By Shane Rodgers
You would think listening to latest “debate” between the two main contenders for Premier of Queensland that there are only four issues that matter.
They are youth crime, cost of living, home ownership and the time it takes to get into hospital when you arrive in an ambulance. Abortion also seems to be an issue but, listening to the answers on the subject, it is not clear why.
At today’s debate, hosted by the Queensland Media Club, Labor Leader Steven Miles and LNP Leader David Crisafulli both stuck to the script and gave well-honed and much-repeated pronouncements and rebuttals on a well-worn rhetorical path.
It was not really a debate of winners and losers. It seemed more like “stay on safe ground, repeat the same lines, add some real names of real Queenslanders to make your point sound authentic and avoid opening any new cans of worms”.
For Mr Miles, the theme was “go with what you know” and he stands by his government’s achievements.
The repeat lines were heavily weighted to cost of living support, namely:
- 50 cent public transport fares
- More health clinics that bulk bill
- Free school lunches
- Discounts on registrations and energy rebates
For Mr David the on-repeat lines were all about:
- Fixing youth crime through tougher action and deeper rehabilitation
- Fixing home ownership by unlocking supply
- Making utilities and insurance more affordable
- Ending the state’s “heath crisis”
The biggest crowd applause came from questions loaded with suggestions that the parties stick to the facts.
In that respect the issue of abortion has clearly been one of the most frustrating for Mr Crisafulli. Billboards and social media are full of allegations that the LNP leader has a secret plan to wind back laws giving the right of choice for women.
Mr Crisafulli denied this in a variety of ways. “There will be no changes,” he said. “We are not changing that law,” he said. “That’s not part of our plan,” he said. “There won’t be any changes,” he said. “I have ruled it out,” he said.
It was hard to find the ambiguity there. But he still seems to get the question every day.
There was also a mini-stoush over the plans for pumped hydro in the state’s energy transition plan. Mr Miles was questioned about the Pioneer-Burdekin Pumped Hydro project and whether the state needed to borrow an extra $12-24 billion to fund it.
Mr Miles said it was a good investment that would give ongoing returns to the state.
Mr Crisafulli was pressured over his plans for smaller local pumped hydro as an alternative. Where will they be? What will they cost? I think the answer was effectively “watch this space”.
In a similar vein, he received the usual Opposition questions about how you can reduce taxes and debt and make new spending commitments without cutting services.
He effectively said this would be achieved through sticking to budgets and running government more efficiently. He committed to lower debt under the LNP and said he would not be borrowing for “burgers at schools” (a reference to Labor’s promise of free school lunches).
Mr Miles committed to returning the budget to surplus in 2026-27.
The debate would not be complete without a question about the Brisbane Olympic stadium. Mr Crisafulli repeated for the gazillionth time that he would review the stadium plan with the independent infrastructure authority and make some calls in his first 100 days if he wins.
But the main stadium would not be at the Queensland Sport and Athletics Centre at Nathan, as committed by Labor.
Mr Miles did not seem to defend the QSAC option. His argument was more that at least people knew his plan and it would allow money to be spent on other things.
In the end, Mr Crisafulli spoke about a “fresh start”, more women running for the LNP and a return to grass roots.
Mr Miles talked about standing on his record, known quantities and trusting Labor to take Queensland forward – “You always know where I stand and what I stand for.”
What we don’t really know from either party is what kind of state we are building for the future. How will we continue to be globally competitive, what are the implications of further waves of technology change, how we can be more attractive for investment and how we will attract the talent we need?
We don’t know how we will keep the regions strong in a world of vast and rapid changes in our major industries. We are not really clear on how we can keep a world class health system as health chews up more and more of the state budget.
It is not really certain what better transport means and how a rapidly growing state will move people between major centres as we keep growing.
Leaders seem to shy away from big plans and visions during elections now and the lines seem so set they could just as easily be delivered by ChatGPT. The term “small target” was used a lot during the debate.
After October 26, it may be hard to judge exactly what mandate we have given the winning side to implement.
Voters will be asking “Is it really a fresh start?” or “Can I really trust them to deliver”.
