Neoliberalism is rarely named by conservative politicians, let alone something they bicker about in public. It is, however, the doctrine the Coalition – and the Liberal Party in particular – has long championed.
It was embraced enthusiastically under John Howard’s government from the late 1990s, through market liberalisation, industrial relations reform, privatisation of state enterprises, financial deregulation and significant reductions in corporate taxation.
Neoliberalism is also the word traditionally used by the Left to criticise this policy agenda, particularly the inequality it fuelled by shifting power, income, and security away from labour and towards capital.
On the face of it, Hastie’s language overlaps with elements of that critique, for example when he says that “a lot of Australians feel like the system is rigged against them” and that “we’re experiencing a lot of economic pain” as the global order fractures.
Padme Amidala: “For social democracy, right …?”
This is surely not going to please the liberal party’s masters / corporate donors.
Would be a quite surprised if the party did a 180 turn and started putting the majority of voters ahead of their corporate donors interests.
I can imagine the Libs messaging doing a 180 but they would never deliver what they promise if they are elected.
I wonder whether Hastie’s message is also a way of trying to attract back ex-LNP voters who went to the Teals.
The challenge for corporate Australia is no longer how to protect markets from politics, but how to act credibly in the national interest, recognising that economic power carries civic responsibility and that long‑term legitimacy depends on more than growth alone.
I’m sure that will be quite the challenge for them. :|
This article seems pretty optimistic to my cynical arse, but the author is undoubtedly more qualified than I am to make such statements. I guess we’ll see what happens.
