It's an awful way to go. Eighteen months ago John Howard could have handed over to Peter Costello as a winner. Today he's a loser. Inevitably, losing this election will influence the way we think about the former prime minister in the years to come.
But what occurred on one Saturday in November 2007 should not provide the entire yardstick with which to measure 11 and a half years.
Economic management will be Howard's main claim to fame. The prosperity the country is experiencing is taken for granted by voters -- and that is one of the reasons the Government lost.
There's a feeling that low inflation and high growth were just luck. We are now going to find out whether it was all luck, as Labor will have its chance to prove that anyone can run the economy. Our low unemployment is the result of WorkChoices. If Labor repeals it, it and the union movement will quickly find out what the consequences will be.
Other than the economy, there are three areas of Howard's legacy that stand out. And they are notable not only because they are positive contributions, but also because they are the areas in which Howard's enemies thought he would fail.
IMMIGRATION
In the 1980s, Howard's views on Asian immigration were among the factors that cost him the Liberal leadership. No one would have predicted that 20 years later he would have presided over the largest immigration program in Australia's history. It is undeniable that in Australia there is less public argument than in any comparable country.
This is not to say that there are no aspects of the program that are controversial. But we are not as xenophobic as the Europeans, for example. For this, John Howard can take much of the credit.
History has vindicated the way John Howard treated Pauline Hanson. It would have been easy for him to have condemned Hanson, everyone who voted for One Nation, and everyone who had the slightest sympathy for anything she said. When Howard did not follow this path it allowed all his enemies to claim that he refused.
To repudiate Hanson because he secretly agreed with her. His reputation suffered, and he will probably always be tarnished by the One Nation episode.
What Howard understood, in a way that his critics did not, was that people's support for One Nation was not a product of their racism but an outcome of their perceived powerlessness in the face of massive economic and social change.
Had Howard done what the media and what many in his own party urged, which was to launch an all-out attack on Hanson and her followers -- he would have stoked even more anger and resentment.
Howard's strategy eliminated One Nation as a political force, and Hanson was reduced to Dancing with the Stars. The long-term outcome helped enshrine acceptance for Australia's large and nondiscriminatory immigration policy.
ASIA
Before Howard was elected in 1996, Labor claimed that no one in Asia would take him seriously. Paul Keating boasted that only he could maintain Australia's special relationship with Indonesia, and only he understood China and Japan.
The past 11 years have seen that theory turned on its head. Our relations with the region are close and strong. The secret of Howard's success is that he has never been hung up about whether Australia is an "Asian" country, or a country "in Asia". We don't have to choose to be one or the other, and it's not an issue that should worry us or our neighbours.
Howard's practical approach is appreciated and understood. He used his practical political skills to manage our relations with Indonesia while we pushed for independence for East Timor.
Few Australians understand how bad the Asian financial crisis of the 1990s was, and how much Australia is respected for its role in assisting the economic recovery of the region. Our $1 billion aid to Indonesia after the tsunami won widespread recognition for its generosity and for the speed with which it was given.
RECONCILIATION
John Howard's refusal to say sorry for the stolen generation has bedeviled his handling of indigenous affairs policy for a decade. His emphasis on "practical reconciliation" was unpopular, but it changed the terms of the debate. Health, education and employment are now at the centre of the discussion. Because of Howard the public argument shifted away from just being about whether to say sorry to the question of how to improve the living standards of our fellow citizens.
Even those who disagree with the policy cannot retreat from the point that the Government's Northern Territory intervention has put the issue of indigenous disadvantage on the front page of the newspapers.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment