A majority of Australians now say they believe that the government lied to them about the reasons for going to war, and the cash for visas scandal has shattered what little public credibility Philip Ruddock retained after the “children overboard” inquiry, yet still the polls indicate that the Coalition would win an election held tomorrow.
How is this possible? The fact that a government which has, for over eight years, attacked the basic rights and standard of living of so many sections of the community can have such staying power is largely explained by a corresponding weakness in the public credibility of the opposition.
In the last year or so, the Labor opposition presented slightly more liberal posture on the issues of war and refugees - an adjustment to the broad mass movements that emerged around these issues. But the differences were very slight.
On the war, the ALP leadership’s opposition was weak. It echoed the government’s lies about of the need to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and fight “terrorism”, and as soon as the war commenced, dropped the call for the troops to be brought home. Today, Labor wholeheartedly supports the continued presence in Iraq of 1000 Australian troops and many people have drawn the correct conclusion that, had the ALP been in government at the time, it would have stood shoulder to shoulder with Bush and Blair.
On the issue of refugees, Labor’s adoption of a policy which is barely distinguishable from the Coalition’s has further revealed the tokeness of its “opposition” role, and on most other issues - privatisation, “law and order”, civil liberties, etc - the policy gap between Liberal and Labor is even narrower.
Whatever the differences in rhetoric, Labor has offered a continuation of the economic rationalist policies that the previous federal Labor government pioneered - and growing numbers of people see it.
The failure of the Labor “opposition” to deliver, or even offer, significant social reforms is in increasing contrast to the deepening public anger about the job- and service-cutting polices of neo-liberalism and broad opposition to its wars and civil rights abuses. The ALP knows this too, and in an effort to stem the loss of support to the Greens and claw back some of its traditional working-class base, it has seized on the issue of Medicare to differentiate itself and re-mould its image as an opposition worth voting into office. Labor pollies are hitting the streets, the community meetings, suburban letterboxes and the media with a list of promises to oppose in parliament large parts of Howard’s attack on Medicare, defend the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and possibly even change tack on its previous support for private health insurance subsidies.
Of course, whether or not the ALP keeps these promises will be decided, not by a commitment to universally accessible, high quality public health services, but by its judgement of how high a dividend it will get on polling day for being seen to take a stand. To save its political skin, Labor may actually keep its promises on Medicare. If it does, all the better. Socialist Alliance will stand together with the ALP and the Greens when they oppose Howard’s attacks on Medicare, higher education and union rights. But we know that we cannot rely on parliament — it is only through collective action on the streets, and in our workplaces, schools and communities, that working people can defend our interests.
We also know that Labor’s newfound responsiveness to community concerns about Medicare won’t make it a real opposition, one which can be relied on to respond to (let alone lead) a charge to defend all people’s right to good health and education; secure and well-paid work; and so on.
Nor will it quench the deep-going disgruntlement and anger among working people after years of attacks and betrayals by Liberal and Labor alike. More and more people are not just wishing there was a serious, consistent opposition to neo-liberalism, but are prepared to help create one. The 40% growth in Socialist Alliance membership during the anti-war movement attests to that, and our continued growth (around 10%) in the last four months shows that there is a receptivity to socialist solutions, to going well beyond simply opposing one or another government policy to envision and fight for a society which puts meeting people’s needs before profits.
Strengthening this sort of opposition is an urgent task for us all. At any time now, Howard may call an election. While we continue to campaign on the streets, in workplaces and elsewhere, Alliance branches need to start planning now how we will raise the flag of real opposition in the next election. Which electorates to contest, which candidates to stand, what issues to focus on - these questions now need to be addressed by every branch.