Economic Reform Roundtable – King Jim shoots himself in the foot
WARNING: CONTAINS POLITICAL FARCE
Photos: Canva - Caricature: Bruce Keogh
Prior to the much-touted Economic Reform Roundtable - with its medieval King Arthur connotations - Jim Chalmers adopted subtle but noticeable Arthurian tendencies … tendencies such as wearing a suit of shining armour to work, and referring to himself as King Jim.
The treasurer had turned to the mythology of King Arthur to pre-empt and inspire the reform roundtable, bringing together a mix of leaders from business, unions, the community and government institutions.
In the name of “courage and consensus”, the 23 core representatives were expected to magically morph into the noblest of knights (and dames) and put the national interest ahead of their own.
Where’s the canned laughter?
Can you imagine business and industry following suit? They are having enough trouble cleaning up their public image problems, let alone worrying about the national good.
The major thrust of the roundtable was to suggest and explore innovative new ideas to make Australia’s economy more productive, sustainable and resilient. Our appetite for radical change was about to be tested - so we were led to believe.
Right from the outset, it smelled like a political stunt, designed to make Jim Chalmers look consultative and revolutionary – a big-picture, big-fella treasurer.
It’s a very tall order to expect Australians to believe that achieving over-arching consensus on big issues is ever achievable in these perceived ‘talkfests’. And further, we are left to wonder when any agreed policy ideas will be enacted. After all, the Albanese government is renowned for its timidity and stalling tactics. Maybe its massive new mandate will make a difference.
So, what was achieved by all the hoo-ha? Instead of big ideas and big plans, we got tinkering around the edges, akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic. And it came as no surprise.
But it also came with frustration because Australia’s economic challenges are profound and need urgent attention. Tax reform is the standout challenge, but Captain Courageous (Albanese) decided that taxation would not even get a look-in.
Unexpectedly, and to the great credit of the forum, full consensus was achieved on recommendations to tackle the intergenerational crisis in housing, with its debilitating effect on young Australians. But full consensus on only one big-ticket item is scant reason to call the conflab a success.
The convenors of the forum appear to have not realised that when given air in the name of consensus, conflicting interests have historically held Australia back.
When cowardly governments have their backs to the wall, they compromise best outcomes to appease differing interests, and so the national interest is compromised.
That’s where consensus inevitably leads us – right into mediocrity of half-baked policy.
The treasurer has now unwittingly brought this reality to the fore. As the irony of the mediocre outcome dawns on us, we realise he has shot (or stabbed) himself in the foot.
Jim Chalmers obviously wants to be seen as a mover and shaker. A visionary treasurer who will leave a long-term pseudo-mythological imprint on Australian fiscal and economic history, in much the same way as Bob Hawke and Paul Keating.
But real movers and shakers do not need roundtable cop-outs. They need that old-fashioned quality called “political courage”.
At the conclusion of the final day, the armour-clad Chalmers was seen riding his trusty steed into the sunset, saying “That was a bit of a fizzer. Maybe I should try being that other medieval legend – Robin Hood. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor would be a real winner. I could make big business, and multinationals pay their fair share of tax.
“Wow! What a brilliant idea - and I thought of it all by myself.
Move over Bob and Paul.”