PEOPLE outside New South Wales could be forgiven for finding politics in Sydney bizarre. But locals have been equally bemused by the alarming succession of resignations of state ministers triggered by impropriety, scandal and personal disappointment. The doors of Cabinet have revolved so speedily since 2007 under Premiers Iemma, Rees and Keneally that the wits have recommended Governor Marie Bashir be paid a bonus because she’s had to install so many new ministers.
Opinion polls suggest that when the government’s fixed four-year term expires in March next year voters will vent their anger against the incumbents with relish. It seems obvious that the current chaos is at least partly attributable to how the NSW Labor Party approaches power. It is also true, however, that when the Coalition was last in government, from 1988 to 1995, it too was prone to corruption and handicapped by the dubious behaviour of ministers and MPs. A police minister was accused of sexual harassment, a backbencher was charged and later imprisoned for making intimidatory telephone calls to a local councillor, assistant ministers were accused of rorting allowances and falsifying tax returns, and the premier resigned while being investigated for allegedly offering an independent MP, formerly a Liberal, an inducement to vacate his seat so that it might return to the government fold.
If the problems are not confined to Labor then there could be an alternative explanation. The recent succession of ministerial resignations has largely (though not exclusively) been a parade of men. Names such as Michael, Joe, John, David, Ian, Graham, Milton, Matthew, Paul, Phil, Morris, Nathan and Frank (now returned to the front bench) – and just one woman, Reba – make this male dominance clear. An outside observer could be forgiven for thinking that there are no female ministers in New South Wales. The truth is rather that the women – Kristina, Carmel, Linda, Verity, Virginia, Barbara and Jodi – quietly get on with their jobs. Of course, many male ministers do as well.
Not all of the ministerial resignations have been attributable to impropriety. Some ministers have lost factional support and others have walked away because they have been disappointed in trying to achieve their aims. Yet, amid the chaos, one possibility is that testosterone-driven alpha males are rampaging through the state political system, exploiting its every weak point. As Richard Wassersug, professor of anatomy and neurobiology at Dalhousie University, told Robyn Williams last month on ABC Radio National’s Science Show, young males might not be well positioned to run government affairs. His historical research and work with prostate patients have led him to the belief that “testosterone is a wonderful hormone to get people to act without thinking.” This is very handy in competitive physical sports or in wartime, but governing effectively requires other qualities, including intelligence, compassion and care. Men and ministries might not be the natural fit traditionally assumed.
Speaking on another Radio National program, The Spirit of Things, earlier this month, Donna Mulhearn revealed a good deal about the expectations of Labor Party staffers. Mulhearn had the strength of will to make herself a “human shield” during the allied bombing of Baghdad in 2003 and has written about her experiences in a book called Ordinary Courage. She says that while she was a Labor staffer she was applauded by her colleagues when she displayed aggressive behaviour and managed to score political points by winning arguments, often by demolishing opponents. While great determination was required, she observed, courage was not.
During the now long-gone Labor golden years of the first Carr government (1995–99), I interviewed three dozen MPs about their roles. One of my questions was: how many women should there be in parliament? “We’re surrounded by them here!” remarked one veteran MP. Initially this answer sounds flippant: only about 15 per cent of lower-house members at the time were female, and the upper house had about twice that proportion. But the number of women MPs had grown greatly from their almost complete absence when this veteran first entered parliament. Outside the chamber too, women dominated numerically among the support staff – researchers, secretaries, cleaners and parliamentary employees – who kept the institution functioning. The interviewee might also have been extending a compliment to his female colleagues; by working hard over long hours, they could certainly have made this chap feel “surrounded.”
A decade later, the state finally got a female premier. It’s possible that the appointment of Kristina Keneally caused something of a panic among the alpha males who had previously seen high office in New South Wales as an opportunity to take their turn at the public trough. It could well be that female ministers generally bring a commonsense attitude to their roles, are happy to take advice and to compromise, and seem less concerned with winning political points. All MPs value what they term their “psychic salary,” but it might be that while women take pride in a job well done, the men look for celebrity status and even hero worship.
Perhaps the perception that males are easily corrupted arises from differences in opportunity. You cannot abuse power unless you have it. Males have always had ministerial power and may well regard it as a matter of right. Females are relatively new to the exercise of power and may still respect both its potential for good and its inherent dangers. On 19 June, however, electors in the western suburbs seat of Penrith voted in a by-election brought on when the sitting MP, a female, admitted to rorting the parliamentary allowances scheme (a particular shame because locals report that she was an active local member). She may well have been caught out after being acculturated into a system that condoned broad interpretations of allowances and dubious ways of balancing entitlements and expenses. Whatever the cause of her fall, voters punished Labor severely, giving the Liberal candidate a swing of some 25 per cent.
Opinion polls suggest that replacing a male premier with a female one was a positive move. Had Labor learnt the obvious lesson from this, then every time it lost a male minister it would have sought a female replacement. Had it been so bold, then it is possible that the state would by now have achieved much greater stability. Labor might also now be looking at possible victory at the 2011 election, instead of facing calls for the government’s early departure.
IN THE Westminster system, members of the executive are also MPs. They must combine administrative and political activities. It is possible that achieving an appropriate balance between management and political skills brings some tensions to the surface. Queensland Labor celebrated recently because Anna Bligh became the first female premier to win an election. Labor has now had female premiers in four states and all have succeeded males in “baton changes” rather than at elections. Their accessions have usually been greeted with claims that they have been given the traditional female role of trying to clean up messes made by men, and that they have probably been handed poisoned chalices. It is true that female leaders have won from opposition to become chief ministers in the territories, but if success is defined as winning government then there has still not been a successful female state opposition leader. And while women might not be natural opposition leaders as the role has traditionally been defined, questions should also be asked about the assumed natural fit between males and government leadership.
Opposition leaders require qualities that do not always translate well into government. It is widely assumed that the opposition leader must have something of the “mongrel” in his or her make-up, and must not shy away from turning every opportunity to political advantage. Such an approach does not necessarily qualify a person for the calm, dignified management style required of the leader of a state. It may well be that observers of the politics of New South Wales have overlooked the possibility that while males make excellent opposition leaders, they might have to suppress their natural inclinations in order to be good premiers and ministers. This puts the current opposition leader, Barry O’Farrell, in a unique position. Because Labor is so unelectable, the relatively moderate O’Farrell does not need to take the initiative. He does not need to seize power because it seems certain that it will drop into his hands next March.
There is an obvious correlation between ministerial disasters and Labor, but the correlation between resignations and gender is also strong. At the 2011 election, an influx of new Liberal MPs will likely see the Coalition parties form government. For the people of New South Wales, the greatest fear is that Coalition MPs might be as poor administrators as Labor MPs have been. They certainly will be disastrous if all they do is replenish the stock of alpha males in positions of power. While voters will have the chance to express their opinions about the party allegiance of these ministers next March, the gender issue is likely to be as invisible as it has been in past elections. More is the pity. •
