Laura Tingle, in her insightful essay in the current issue of Quarterly Essay evaluates the notion that voters in Australia are unhappy with our leaders as they expect them to do more, when all the reforms & deregulation of the last 30 years or so mean Governments can actually have less influence in many cases & therefore can do less in many instances.
In this context, voters are generally dissatisfied with both our leaders, Gillard & Abbott. Whilst Abbott as the opposition leader with a seemingly smooth road ahead to the lodge can still look forward to shaping his public persona as a leader, it is simply too late for Julia Gillard to redefine herself, as has been attempted by her advisers in several occasions since the infamous "Real Julia" campaign mid way through the last election.The latest campaign since late 2011 has been to redefine Gillard's public image as a politician with a strong political conviction!
Bob Hawke was generally liked & admired, whilst John Howard was generally disliked but admired for his political conviction & leadership. Both rallied voters behind them.
Winning votes through "politics of conviction" is the best way politicians who are not generally liked by voters can succeed as leaders! But in case of Gillard, it's too late to attempt this strategy.
Why is it that the manner with which she overthrew Kevin Rudd & her broken "No Carbon Tax" promise seem to totally undo all her hard work, personal charm & in many instances good policy initiatives (eg the National Disability Insurance Scheme) rendering them all ineffective in winning back the voters' trust?
The reasons for this intense apathy towards her do not entirely have to do with her broken promises. After all name one political leader who at some stage has not done exactly that!
The answer lies in this: Voters in Australia do not necessarily feel they need to LIKE their leaders in order to vote for them. But it is imperative that we admire our leaders for their political conviction in order to trust them with our vote.
Voters liked Bob Hawke, and trusted him as "one of them". Hence they stuck by him & his team as he introduced major reform across the board.
Voters, on the other hand did not like either Paul Keating or John Howard. But we admired both men for their leadership & political conviction. As a result they succeeded in carrying the voters with them despite their general lack of popularity in the polls.
However, the mantle of "Political Conviction" can not be contrived & constructed once you are the PM! It requires years of proven track record in public life for its foundations to be sown & and at times carefully adjusted & corrected.
The reverse process, ie attempting to create a perception of a leader with a strong political conviction once in office, especially when a politician has already broken the voters' trust (ie Rudd & carbon tax issues), is almost impossible. Hence why no matter what Gillard does, the polls continue to indicate intense public dislike for her.
In other words, "political Conviction" is not a tag that can be simply stuck on a politicians forehead simply because it will not stick overnight!
But Gillard & her seemingly out of idea advisers continue to hurriedly & desperately to (once again) redefine her public persona as a politician with strong "political conviction"!
It is simply:
a) too late in her political career for Gillard's public persona to be redefined & public perception of her to be altered in a positive way.
b) an even more impossible task to rebrand a politician with a "Political conviction" tag in such a short space of time ie 2012 to the elections in 2013
The voters have decided that not only they don't like or trust Gillard, but also more crucially they do not admire her as a politician with a strong "political Conviction"
As a result, Gillard's leadership is in mortal trouble.
