Great Expectations: Government, Entitlement and an Angry Nation

Quarterly Essay #46

by Laura Tingle

Rather than relaxed and comfortable, Australians are disenchanted with politics and politicians. In Quarterly Essay 46 Laura Tingle shows that the answer goes to something deep in Australian culture: our great expectations of government.

Since the deregulation era of the 1980s, Tingle shows, governments can do less, but we wish they could do more. From Hawke to Gillard, each prime minister has grappled with this dilemma. Keating sought to change expectations, Howard to feed a culture of entitlement, Rudd to reconceive the federation. Through all of this, and back to our origins, runs an almost childlike sense of the government as saviour and provider that has remained constant even as the world has changed.

Now we are an angry nation, and the Age of Entitlement is coming to an end. What will a different politics look like? And, Tingle asks, even if a leader surfs the wave of anger all the way to power, what answer can be given to our great expectations?

“It is wrong to see the anger of the last few years as a ‘one-off,’ which might go away at the next election. The things we are angry about betray the changes that have been taking place over recent decades. Politicians no longer control interest rates, the exchange rate, or wages, prices or industries that were once protected or even owned by government. Voters are confused about what politicians can do for them in such a world.” Laura Tingle, Great Expectations

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Australia, Essays, History

93 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2012

About the author

Laura Tingle is chief political correspondent for ABC TV’s 7.30. She won the Paul Lyneham Award for Excellence in Press Gallery Journalism in 2004, and Walkley awards in 2005 and 2011. She is the author of Chasing the Future: Recession, Recovery and the New Politics in Australia and four acclaimed Quarterly Essays, Great Expectations, Political Amnesia, Follow the Leader and The High Road.

Reviews

[Deki Napolju · Rating 3 out of 5]

Much like Judith Brett's Quarterly of last year, Tingle's is first and foremost an historical and expositional essay rather than anything particularly prescriptive. Also like Brett's this essay is a great Australian History for Dummies - this time in the field of economics, federalism and private/public funding models, but for me the author, like Brett before her, missed the chance to propose much in the way of an future alternative to our current state.

Yet despite this Tingle's use of the Magellan simile at the end of the piece is helpful. We need an inspired and inspiring leader, a parliament less prone to inane bickering and a less individualistic and opportunistic polity. We have become selfish, dumb and conceited. Not only that, in being aware that we have developed these traits, most of us actually seem proud of them.

[Kostan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Laura Tingle writes an eloquent and unbiased essay questioning what the role of government is in Australia as of 2012. It's a concise and clear summary of Australian's expectations that I wish every Australian voter read before going to the polls. it doesn't sway readers either way politically, but it gives us a far deeper understanding of what our vote means, and what we should be expecting from our ruling party.
At the end there are a series of criticisms on "Us and Them", a book on animal rights, and a response from the author. Thought invoking comments on a subject we shy away from.

[Avril · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short survey of Australia's history, to explain why it is that Australians feel the government should provide for us, even in a changed world in which governments have much less power to do so. Tingle ends by arguing: "We will have to go back to the idea that government assistance is on a needs – not an entitlements – basis and work out which needs we are prepared to support." I'm just not sure that this can be done. As someone who supports the idea of public education, and believes that governments should not fund private education at the expense of the public system, whenever I mention this I am confronted by people who argue that they pay their taxes, and are thus entitled to governmental support of their choice to educate their children privately. There just seems to be NO way to suggest that government money should go to those most in need - the belief is that taxpayers are entitled to receive money back from the government whether they NEED it or not. Tingle doesn't suggest any way of changing entitlement culture, and I can't imagine it happening - any government that attempts it will be voted out. Reading this essay has just made me feel somewhat sad and cynical.

[Zakgirl · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first quarterly essay I have ever read. I'm so glad I stumbled across it. Laura Tingle, has written an essay that opens your eyes (or at the very least makes you question) Australian Politics and the Australian system stemming from Colonization. Written in an extremely clear and understandable manner and which seems to lack bias. It will help give any newbie to political concepts/ideology an insight. Well written and researched. Recommended for anyone trying to get a handle on Aussie Politics and Systems. It certainly makes you question our (the Australian people) role in society now and into the future. And now I'm off to read, Traitor Game, by B.R. Collins, which is nothing to do with Politics but a fantasy world created by Michael and Francis two characters in the book dealing with friendship, bullying, sexuality and peer pressure. Hmmm, will this be that different from Aussie Politics? Shall see ;)

[Matt John · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent overview of the political history of Australian politics and how deregulation meant less government control - yet the government of the day and its opposition still argue strongly about how they will make life better for Australians. Laura Tingle also argues that Australia has become a nation where many entitlements are handed out and regardless of whether they are for the greater good or not, the Australian people feel let down and angered if any of these entitlements are reduced or taken away, despite much better living standards, conditions and wages than most other countries in the world. Tingle suggests that Australians now don't really know what we want of our government or how we expect them to deliver.

