A decided ennui has overtaken Canberra, or at least the Press Gallery. There’s a general sense that politics at the moment is truly wretched, a Sisyphean ordeal. Just as Labor is apparently condemned to roll (or perhaps rickroll), a policy rock up a hill, only for it to roll down again, and the task commence anew, so the media must exhaustively cover, and comment upon, every nuance of the repetition, over and over.
Clash of the titans it ain’t. And pace Albert Camus, there are, alas, no absurd heroes in this building. There’s plenty of absurdity, yes, but heroes? Sorry, we’re all out of them.
So the carbon pricing package debate, over ostensibly the most important piece of legislation to be debated this term, has been reduced to scenic backdrop. Instead, Labor and the Coalition are going hammer and tongs over several thousand asylum seekers — a diversion of the national attention span so manifestly disproportionate that it would be comical if there wasn’t, in the possibility of people drowning trying to get here, a deadly serious policy issue that is being furiously ignored by everyone except those with the responsibility of actually developing and implementing policy.
Everyone else — refugee advocates, the Greens, the media, Labor backbenchers, and most of all the Opposition — can play dress-ups in the clothes of compassion while the government is stuck with the task of trying to work out how to stop people drowning themselves trying to get resettled here.
For Labor, perhaps the better mythic metaphor at the moment is that of Prometheus, eternally chained to a rock and condemned to have his liver eaten over and over again. It was an eagle that feasted on his liver in the original; a turkey would be more apt round here. That’s Labor’s lot for now and the immediate future. There’s to be no escape, no salvation, so there must simply be acceptance. Even a leadership change now would be useless.
In that regard, at least, if in few others, Julia Gillard is the ideal leader. She may not be much chop as a political tactician but her resilience is impressive. No matter what body blows strike her Prime Ministership, she dusts herself off and keeps going. Keeps going the wrong way, many critics inside and outside the party insist, but on she goes, pushing that rock up the hill, certain in the knowledge that it will roll straight back down again, if only because it has every other time she’s done it in the last twelve months.
One doubts if, like Camus’ absurd hero, Gillard has found contentment in the futility of her task. But she works away at a policy agenda anyway, and a solid one — more solid than Kevin Rudd’s, although he had the excuse that the GFC substituted keeping the economy functional for any ambitious reform program.
The government’s proposed asylum seeker policy is by no means ideal. We shouldn’t be keeping people in detention unnecessarily, we should be resettling far more people than we do, and we should be providing a lot more funding for the UNHCR. But I can’t see another policy around at the moment that better marries the twin goals of fulfilling our moral obligations to assist people fleeing persecution and discouraging them from risking their lives.
It’s not the best policy option by any stretch, but it’s the least worst one currently on offer. There’s nothing particularly heroic about prosecuting the case for such a policy, but as in a lot of other policy areas, the government’s fate is to doggedly pursue second-tier policies that only have the single redeeming feature of not being nearly as bad as what their opponents are offering.

108 thoughts on “Politics is a Sisyphean ordeal, and Gillard’s ideal for it”
Suzanne Blake
September 21, 2011 at 2:27 pm@ TheTruthHurts
OK must have misheard, it was $300 million not $800 million.
In any case its MORE LABOR WASTE.
“Labor should have put a clause in the agreement that if there were legal problems with the plan going ahead the contract would be null and void”
Yes thats 101 type stuff. Solicitor General should be FIRED for gross incompetence.
SBH
September 21, 2011 at 2:29 pmdo you mean ‘than’ you? If so, she may well be but that’s not evidence.
Here’s a small selection of your views about pollies and the Greens.
Wait to you see the damage the extreme Greens make,(1 July 2011 at 2:30 pm )
Yes Politicians do lie (7 July 2011 at 2:50 pm)
The good news is that voters will see how extreme the Greens are and maybe in 2013 we will see them loose their control (1 July 2011 at 2:27 pm)
A single member of parliament making a statement ‘in passing’ is not evidence.
You don’t have evidence. you just make sh*t up and lie through your teeth.
Jimmy
September 21, 2011 at 2:29 pmTTH – SO “1. We do the processing
2. We provide shelter, food, health and education to Australian standards
3. We provide protection by Australian staff to Australian standards” and it costs more than processing on the mainland and all the people processed ended up in Australia last imte so what is the advantage?
Plus Nauru currently isn’t a signatiory, it has agreed to start the process towards it but being a signatory is only the first hurdle.
This legislation will put both Malaysia and Nauru beyond a legal challenge so why would he oppose it, he seures his policy as much as it does the ALP’s, And if you and your alter ego Suzanne are worried about $300m or $800m being wasted your mate Tony could solve that problem by voting for the legislation.
SBH
September 21, 2011 at 2:33 pmOh, well what’s $500 million between friends, eh? you Hansonesque m*ron
And it hasn’t been paid ‘already’.
Why don’t you observe your basic obligation as a citizen and get informed before shooting off your big mouth?
Jimmy
September 21, 2011 at 2:33 pmAlso Papua New Guniea aren’t signatories either s Manus Island would be out which is another pillar of Abbotts policy.
Knack
September 21, 2011 at 3:18 pmJimmy;
Actually, PNG are, an have been for quite some time, theres a UNHCR regional office here.
Jimmy
September 21, 2011 at 3:23 pmKnack – Then why is it that it ahs been widely reported that Nauru may (stress may) be able to get through but PNG definitely wouldn’t after the High Court Ruling?
Knack
September 21, 2011 at 3:23 pmSB;
‘MORE LABOR WASTE’ so, was Liberal Pork Barrelling waste?
I asked your alternative login if they could explain exactly what you and he mean when you reefer to the ‘Pink Batts’ and ‘BER’, why do you claim they were failures? Again, im honestly asking, as im quite happy with my insulation, as are my mates who are qualified installers were happy with the extra work, and extra scrutiny on the industry. As to the ‘BER’, there seems to be, on the whole, more people happy with the improvements to their schools than not, but happy to be informed otherwise.
Knack
September 21, 2011 at 3:27 pmJimmy;
thats a question that i have been asking, i think it has more to do with the fact that the gov of Nauru will do anything, and i mean anything to get that injection of capital back.
Heres the link for the UNHCR that shows the regional map.
http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/page?page=49e488e26&submit=GO
Also, i think it just makes good copy for the Allan Jones types to say that Nauru would work, seemingly just on the basis that Abbott says it will, but is yet to provide the legal advice to that affect, and theres no logical reason why he wouldn’t, if it existed.
Knack
September 21, 2011 at 3:28 pmJimmy;
thats a question that i have been asking, i think it has more to do with the fact that the gov of Nauru will do anything, and i mean anything to get that injection of capital back.
Also, i think it just makes good copy for the Allan Jones types to say that Nauru would work, seemingly just on the basis that Abbott says it will, but is yet to provide the legal advice to that affect, and theres no logical reason why he wouldn’t, if it existed.
I pasted a link to the UNCHR but its in moderation