Federal Member of Parliament Bob 'The Mad' Katter is someone who knows a bit about cyclones.
I mean, he's survived at least 30 of them by now, and maybe more than that. He's pretty much lost count, since they used to whistle through his part of far north Queensland every five minutes back in the seventies. And he was nearly killed by one when he was six, when 'Cyclone No Name' swept through Townsville - or somewhere - and upset the ferry he was riding back from Magnetic Island on. Not that this bothered Bob much. By age six he'd already survived 14 cyclones, 10 hurricanes, 87 flash floods and the election of the Bjelke-Peterson government, so nothing much phased him:
'I thought it was fun, but my mother was certain we were going to drown.'
So this is clearly a man we can rely on to give us some insight into the Level 5 Cyclone, Cylone 'Yasi,' that crossed Queensland's coast last night.
And Bob was happy to oblige, taking to ABC24 last night to provide some insights.
It was clear from the start that Bob was concerned. A lot of his mates, tough sort of blokes you'd imagine, were looking a bit 'glassy-eyed.' Everyone was worried, even people who had survived Cyclone Larry in 2006. Bob was worried for them too, but less concerned about himself. Having survived cyclones, hurricanes, monsoons, tornadoes, floods, fires, famine, plague, yo-yo's, low GI diets, happy pants, 'talk to the hand,' text speak and the Howard government's refusal to subsidise Queensland's sugar industry, he'd built himself a steel reinforced house and felt he could survive anything.
'We're not going anywhere,' he said.
But he was much less sanguine about what the media had been doing to his constituents. The glassy-eyed ones. Playing up to their fears. 'Terrorising' them, in his words, with this constant talk of a large storm bearing down on Queensland. He seemed to feel that the media were beating up the storm and the dangers it posed, to whip everyone into some kind of storm frenzy and so help their ratings (or something).
'The message that has gone through to people has been one of terror.'
Hmmm, looks pretty terrifying to me.
But Bob would have none of it. Didn't the people in the media understand that in Queensland people were built tough, and that they, and he, had survived earthquakes, tsunamis, the fall of the heavens, the explosion of the sun, the end of the... well, you get the idea. The earnest interviewer on ABC24 seemed puzzled by this argument. Did the member for Kennedy not want the media to highlight the plight of his constituents? And what about the people who had stayed in those areas and who might be relying on organisations like the ABC to keep them up to date with what was happening?
'You're missing my point,' said Katter, who then proceeded to pretty much go, 'Terrorise, terrorise, terrorise, terrorise, terrorise, terrorise, terrorise.'
Clearly he felt pretty strongly about it, whatever it was he was talking about.
A quick word association game in relation to the flood disaster that has hit Queensland and Victoria. I say the words 'Flood disaster' and you say the first thing that pops into your head. Ready?
Flood disaster.
(Pause)
Ok, let's try that again.
Flood disaster.
Oh wait, that's right, I'm sitting here by myself. Ok! Well then let's have a 'Google' search fill in for the other person. Type 'Flood disaster' into Google and you'll get the following list of words (a brief selection from many):
Which probably sums up the situation pretty nicely, without any turgid linking material from me. I mean, it all sounds very serious, horrific and heartbreaking. A bad thing, in other words, without any obvious upside.
So is it cheeky to propose that some of the nations political leadership are slowly, carefully and very privately starting to think about the advantages of the crisis? And, more specifically, how they will benefit from those advantages? Well, perhaps it would be, if this wasn't exactly what has started to take place.
This is not to suggest that the political leaders in question don't take it all very seriously. I mean, some of their best friends are flood victims. And they're obviously emotionally effected by what's happened, just as the public at large has been. To varying degrees, they have committed themselves personally to trying to help the people in those regions.
But what I am suggesting is that politics is politics and is applicable in every situation, short of apocalyptic nuclear war. And even then, if more than one person survived the mushroom clouds and the fallout, you can bet that the next day the survivors would have formed into rival groups and would be arguing about how to distribute the one remaining crate of baked beans. And just like every situation where politics is a factor, there are bound to be angles to be worked, opportunities to be taken and enemies to be vanquished.
A brief look then, at some of the major political players and how they are trying to subtly, craftily and oh so gently turn the flood crisis to their advantage.
QUEENSLAND PREMIER ANNA BLIGH (Labor)
The obvious political beneficiary of the flood crisis, Bligh has been turned from someone about as popular as her namesake, the one who captained the HMAS Bounty, to someone regularly referred to as a 'hero.' She has done this through hard work, dedication, a few tears and relentless use of the phrase 'Queenslander.' As in 'We're all Queenslanders, you and I, and we're built tough up here.' Bligh has been too busy to really reap the benefits of what has happened yet, but she can expect to be significantly boosted in the polls when it's all over. Expect her to take her chance to properly revitalise her political fortunes and sweep away some of her dud ministers, replacing them with people much like herself, preferably one's in gumboots and muddy shirts who lost their house (or, at least the family Subaru).