[Paul · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting topic. Favourite quote: "When the Gillard government finally got legislation through parliament earlier this year that imposed a means test on the private health insurance rebate, 'the Australian' reported the reaction of a family in Adelaide which earned a combined income of more then $258 000 and, as a result, would lose the 30 per cent health insurance subsidy they were receiving from the federal government. "It's ridiculous - the better we do, the more the government takes," the woman said. "Every time we try to get ahead and don't rely on the welfare system, we get a guarantee they'll hit us again".

[Neph · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very solid summary of the changes in Australian politics and public expectations from the settlement onwards, with a particular focus on post-privatisation politics of recent memory. Second edition afterword highlights just how much bipartisanship has been forgotten for those of us who grew up under Howard. A short response by former minister Rachel Nolan is engaging [and contains one of the clearer explanations for privatisation from a Left perspective that I have seen].

[Christopher Dean · Rating 5 out of 5]

This quarterly essay is very pertinent in relation to current arguments about the merits or otherwise of middle class welfare, particularly that which is not means-tested. Most Australians appear to want more and more handouts from government but are not prepared to accept taxation increases to pay for it.

[David Blayney · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would consider Tingle's essay to be essential reading for anyone seeking to understand Australian politics and the expectations we as citizens have on our government, and how this impacts our political climate.

[Gabrielle Trenbath · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tingle raises issues that Australia needs to talk about but won’t.

Eloquently written as usual, Laura Tingle shows that she understands Australia better than the current political class

[Hannah]

While this is a little dated now it's definitely one of those essays that made me such a fan of Quarterly Essays. Very interesting look at auspol and how it's changed over the past few decades.

[Amanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

A sweeping insightful history of Australian political environment factors connecting to the contemporary minority Gillard government that unlike others draws connections of current Australian attitudes towards government and politicians right back to first contact and settlement. She appears to present the current limitations to the efficacy of government in the (excessive) deregulation in the Hawke Keating and Howard governments and the lack of coherence in a long term strategy and structures to assure government funds to the destabilisation of public institutions as the relationship and jurisdictions of federal vs state governments evolved over time. Interesting and somewhat alarming. Ends on a rather sombre note and the thesis she presents has only crystallised further into evidence as we have moved past Gillard to the present recently elected into the second term Albanese government. One could make the argument he has won the latest election in part due to his campaign that appealed to the expectations of a parental government to get things fixed and for us to be looked after

[Indy Scarletti (paperindy) · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a brief overview of the relationship of Australian identity and government through the history of colonisation through to 2012.

If you don’t find history of tax structures and superannuation schemes already compelling, I won’t recommend it, but for those interested in policy contexts it was an interesting exploration of the shifting relationship between government, entitlement, and politics.

It has certainly given me some reason to reflect on the expectations I take for granted in this country and about what the role of government could be within a functioning democracy. In a country where I struggle to feel a strong sense of identity, this essay helps to unpack some of what it might mean to belong to an Australian culture, for better or for worse.

[Benjamin Cronshaw · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great analysis of Australian politics and role of government.

[Kate [catching up] · Rating 3 out of 5]

A sweeping history of Australia’s relationship with government, which explains how we’ve come to expect more from governments just as their ability to deliver has been eroded by privatisation. Tingle’s essay is clear and concise, providing an effective overview for beginners, but doesn’t break much new ground. Like many books in its category, it stops short of offering meaningful alternatives to the current model. A solid primer, but less satisfying for those seeking something more prescriptive or forward-looking.

[John Marius · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this collection. Through her recount and analysis, Laura Tingle has untangled some key features of the Australian psyche that have thus far eluded me. Indeed, most Australians under 35 (including myself) have very little understanding of what national politics looked like before John Howard and that certainly colours our expectations and understanding of government.

Rachel Nolan's response was great, setting out a blueprint for what government should be: innovation, sustainability and social services.

It is hard to read things Tingle predicted years ago, especially the notion that an Abbott government (which would become the Turnbull govt), in absence of policy or vision, would waste the Australian publics time for a few years.

[Loki · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wanted to like this more, and it is good, but it's ultimately an essay that needs to be a book - and that book needs an editor. It's smart and insightful, but discursive and incomplete. It reads more like the draft of the essay it's supposed to be than anything else. Which is a shame, because this is a topic that is deserving of a lot more enquiry.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Government gave up the command of society but didn't give up the rhetoric. Now we don't know what we want of government or how it will deliver. About right.