A week in politics- settling for some, unsettling for others!

Yes, it’s true. Australians can start voting on Easter Tuesday. In a mere eleven days.  There was a time, not so long ago in Australia, when the separation of Church and State and a national disposition towards faith would have found such a possibility unacceptable.

That’s right in eleven days pre-poll voting starts. It is an option taken up by close to one-third of all voters.  Before then we will have crowned another champion at the Masters golf tournament which is ‘the Wimbledon’ of the four Grand Slam golf tournaments.  It is impossible to tire of looking at the incongruously named Devil’s Elbow on the Augusta golf course, with its striking springtime display of azaleas. There is still great beauty in the world.

Voting will start as Hot Cross buns and celebratory meals are still being digested. Preparations for Australia’s secular day of faith, ANZAC Day, will be underway.

It is extraordinary how the simplest matters can make us feel either wholly settled or unsettled. Is there anything as unsettling for an individual than biting into an overly tart and sour apple? On a social level the same can be said for observing the number of people with tattoos and piercings. Whoever thought that a nose ring could be considered anything other than repulsive?

Another reminder for me this week. The shoelaces on my sturdy walking shoes frayed, losing their casings. The laces could not be tied properly and constantly unravelled. A sturdier pair was acquired and suddenly everything was more settled. I regained my footing.

Unsurprisingly, millions around the world this week have felt anything but surefooted. The gyrations of stock markets mirrored the mercurial announcements of the White House on tariffs. The week has ended with Trump declaring a 90 day moratorium on the imposition of all tariffs on America’s trading partners, with the exception of China who have been burdened with punitive tariffs.

Once again, people are left to wonder about President Trump’s modus operandi. How many times has Trump announced an extreme and confronting policy only to strategically retreat, but still achieve his principal aims? Is there method in his madness, or pure mania and megalomania?

In Australia, the election campaign continues with the repercussions of Trump’s tariff tirades the omnipresent backdrop. As predicted the Prime Minister has embraced the “need for national certainty” rhetoric as he remembers that politicians should never waste a crisis. His senior Ministers continue to escalate barbs about Opposition Leader Peter Dutton being a “Trump in waiting.”

It certainly has not been a week when Mr. Dutton has been surefooted. He was forced to recant on his party’s plans to slash public service jobs and enforce stricter Work from Home guidelines.  These concessions confirmed the image of an Opposition struggling to present a compelling policy narrative. Add to that Mr. Dutton’s father had a heart attack the day of the first Leaders’ Debate on Tuesday. Yesterday it was confirmed that Mr. Dutton was the intended target of a foiled terrorist attack concocted by a 16 year old schoolboy.

When Leaders’ Debates became permanent fixtures of Australian election campaigns, they were prominent campaign events. They were broadcast on free to air television. Now, they are an event on Sky pay television.  Most Australians would have assessed the debate through the media’s post-debate analysis. The television audience was 410,000 from a voting electorate of just under 18,100,000. Last year the AFL Grand Final was viewed by 3.39 million. Go figure. Literally.

The consensus of most commentators was that the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader were surefooted enough to avoid damaging gaffes or errors. It seems Mr. Dutton needs a ‘breakthrough’ moment; however, the electoral currents are not serving him well. Despite what Harold Wilson said, there do not seem to be enough weeks left to turn Opposition’s fortunes around.

This election greatly reminds me of the 2001 poll held on 10th November. Three years earlier, John Howard had sacrificed a large majority to secure a mandate for a Goods and Services Tax. The Coalition was returned to office in 1998, despite obtaining a lower percentage of the two-party preferred vote than the then Opposition Labor Party. If the 2025 campaign is overshadowed by events in Washington, so too it was in 2001. The 9/11 attacks reinforced John Howard’s emphasis on national security. Incumbency = an electoral advantage.

The 9/11 attacks reinforced the political decision of the government to refuse to allow the MV Tampa, a Norwegian freighter, that had rescued over 400 asylum seekers to enter Australian waters in late August. The Tampa incident led to the introduction of Australia’s ‘Pacific Solution’, which saw all asylum seekers sent to Pacific locales where their claims would be processed.  

The result of the 2001 election was a mirror image of the 1998 poll. Of the 150 House of Representative seats contested, only four changed hands. In 1998 the Coalition, in a 148 seat contest, won 80 seats to Labor’s 67. In 2001, the Coalition won 82 and Labor 65. 

In 2025, the joker in the pack is the low primary support of both parties. As they have lost support, voters have turned to minor parties and Independents. It would still be astonishing if the Labor Party did not have the first opportunity to form a minority government. Many within the government have a growing confidence that it will be returned with a workable majority.

Speaking of jokers in the pack, Novak Djokovic must be wondering what he has to conjure to win his 100th title and join Jimmy Connors and Roger Federer as the only men to accomplish this feat. Yesterday, Novak crashed out of the Monte Carlo Masters in the first round. The surefooted champion is having trouble avoiding feet of clay. That's another link between tennis and politics. Supremacy and permanency are inherently fleeting. Like life itself.