on the ABC’s top-rating (three words you don’t see together very often) Gruen Nation revealed a raconteur of some skill, and a pretty insightful commentator to boot. No doubt he’ll be looking for other media gigs to capitalise on his renewed fame.

It’s strange to say Kevin Rudd had a good campaign, but in an odd way he did. Media and public sympathy was only enhanced by his illness, and whatever the result tomorrow his reputation will come out unscathed: if the ALP wins, his late intervention will be seen as a key factor; if they don’t, his ousting will be.

Bob Hawke has now effectively replaced Gough Whitlam in the pantheon of Labor greats, while John Howard’s brief return cemented the affection and regard significant sections of the electorate still hold for him. The less said about Andrew Peacock’s ill-judged comments the better.

It’s been suggested the reason for all these special guest appearances was that neither the PM nor Opposition Leader had the gravitas to pull spotlight themselves. We’re hoping that in 2013 one of them has been on the stage long enough to grow into the leading role, and that there’s no longer a part for these distracting supporting players.

Kerry and Laurie’s Excellent Adventure

This campaign has been characterised by media outlets keeping their leading journalists at home rather than lose them to the road for five weeks. This may have been what led one media commentator to call the coverage “one of the most abysmal performances I have seen from the media”. We’re not sure if that’s true, but the line of questioning about “Mr Rabbit” surely marks a new level of triviality.

But despite all the tweets, Facebook updates and FM radio interviews, the last five weeks have clearly demonstrated the traditional media’s ongoing ability to lead the political debate, set the agenda, and completely derail a campaign when they want to.

Two pivotal journalists – Laurie Oakes and Kerry O’Brien – changed the fortunes of both parties in the campaign, throwing the Labor and Coalition campaigns off the rails in a way that demonstrated these Titans’ ability to own the media cycle: Oakes by his cabinet leaks and O’Brien with his questioning of Abbott on broadband. Both journalists were at the top of their game and left politicians on both sides in their wake.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum

First there were silly arguments about the format for the leaders’ debates, although what we ended up with was a forced and lifeless event. Then there was the economic debate that never was. But the most interesting new development over this campaign has clearly been the ‘people’s forums’, where Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott have been tested separately by questions without notice from voters.

In the crucial election battleground of Western Sydney, Gillard and Abbott faced a room full of swinging voters at the Rooty Hill RSL. Gillard faced a reasonably hostile audience from a pokies stool on the stage, dealing calmly with questions on the ALP factions’ involvement in Kevin Rudd’s dismissal, broken promises and bungled schemes. Abbott won the night by moving down to be amongst the people, and demonstrating his natural, folksy style with everyday Australians.

This week featured another people’s forum in another important battleground: Queensland. The forum at Brisbane Broncos Club in Red Hill used the same format as the Rooty Hill event. Both leaders positioned themselves below the podium among the people and both faced some difficult questions, Abbott on WorkChoices, broadband and election costings, Gillard on why she took away Queenslanders’ ability to determine the Prime Minister. Abbott was up first, but Gillard emerged slightly ahead according those present and media commentators.

The ABC’s Q&A debates offered viewers a different dynamic, with a mix of Labor, Liberal and swinging voters. Gillard’s polished performance was a defining moment in her campaign, producing a near perfect answer on her family status and demonstrating her sharp humour when responding to a gift of a question on Mark Latham. Abbott found the questions from the ABC’s audience more challenging, provoking a mixed response from the audience.

The people’s forums were a refreshing change from the trained political parlance practised by the press gallery and challenged the leaders to connect on a different level. We’re sure they’ll become a fixture, although the jury is still out on the need for a US-style debates commission for future campaigns.

The State(s) we’re in

The cartographer’s marks that separate the States of the Federation are often said to be accidents of history, a reminder of our colonial past that is an anachronism in our modern, borderless economy. So why are there such significant differences in the mood and temper of the state electorates? Why are those who follow Rugby League so pissed off, while those who watch AFL are so seemingly content?

Dissatisfaction with the Keneally and Bligh Governments will most likely lead to significant Labor losses in NSW and Queensland, where polling suggests they will lose four seats and eight seats respectively. Gillard has done what she can to distance herself from the NSW Government in particular. But the people of the marginal seats of Western Sydney seemingly don’t care.

The mining tax debacle and the knifing of their own PM mean the state of play in Queensland is even grimmer. The pollsters are tipping Bonner, Petrie, Leichardt, Forde, Dawson, Flynn, Dickson and possibly even Brisbane will fall to the Coaltion.

The Government will do well in progressive Victoria and possibly even South Australia, but cannot afford to lose the NT seat of Solomon. If the ALP is behind when the polls close in WA, then it’s ‘so long, farewell’ to the Gillard Government as the seats of Hasluck and Swan are tipped to swing to the Coalition.

More than Facebook and email

For all the planning and strategising done by parties before a campaign, they are unpredictable, uncontrollable events with a momentum all of their own. This was supposed to be the health and economy election, so the prominence of broadband has been a surprise to many.

The issue was a late game-changer for the Government, allowing it to promote its future-focussed bona fides against the Coalition’s apparent disinterest in the technology of tomorrow. The Coalition announced it would scrap the NBN as part of its $6 billion broadband policy, but Tony Abbott’s absence from the announcement and his later stumbles on the issue made him look out of touch and out of date.

By contrast, Julia Gillard flew to Tasmania to launch the commercial start of her $43 billion NBN, and four days later used the Labor campaign launch to link the NBN with the future health of Australians through online consultations.

Moving forward with real action

No doubt a majority of TV viewers were relieved to see the broadcast blackout kicking in on Wednesday night, especially after an intense final week of negative advertising. If you are still undecided, rest assured, online and social media advertising will continue on until tomorrow, thanks to a blackout loophole.

With the 2010 Federal Election TV advertising all wrapped up and in the can, it’s time to revisit some of the highlights and lowlights:

• First round of positive ads featuring their leaders talking about their priorities – Liberal’s Action contract ad (with that rather dated “Real Action” jingle) and Labor’s Moving Forward ad (featuring some sloppy writing).
• Labor’s series of negative advertising – Tony Abbott’s record as a health minister, economic record, and tax hikes, and “Don’t risk with Tony Abbott”.
• The Coaltion’s negative advertising saw the return of “Kevin O’Lemon”, also “Same old Labor” followed by “Same old Julia”, South Park-esque ads featuring Gillard and Keneally, Another boat and Stop Labor’s carbon tax.
• Third party advertising – with the ACTU sticking with an anti-WorkChoices theme, GetUp!’s series of commercials most notably on Abbott’s record on women’s issues, and the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies’ anti-mining tax ad.
• Perhaps the ad that generated the most buzz didn’t broadcast at all – the fake Greens ad by Republic of Everyone on Gruen Nation – If you think, vote Greens generated close to 100,000 views on YouTube.

Best quotes of the campaign

Oakes: “What do you think when I say Mark Latham?”
Gillard: “Unfortunately at the moment Laurie I think Channel Nine.”
Oakes: “Well that’s a fair cop Gov.”
- The PM and Laurie Oakes, Weekend Today, 1 August

“We really are a cross-section of the community, albeit some of the more colourful sections of the community. We’re not exactly the ‘gray suits’.”
- Fiona Patten, President of the Australian Sex Party

“Bob Hawke… had a tax summit, now if we had that today, happen before people’s eyes – ‘Oh – tax summit, imagine doing that? Imagine getting people to Canberra? Oh – why would you bother talking to anybody? Why don’t get on with leading it’ – tweet, tweet, tweet and so on.”
- The PM at yesterday’s Press Club event.

“Nice to see you Mark, and I hope you enjoy your life as a journalist.”
- The PM to Mark Latham, 7 August.

“Just as the Prime Minister says, I say as well that I’m no Bill Gates here and I don’t claim to be any kind of tech head in all of this.”
- Tony Abbott on the 7:30 Report, 10 August.

“There are some things that can’t be measured.”
- The PM on Mark Latham, Q&A, 9 August.

