Election watch

Issue 

Election watch

How the ruling class rules

At first glance, it seemed almost a tautology. "Hypocrisy on waterfront" was the title on the Sydney Morning Herald's April 10 editorial. But really, "hypocrisy" and "Sydney Morning Herald editorial" are usually equivalent terms.

It was only when readers got into the body of the editorial that they discovered that the title was intended to refer to someone else's hypocrisy.

That someone else, of course, was the Labor Party and the ACTU: while now they are defending the MUA, in 1989-90 they collaborated to destroy another union, the Australian Federation of Air Pilots.

Certainly, no-one could accuse the SMH of that sort of hypocrisy. The paper is completely consistent: it is in favour of smashing unions whenever and wherever the opportunity presents itself. It cheered the pilots' union's destruction at the time, just as it now revels in the government's plan to deal similarly with the "waste, greed and inefficiency" of the MUA.

The point of recalling history — not usually the Herald's strong suit — was unmistakable. The editorial was intended as a warning to the ALP leaders of the treatment they can expect in the coming federal election campaign if they go beyond token support for the MUA.

If Labor leaders smash unions, they're "responsible". If they criticise union-smashing, however mildly, they're "hypocrites". It's one of the ways that elections are used to ensure that nothing changes.

Closet campaigning

The Sydney Morning Herald reported on April 15 that PM John Howard's office was "discouraging Canberra-based journalists" from joining his three-day campaign trip to north Queensland. Only a pool television crew covered the trip.

Why would anyone want to campaign on the quiet, actively discouraging media coverage? Could it be that Howard wanted to say something to (white) north Queenslanders that he didn't want widely publicised elsewhere?

If so, could words in that category include his praise for National Party federal MP Paul Marek as "classy" and "terrific"? Marek is notorious for his remark that Aboriginal land rights should have been eliminated for "$20 and a box of Jatz".

By Allen Myers

If you like our work, become a supporter

Green Left is a vital social-change project and aims to make all content available online, without paywalls. With no corporate sponsors or advertising, we rely on support and donations from readers like you.

For just $5 per month get the Green Left digital edition in your inbox each week. For $10 per month get the above and the print edition delivered to your door. You can also add a donation to your support by choosing the solidarity option of $20 per month.

Freecall now on 1800 634 206 or follow the support link below to make a secure supporter payment or donation online.