DUCKPOND

The current polls aside, it does not take much of a shift in the electoral ballast of the ship of state to change the government. The number of seats needed to form government gives one perspective. Seen in another way, if one person in twenty changes their minds that can be very significant, subject always to where they live.

The policy to upgrade broadband announced today by Labor, it seems to me, may well be decisive. Here is the report from ABC News Online. The way this has panned out tends to confirm me in the speculation that attack is not always the most effective political action. No doubt the policy will now be dissected and analyzed in detail, but beyond the criticism it is still visionary and with the political attack, distinctive.

Looking back from some point of time in the future, we may be able to conclude that on this day, with this policy, Labor won government. Australians do not have the reputation for the quick adoption of technological innovations for nothing, and this is a technology at the finger tips of many people, not just generation x and y. At the very least, it is strategically clever policy, and it is the first evidence that Kevin Rudd, assisted by Lindsay Tanner in this instance, can kick goals.

Of course, this is just a theory based on no more than intuition. The policy strikes me as Whitlamesque in the way that is long term, “nation building”, transforming and captures the imagination. cs on his Santogate post at Troppo provides support, at least for the contention that events six months from polling day can be decisive:

There is a decent amount of support around for the idea that elections can be won and lost well before the campaigns proper. Many attribute Clinton’s second term to the success of his campaigning in swing states a year or more out from the poll. There are theories that Keating lost with the infamous Dawkin’s budget, or in November 1995. Based on research six months or more before the 2004 election, Hugh McKay was a rare commenter in never giving Latham a chance in hell. As always, these things are indeterminant, but one possibility is that the election is decided – only time’ll tell.

When making predictions, I do not do so in the belief that I will be right, but rather that I might be right. There definitely is not a sense of unanimity among the comments at The Australian. There seems to be a marked divide between those who think it is a good idea, and those who follow the Government’s line about taking money from the future fund. Still in these matters, I contend it is best to ignore the ideologically and politically blinkered.

Postscript: 22 March 2007

While the commenters are sceptical Peter Martin, via Troppo’s Missing Link( the “hivemind” or the wisdom of juries, or the hegelian collective mind), believes that Labor and Rudd have been suckered by Packer and others on the broadband proposal. Certainly, it is a better line than the Government’s confected attack. The political lesson here is sometimes it take time and study the proposal in depth.

My point, supported by some of Peter Martin’s commenters, is that the proposal as an idea will resonant with many voters. Perhaps from the Government’s point of view, they should wait on the quantative and qualitative research before they lauch their counterattack – and counter proposals – and perhaps their response simply represents the bearpit nature of parliamentary debate, and they are running the talking points from last year’s Republican playbook as well as what they imagine despite the polls is the publics frame on Labor policy.

Still I think policy initiative matters, in this instance especially because it enables Labor to get out ahead of the Government’s soon expected intensified public advertising campaigns and the announcements of budgetary largress that is expected to start flowing about August.

I suppose aside from considerations about the tactical shadow plays involved, it is reasonable and required to consider carefully whether the broadband proposal is good policy. In dealing with the substantial questions, some of us will be more challenged, which is not to say that answers are not required.

Postscript: 24 March 2007 

Now John Quiggin is on temporary leave, Fred Argy at Troppo has taken up the challenge to provide the economic analysis of the broadband proposal.