Surprisingly, our governments don’t seem to learn from experiences such as the pandemic and natural disasters.
What should be an opportunity for mature debate and to start to create that future gets so easily lost in what has become a very tribal, adversarial, slugging and slanging match, called “the campaign”.
The latest and overused terms – “gaslighting” and “virtue signalling” – have become a mechanism for knocking out serious debate.
Some sections of the media seem to have already joined a side and are running comprehensive campaigns and agendas that include failing to report on certain people and stories that don’t fit those agendas.
Prime minister and opposition leader should be referred to as such, respectfully, and not tagged with sleazy monikers that the presenters hope will define them in the public consciousness.
What we need is something like a “Speaker” to monitor the behaviour of media commentators who thrive on sustaining this disrespect, under the guise of truth-telling and objective commentary.
As a consequence, the big issues and challenges are ignored and left to drift for so long that they become too big for our politicians to admit to or to accept responsibility for.
None of the key politicians want to honestly state where we sit as a nation or to admit what the national priorities should be, preferring to be “small targets” in the slugging match.
And it is not even about winning to lead, it is about getting the position and power but with little or no commitment to creating a meaningful future for our nation and its people.
With such an alarming number of people living below the poverty line, and most struggling with the costs of living in such a wealthy economy, there is little to celebrate.
It has been absent in preparing for and responding effectively to the pandemic, to a series of natural disasters, fires and floods, and on other big issues such as recognition of First Australians, climate change, aged care and cost of living – always with an edge to perceived political advantage.
A most telling comparison of leadership has been to watch some of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s speeches that he has made recently to various parliaments around the world as his country faces the crisis of war.
Many have hoped that with several senior ministers claiming to be “Christians”, the government might be able to draw on faith for basic moral values.
The Morrison government doesn’t want to recognise that it is possible to define an effective future, and pathways to it, by responding expeditiously to the climate challenge to create a low carbon, clean Australia over the next several decades, planning deliverable transition strategies for each of the key sectors.
In agriculture, the challenge is to foster regenerative agriculture to dramatically improve the carbon content of our soils.
It is important to recognise that agriculture as a sector can be negative in net emissions, thereby contributing very significantly to the overall objective of net zero emissions by 2050, offsetting emissions from other sectors.
We have the technologies, with scope for considerable improvement in some, for example measuring soil carbon and storage.
Importantly, it needs to stand ready to support individuals, businesses and communities through any disruptions caused by the transitions, with support for any necessary retraining and relocation, as well as community restructuring and financial support.
Probably the most effective way to co-ordinate this strategy would be for the government to establish a transition commission staffed by professionals with a high-powered, representative board to ensure good independent governance, which should include representatives of the federal opposition to work towards a degree of bipartisanship that will be essential to an effective transition.
In the short term, the economic fallout from coronavirus has taken about a third of our revenue.