“Wayne Swan is to surpluses what Paris Hilton is to celibacy. They remember it once existed but they’ll never see it again.”
- Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey, 20 July.

Spinning the wheels

The term “spin” is really getting a workout at the moment. Tony Abbott says Kevin Rudd is “more spin than substance”. The final days of the recent South Australian election campaign saw a senior Liberal admit his Party’s cost estimates for a major hospital redevelopment were, “in essence”, spin. An online study earlier this month claimed over half of the news stories appearing in Australian metropolitan daily newspapers were driven by “public relations spin”.

And last week in a moment of honesty he may come to regret, Federal Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner said: “Spin is a reality in modern politics, whether any of us likes it or not.”

Spin is as old as politics itself. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar Brutus, one of Caesar’s assassins and a former ally, spins his actions as the result of his love for Rome: “Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more.” (Brutus was clearly unconvinced by his own spin, killing himself in Act V.)

In the modern political battleground spin equals sin. Accusing your opponent of spinning is code for saying they’re lying. It’s an accusation that tries to activate underlying voter discontent about politics and politicians by positioning the speaker as the straight talking, no bullshit alternative to a slick, media-trained salesman who’s more interested in a headline than a result.

But anti-spin is still spin, it’s just spinning in a different direction.

While the media regularly accuses politicians of spin, newspapers, commentators, news magazine programs, talk radio hosts and, yes, bloggers, are all furiously spinning.

This has become more and more pronounced in recent years. As the media becomes ever more fragmented and the old media continues its decline in audience and influence, the competition has become more desperate, the commentary more strident. Stories that a few years ago would not have got up are now splashed on page one, requiring more spin than source(s).

Increasingly news consumers are getting their information from commentary and interpretation like this and millions of other blogs around the world, obviously partisan news outlets like Fox News and MSNBC, talk radio, and special interest groups.

Like cogs in a machine, the faster one spins the faster they all spin.

Tony Abbott: mistaking the crowd for the audience

On the day before Tuesday’s health debate I was giving media training to a client. Tony Abbott should have been there.

“Remember who your audience is,” the client was told. “There’s a huge difference between talking to A Current Affair and talking to the 7.30 Report.”

Abbott thought his audience was the political insiders being wined and dined at the National Press Club. His knee-raised, arms-splayed, loud-laughing, bad-joking, interjecting persona might have raised a cheer from the Liberal faithful in the room but that’s not who his real audience was. If you are talking to Tracey Grimshaw or Kerry O’Brien then you had better understand that while they are conducting the interview you are really giving answers to the hundreds of thousands of viewers out there.

Abbott forgot that and came across to the wider public as aggressive, undisciplined and (whisper it quiet) almost Lathamesque.

Our client was also told never to trash an opposition brand. He could say his product is better, faster, more efficient than other brands but he should never resort to saying another brand was no good and he should never ever ever attack another brand on a personal level.

Abbott had a duty to attack the government’s health plan, and because he has decided not to release the Coalition health plan until closer to the election it was difficult to attack in a constructive way by comparing it unfavourably to his own product. Yet he broke the golden rule when he went after Kevin Rudd on a personal level. Perhaps he was looking for the nightly news grab, but once again he misunderstood his audience.

Making jokes about Rudd being a boring speaker might be all well and good in Parliament – or at the National Press Club during a normal presentation – but personal attacks just don’t fly with anyone except the rapid supporters.

When Mark Latham spoke before the 2004 election of the Howard government being a “conga line of suckholes” Labor stalwarts cheered because he was “giving it” to the Coalition. Undecided voters – the ones he had to impress – wondered whether he had the gravitas to be Prime Minister. A couple of months later they decided, and Latham was no longer.

The Australian public want their leaders to be respectful. They have got to be able to envisage them at important occasions, see them at the White House or a world leader’s forum.  They want them to fight, but by the rules of good behaviour.

The same is true of leading brands. We want them to be respectable, we want to be able to display them on important occasions and we want them to spruik their wares in an engaging, innovative and positive manner.

The guy I was training now understands that. Tony Abbott still needs to.