Hawke's legacy: why australia's 'gold standard' era still matters
Forty years on, the Hawke government’s achievements remain a benchmark for progressive reform in Australia. Former Attorney-General Gareth Evans argues that the period from 1983 to 1991, followed by the Keating years, represents a uniquely successful stretch of governance, one that continues to shape the nation's economic and social landscape. Forget the nostalgia; Evans delivers a detailed autopsy of what worked – and why it might be nearly impossible to replicate today.
The unlikely coalition: hawke, keating, and a shared vision
It’s a bold claim, particularly when stacked against the longevity of the Howard era. But Evans, a key player in the Hawke administration, insists the 'gold standard' label is justified. The secret wasn't a lack of internal friction – the usual power struggles and ego clashes were ever-present. Instead, it was the manner in which those tensions were managed, fueled by mutual respect and a commitment to a shared goal. Think of it as a controlled burn, clearing out the undergrowth to allow for sustained growth.
Hawke, a former union leader with an unexpected aptitude for institutional discipline, possessed a rare combination of skills: crafting compelling narratives, connecting with ordinary Australians, and navigating complex negotiations. His ability to sell often-unpalatable economic reforms – wage restraint, deregulation – was underpinned by the 'social wage' – investments in education, health, and superannuation. This wasn't just about austerity; it was about ensuring Australians felt protected during a period of significant change.
And then there was Keating. Evans doesn't shy away from describing him as a “larger-than-life” figure, a potent blend of statesman, aesthete, showman, and streetfighter. Keating’s strategic vision and unparalleled communication skills were arguably even more impactful. His wit was legendary, capable of disarming opponents with a carefully crafted barb – remember his description of Malcolm Fraser as an “Easter Island statue with an arse full of razor blades”? It was brutal, but undeniably effective.
Beyond policy: the process that mattered
But the success wasn't solely about individual brilliance. Evans highlights six key factors. Firstly, the quality of leadership. Secondly, a commitment to avoiding dysfunction, rigorously adhering to cabinet processes. The Rudd government's later bypassing of these processes, particularly during the GFC, serves as a cautionary tale. Genuine collective decision-making is messy, but vital.
Thirdly, a culture of open debate, where arguments trumped authority. Hawke and Keating, despite occasionally chafing under the pressure of peer review, understood the importance of a Westminster system. Fourth, a willingness to listen to and consult with stakeholders, including the public service, which was genuinely valued for its expertise. Fifth, a relentless focus on explaining and arguing the case for every policy decision. And finally, a capacity to adapt – to understand and respond to the evolving concerns of the public.
A lost art? replicating success in a fractured age
Evans is realistic about the challenges of replicating this model in today's political climate. The 24/7 media cycle, the rise of populist sentiment, and the proliferation of crossbenchers have created a far more fragmented and volatile environment. The Albanese government, while showing signs of progress, is still grappling with finding its collective voice.
The key takeaway? It’s not enough to simply implement good policies. Governments need to master the art of persuasion, build consensus, and demonstrate a genuine commitment to leaving no one behind. The Hawke era wasn’t about avoiding conflict; it was about harnessing it, channeling it into a productive force. And that, perhaps, is the most valuable lesson for Australian Politics today.