Let me start my year with a confession: listening to the Australian of
the Year, Rosie Batty, arguing at length for more attention to be paid
to domestic violence, my first thought was she was laying it on a bit
thick. There are lots of problems in the world and domestic violence is
just one of them.
But then another thought occurred: this year we'll
be listening to hundreds of men banging on about problems far less
important than domestic violence. The vast majority of the problems we
hear about - and I write about - will be economic. Is the economy
speeding up or slowing down? Will the Reserve Bank cut interest rates at
its next board meeting?
Above all, they'll be worried about
preventing a slowing in the rate of improvement of our standard of
living. That is, they'll be almost wholly concerned with the material,
tangible aspect of our lives. Few will concern the more feminine, airy
fairy "social" side of our lives.
For the most part, our
politicians will leave such touchy-feely concerns to single-issue
campaigners such as Rosie Batty. They focus on the really big, important
issues, and think about the lesser, social issues only when the Rosie
Battys gain enough public support for the pollies to decide they'd
better be seen doing something.
Truth is, the political year we
face won't be any fun (except for the media). It will be another year in
the difficult education of not-so-young Tony. He's having trouble
learning what John Howard well knew: even prime ministers don't have
much power to do as they please.
You can push through a few silly
self-indulgences, such as reinstituting knighthoods, but even that will
cost you politically. And what you can't do is reshape the world in a
way that favours the rich and powerful while the rest of us nod
approvingly.
This year a lot of ugly chickens will come home to
roost. Part of the way Abbott got himself elected was to promise he'd do
nothing unpopular in his first term. All the "reforms" being urged on
him by the big end of town would be inquired into and, if it was decided
radical changes were needed, they'd be taken to the next election for
voter approval.
Abbott dragged his feet in commissioning these
inquiries, but it will be full-on this year. Ostensibly, much of the
agonising will arise from our refusal to contemplate paying higher taxes
in return for greater government services and from the Coalition's
claim to be able to achieve lower taxes.
In reality, the problem
is the government's refusal to solve its revenue problem by cracking
down on all the rorting of the tax system by business and high
income-earners. Turns out many of these people are prepared to make an
exception to their fatwa against higher taxes: surely an increase in the
goods and services tax wouldn't hurt?
We face a year of
contention as business rent-seekers seek to further advantage
themselves, all in the name of much-needed "reform" and ensuring the
continued rapid rise of our material standard of living (starting, of
course, with theirs).
But ask yourself this: can you really see
the ever-popular Tony going into next year's federal election with a
proposal to increase the GST or any planned industrial relations changes
his opponents could characterise as the restoration of Work Choices?
And, even if he did, can you see him winning?
See? We face a year
of furious economic and political debate leading to very little.
If you
haven't guessed, I'm not facing such a year with any enthusiasm. And
Rosie Batty reminds me we'll be earnestly debating over running repairs
to the capitalist system while largely ignoring the social issues that,
for far too many of us, stop our high material standard of living from
translating into a high quality of life.
Take the question of
increased longevity. Joe Hockey has signalled we'll be hearing a lot
about this after the release of another intergenerational report in a
few weeks' time.
The pollies will pay quick lip-service to the notion
that living longer may not be such as bad thing, before portraying it as
a terrible problem threatening "unsustainable" growth in government
spending on pensions, aged care and healthcare.
But I have good
news for those who obsess about the economic while ignoring the social.
There is increasing evidence that how long people live is strongly
influenced by the quality of their relationships with family and
friends, particularly their face-to-face contact.
Around the world
there is evidence of the number of people's very close relationships
declining, of more people living alone and increasing loneliness.
Australia is unlikely to be an exception.
So the solution to the
fiscal longevity problem is at hand. All we have to do is hope people's
intimate relationships continue to decline and loneliness continues to
increase. And the best news is we've already instituted the main policy
response needed: malign neglect.
Of course, it would speed things
up if we were to step up the federal and state funding cuts to community
organisations that help people in need. I'd start with Meals on Wheels.
And don't forget that ignoring the obesity epidemic will do much to
stop babies living to 150.
I reckon we should make it a national KPI to get life expectancy down to 75 by 2055.
