|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 <<
back to archive indexDate: 27th July 2005 Farewell BobSome achievements but a lot of missed opportunities.The sudden resignation of Bob Carr gives a time for reflection on his time as Premier. He has managed the media well, but I do not think history will be so kind. He has achieved some things and dominated his opposition by research and rhetoric, but overall, it is a disappointing Premiership. He has had the reputation of being an environmental Premier and he has increased the number and area of National Parks. But he has been fundamentally a Conservative, who has followed the agenda of the big end of town, rather than really advocating for the people of NSW. Government gets it legitimacy from the fact that the people elect it to stand up for their interests against other vested interests. So if it does not plan, does not set the agenda and does not stand up to vested interests, it is doing a poor job. Whether it manages the media or not. Bob the Realtor did not do well by these criteria. He would not borrow to build infrastructure, which is the way governments have invested in their States for centuries, and instead has sold assets to balance the books. Schools, hospital, railways have been run down. Planning has been deals with developers rather than a real plan. Now, Bob has resigned in as unplanned a way as he managed the State. He said it was a nice day on the weekend and he wanted to spend more time with Helena. Presumably if a better way of spending his weekends comes along, he will go somewhere else. Will he go Federal, where there is such a dearth of Labor talent that he would look good? Will he go to academia to brush up his future image? One can only guess. Bob presided over a record term, with record prosperity. Much is asked of those to whom much is given. He had as good an opportunity as anyone could ever be given, but he did little with it. With control over both houses of Parliament, he might have done great things. He could have reformed Workers Compensation rather than merely take benefits from injured workers. He could have stood up to shonky builders. He could have borrowed money and built railways, schools and hospitals. No banker criticises someone with debt, if they have good asset backing for that debt. But instead he took the easy course, spinning minor achievements as a great job. He did not stand up to the Federal government on moral issues such as refugees. Even though he states he has a huge interest in foreign policy and 59% of people believe that Australia's Iraq policy is the reason for terrorism, he did not challenge Howard on this. He just increased police powers against terrorism. It is not known who will replace Bob. It is my opinion that the talent in the Labor party is on the Left, but they do not have the numbers. Carmel Tebbutt, with her conscientious approach, obvious intelligence and genuine concern for people would be the best. John Watkins has performed solidly if unspectacularly, and Bob Debus, overloaded with portfolios, has done a good job. Carl Scully, Minister for Train Crashes looks likely to have the numbers. Craig Knowles, the Controller, looks to have damaged himself using his temper with the nurses who tried to tell him about the problems of the Health system, his drink-driving charge, and the questionable planning processes that are less than transparent. Perhaps Morris Iemma, the Health Minister might make a late run. He is hard to assess, but despite the fact that Health is in a mess, it was messy before he got there, and he has not worn much of the flak. Frank Sartor, the benign Dictator is not of the Labor faithful, so although competent, will probably not get a look-in. And do not rule out surprises. As far as the next election is concerned, Bob's successor will look small, and he or she will be heavily scrutinised. Will people stick with Labor under a new leader? Or will the public see that there is no real difference in the policy areas that matter, and register their lack of approval by installing a Liberal government? With current policies it will be difficult to choose between the Labor and Liberal parties and they will no doubt squabble about who had the ideas first in the run up to the 2007 election. Naturally we would be better with more options than a choice between two identical twins. Farewell Bob, more in sorrow than in anger. Yrs, Arthur Chesterfield-Evans (ACE) |
 |