Rudd's rhetorical game of Twister

Kevin Rudd has been elected on a platform of responsible change. Herein lies his essential difficulty. He must plan major transformations to policy in the areas of education, the economy, health and perhaps foremost of all, climate change, while causing the minimum level of disruption and operating in an economic and historical straitjacket. Like the wayward partner given one last chance to prove he or she can change, Rudd must be on his economic best behaviour.

Rudd is effectively left trying to hold down a series of rhetorical committments without being able to committ to the substance necessary for their immediate fruition. This pattern is most obvious in relation to the education revolution that while criticising the Howard government's woeful performance, does not provide any additional funding for universities.

It is also now playing out on the world stage with Rudd all but suggesting he was verballed by his delegation at Bali. Rudd continually emphasises the long term 60% reduction target by 2050 and refuses to be drawn on specifics until the Garnaut report is released. Determined to be a leader and a honest broker with China and the developing powerhouses, he has to sign up to big cuts but cannot actually say that until Garnaut reports. Here again he is making grand rhetorical statements while fudging on the detail until the evidence of economic responsibility is available.

The perils of retail politics - particularly in a country given five years of successive tax cuts - means that Rudd was forced to offer some tax cuts. Swan is running two messages that are true but inherently contradictory, namely that Howard was the highest taxing PM in history and that the economy is subject to inflationary pressures. He cannot very well turn around and cancel the tax cut because he would look like a hypocritical Scrooge. This puts $31 billion of extra pressure on Rudd over the budget cycle which constrains his ability to close the gap between rhetoric and real spending. On the other hand, a number of economists have commented that while Rudd gets some credit for his dramatic end to the spendathon, his record is tarnished by acquiescing on the original tax cut.

Rudd is thus left with a sackload of aspirational promises with very tight constraints for their delivery. At some point, responsibility demands that the community will be asked whether it carea more about microlevel relief or solving problems on a national or internaional scale.