PRIME MINISTER JULIA GILLARD (Labor)
That's right, that's her in the back. Anyways, the Prime Minister has not been enjoying the best of runs from the press during the flood crisis, least of all when she's standing beside the anointed hero noted above, but in her diligent, plodding way is doing her best to cash in on the situation regardless. Her prime mechanism for this is a reordering of Government budgetary priorities, AKA 'Tax and Don't Spend.' The Federal Government is committed to paying for 75% of the reconstruction bill after the waters subside and the PM has decided to pay for this in two ways. Firstly, by cutting back in Government spending in some areas , AKA cutting unpopular, poorly conceived and just plain barmy policies like her loopy 'Cash for clunkers' scheme. This allows her to get rid of policies she wanted to ditch anyway, without appearing to break her election promises. Secondly, Labor plans to raise money by introducing a short term levy on most everyone not living in a flooded area; AKA a brand new tax on workers earning more than $50 000 per annum to be maintained, essentially, at the PM's whim. This allows Labor to cover up some of the shortfall in their finances they created when they cut their mining tax back while not cancelling any of the unpopular, loopy and just plain barmy policies that they're really attached to. And it gives them some remote, unlikely hope of still getting the budget back to surplus by 2050 (or whenever it is they're proposing to do it by).
FEDERAL OPPOSITION LEADER TONY ABBOTT (Liberal)
In times of crisis, Opposition Leaders often find themselves somewhat marginalised, and Tony 'Stop the Boats' Abbott is no exception. After all, Opposition leaders can't allocate funds or call out the troops or really do anything except talk... and initially no one wanted to hear anyone speaking except Anna Bligh. But 'Stop the Boats' has his chance now that the aforementioned new levy/tax is on the table, as it gives him a fine opportunity to do what he does best; rush around the country with his shirt sleeves rolled up, yelling non stop about how he's fundamentally opposed to blah-blah-blah until his brain nearly dies from oxygen deprivation. You can almost hear his advisors grinning to each other as Abbott takes a deep breath and prepares to start his angry man routine: 'He's back!'
VICTORIAN PREMIER TED BAILLIEU
'Big Ted' Baillieu has been a little love starved as well, what with Victoria not getting quite as much rain or as badly damaged as Queensland, so consequently his political opportunities have been fewer. Nevertheless, 'Big Ted' hit the media yesterday to stake out his political territory, which you could basically think of as 'Don't Do It And Do It Faster.' Essentially, he said words to the effect that he also opposed Federal Labor's new levy/tax, that he thought it was immoral and wrong and would hurt working families in Victoria... and that Federal Labor were wholly responsible for fixing Victoria up and if they didn't give him a chunk of cash the size of the Opera House straight away then he'd have to start stalking the PM wearing nothing but a pair of Speedos. Which puts him in an almost impregnable position, politically; if Labor raise the cash and give it to him they've hurt Victorian families and if they don't they've neglected flood victims. So yes, he's done a fine job with the political maneuvering... And a less fine job in terms of what he's done, tangibly, constructively, in reality, to actually help any of his constituents. At this point it's obvious where his priorities lie.
And these are only the more obvious examples of the political benefits that are flowing from the floods. More can be expected to be heard from the players noted above, as well as from any half well known elected official that can get themselves in front of a microphone and try and work the situation to their advantage.
If you were to make comparisons, a natural disaster most closely resembles a war in it's political impact, in that it mesmerises the population, provides ample opportunity for political advancement, costs and generates staggering amounts of revenue and can prove fatal to any politician who does not handle it deftly. And while you consider this and all the political activity that will buzz around the floods in the coming weeks, it is perhaps worth considering the other trait that natural disaster share with wars: They both often have truth as a first casualty.
During last years Federal Election campaign, there was a lot of pundit speak about how the struggling Labor Governments in New South Wales and Queensland may hamper Federal Labor's chances in those states. And by struggling, we mean 'thoroughly despised.' So badly were both of those Governments travelling, and so entrenched had voter dislike of them become, it was considered a rock solid, lay down, close the betting markets certainty that both would drag Federal Labor's vote down and both would be turfed out at the first available opportunity.
This is now true only in New South Wales.
Last November, Queensland Premier Anna Bligh faced polls that showed her Government's primary vote on 28% and her own approval rating at 25% (with 70% disapproving), figures that indicate electoral oblivion. This week, as raging flood waters swept through her state and Mrs Bligh worked tirelessly to try and keep spirits up and keep people informed (no mean feat, doing these simultaneously), more than one daily newspaper referred to her as a 'hero.' When things return to something resembling normal, she can expect to see her standing in the polls considerably strengthened.
Such is the dramatic nature of The Politics of Disaster.
Now this is not to suggest that Bligh has done this deliberately, or tried to milk the flood disaster for her own benefit. Far from it. Throughout, she has been hard working, diligent, compassionate and is obviously trying her best to try and manage the still developing crisis as well as it can be managed.
The point is, Anna Bligh has always been hard working, diligent and compassionate - she's a very down to earth, no frills sort of person - and these character traits had lead her to a point where, before the flood crisis, people spat on the ground whenever they mentioned her name. She is the same, the extraordinary circumstances that she and her state find themselves in are what is different.
Nevertheless, she is going to reap a benefit in both plaudits and polls, due to her conduct so far.
But The Politics of Disaster is a fickle thing. For evidence of this, and the flipside of Bligh's experience, we need look no further than the other woman involved in the disaster this week. And by this we mean none other than Julia Gillard. C'mon, you remember her... You know, the Prime Minister!
In any case, Gillard's efforts during the flood crisis were much the same as Bligh's; she toured affected regions, repeatedly briefed the media and freed up as much emergency cash as the Government could spare. She even stood behind the Queensland Premier while she gave one of her tear streaked, highly emotional and highly popular press conferences:
And her reward for these efforts? A mild to severe case of loathing and revulsion. Gillard was described, at various times this week, as 'cold,' 'aloof,' 'disengaged' and that she 'doesn't appear to care.'
As noted, the difference between Gillard's and Bligh's performances over the past week or so is only minimal. But the perception of the differences in their performance is stark; hero on one side, cold hearted bitch on the other. What we can take from this is that The Politics of Disaster is a complex and unpredictable thing. People are highly emotional in times of crisis and their judgments not always rational. Political leaders can even experience the whole spectrum of emotions going from hero to bitch/villain in the space of just a few days or weeks.
Some more examples from recent political history further illustrates the point:
Example 1: John Brumby versus The Victorian Bushfires The then Labor Premier started out pretty well in the crisis management stakes. Similar to Bligh, Brumby was a dour, reserved sort of guy and his grave, solid demeanour was what the public wanted to see as large parts of Victoria burned up. But Brumby proved less adept at managing the recovery, as reconstruction moved slowly and the Royal Commission he instigated produced a series of recommendations that he didn't want to implement (compulsory buybacks of property among other things). His standing was subsequently damaged, although he probably managed to break even overall.
Example 2: George W. Bush versus Al Qaida and Hurricane Katrina The drawling, cowboy inflected, wannabe macho Texan saw both sides of The Politics of Diaster, although with each separated by several years. The 9/11 terrorist bombings probably saved his presidency, after he had made a mediocre start in the wake of the 2000 election controversy. A drawling, macho, cowboy was exactly what America wanted after the terrorist attack had shaken them and, since, no real ones were available, Bush made an acceptable substitute. His approval ratings soared above 90% as a result. But flash forward to 2005 and this schtick was completely wrong for the Hurricane Katrina disaster (which called more for a diligent, Bligh style approach). It appeared for a time that Bush either didn't know where New Orleans was, or didn't care that most of the poor people living there had drowned. Sending Dick Cheney in to tour the aftermath probably wasn't a great idea either:
Bush's long slide in the opinion polls started shortly after.
Example 3: Barack versus the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill The boy wonder President was determined not to repeat Bush's mistakes, when a giant oil spill threatened the same part of the country as Katrina. He got his hands dirty as soon as he could; touring the area repeatedly, addressing the nation in prime time, massaging cash assistance through Congress, even taking his holiday there to try and help the tourist industry. He reaped some initial rewards for his efforts but, as the weeks and then months dragged on and oil continued to flow, support for his efforts began to collapse. It seemed almost as if, by working so hard to try and solve the problem and being so omni-present around it, Barack had himself become associated with the leak... and then blamed for it. Damage was undoubtedly done to his standing as a result of this, although how much remains to be seen.
And this is the problem that may lie in the future for the Queensland Premier. While her constituents are united behind her at the moment, the flood crisis has a long way to run. And once the waters start to subside, a massive reconstruction effort will need to be overseen by a Government who's poor record in competent service delivery had lead to their hopeless position in the polls last year. And people living in temporary shelters while they wait for the Government to declare their houses safe to return to are understandably impatient.
The Politics of Disaster will also demand that the Queensland Opposition, after a brief period of bipartisanship, will almost immediately begin to criticise all of the Government's reconstruction efforts as slow, inefficient, cheapskate and completely bloody useless. In this scenario, Bligh's diligent, hard working public demeanour, which is serving her so well at the moment, may become a liability again, as she may not seem to be energetic or vigorous as she should be. She's a plodder, is Bligh, not a racehorse and people without electricity or with a front yard full of dead fish and garbage,
often want a racehorse.
The Queensland Premier, like the population of her state, has a large and difficult time ahead of her. We wish her well.
