EDITORIAL : THE AUSTRALIAN, AUSTRALIA

Asian political giant steps down

LEE Kuan Yew recognises the need for generational change.

EVEN at 87, Lee Kuan Yew's announcement that after half a century in government he is finally quitting Singapore's cabinet, was unexpected. Most recently he has served as Mentor Minister and the dominant force in the administration led by his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsieng Loong. A few months ago he exhorted older Singaporeans to work longer and not become a burden on the state, adding that if he were ever forced to stop work he would shrivel up.

That this political giant of our region has chosen to leave is clearly not because he particularly wants to but, rather, a consequence of last week's election result. The ruling People's Action Party, though it won in a landslide -- gaining 81 of the 87 seats, with a record six going to the left-of-centre opposition Workers' Party -- achieved its worst outcome since independence in 1965. It won 60 per cent of the popular vote, down from 67 per cent in 2006 and 75 per cent in 2001.

Mr Lee says he will remain an MP. But in announcing his departure and that of his understudy Goh Chok Tong, 69, who succeeded him as prime minister in 1990, Mr Lee wisely recognised the generational change that flows from the election. The time had come, he said, for a younger generation to carry Singapore forward in a more difficult and complex situation. Prime Minister Lee, he added, should be given a clean, fresh slate to connect to and engage with this younger generation.

Lee Kuan Yew is right. He has no shortage of critics, particularly among those who believe he was too heavy handed in regulating the lives of Singaporeans, seeking to control everything from the number of babies they had to their toilet-flushing and gum-chewing habits and what they read in their newspapers. But his is unquestionably a record of mighty achievement that leaves most countries in the region for dead. He has transformed a mosquito-ridden backwater with no resources into one of the world's wealthiest and most stable societies with a per capita income of $48,000 and growth last year of 14 per cent, imbuing Singaporeans with an enviable ethic that encourages them to work hard and eschew so-called welfarism, which he scorns. Younger Singaporeans want things done differently. The challenge will be to satisfy them without compromising the extraordinary prosperity that Mr Lee's endeavours brought. It won't be easy. 

Playing wild rivers wild card

SENATOR Fielding's backflip has angered indigenous leaders.

FAMILY First leader Steve Fielding will leave an unfortunate legacy when his Senate term expires next month. His eleventh-hour change of heart over Tony Abbott's bill to wind back Queensland's controversial Wild Rivers laws will almost certainly see the Opposition Leader's legislation defeated, along with the aspirations of Cape York traditional owners who want real employment opportunities to break the cycle of welfare dependency.

Nobody denies the importance of pristine Cape York rivers and their surrounds, which traditional owners were looking after long before white settlement. But they do not need heavy-handed legislation imposing severe restrictions on any development near the rivers or catchment areas to ensure their environment remains healthy. They desperately need the chance to achieve self-sufficiency.

At stake are important projects such as the cultivation of native pongamia trees near the Lockhart River to provide diesel biofuel, an ideal niche industry for the area. A bauxite mine that would have provided more than 1300 jobs for unemployed indigenous people at Pisolite Hills near Weipa on the western Cape has already been scuttled by the Queensland legislation, which was imposed by the Bligh government to appease urban green groups such as the Wilderness Society.

As Cape York Institute director Noel Pearson wrote on Saturday, Senator Fielding travelled to Cape York with Labor senator Mark Furner but did not visit the people most affected by the laws, who live near the Lockhart, Stewart and Archer rivers. The senator rejected an approach to meet representatives of the local communities.

On its website, Family First claims to understand "that most of us have simple yet important aspirations. We want to earn a living doing work we like so we can provide for our families and someday own a home." In siding with urban, anti-development environmentalists to sink Mr Abbott's bill, Senator Fielding will ensure that Cape York remains locked up from productive enterprises that would give local people the chance to aspire to the very values Family First purports to uphold.

There is, however, one crumb of comfort from Senator Fielding's late discovery of the wilderness. It is there that his political career is heading. 

Times like these require the spirit of Bill Hayden

Labor's road back towards the politics of reform

AN unenthusiastic reaction to last week's budget has added to the gathering mood of pessimism enveloping the Gillard government. The Prime Minister has faced unrelenting pressure for the first 19 weeks of 2011, a year she pledged would be the year of delivery, tempting some commentators to discount her chances of survival. We note, however, that barely a year ago the consensus among the commentariat was that Tony Abbott was unelectable. Julia Gillard should take the insider chatter with a pinch of salt and get on with the business of governing.

Her first task is to rise above the fatalism that has settled on Canberra and remember that good governments set agendas rather than allow events to dictate terms. Ms Gillard must make long-term decisions that would make Labor once again the party of reform. Labor should learn from the example of Bill Hayden, who restored sanity to economic management in 1975. It was far too late to save Gough Whitlam but it laid the foundations for Labor's return to power eight years later.

Second, Labor must govern in the long-term national interest, rather than simple political expediency. Labor's achievements between 1983 and 1996 meant embracing difficult policy solutions that tested the nerves of some party loyalists. The results, however, speak for themselves.

Third, the government must draw on the sagacity of longer-serving ministers such as Craig Emerson, Simon Crean and Martin Ferguson and former ministers such as Graham Richardson whose astute observations in The Weekend Australian on Saturday contained advice that Labor would be foolish to ignore. Dr Emerson's insistence that immigration should match economic conditions would have seemed unremarkable two years ago, but the bipartisan retreat to a small Australia was one of the least attractive developments of last year's election.

Fourth, Labor should stop apologising when it gets it right. Tightening the cap on middle-class welfare was a positive feature of last week's budget, and Treasurer Wayne Swan should have trumpeted this check on recurrent expenditure, much of which is the legacy of John Howard. Voters never say no to a handout, but they are astute enough to know that someone, somewhere has to pay, and unless government expenditure is kept in check, there can be no relief to cost of living pressures through tax cuts.

Tellingly, in an interview on the ABC's Insiders yesterday, which should have been an opportunity to bask in post-budget glow, Ms Gillard responded to gentle questioning by mentioning Mr Abbott nine times in familiar, pre-rehearsed answers. The best place to expose Mr Abbott's populism on issues such as middle-class welfare and immigration is from a sound platform of her own built on rational, long-term strategic policies.

Labor's problems are all the more acute because of a finely balanced parliament, which will become even harder to negotiate in July when the Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate. But Labor will be writing its own obituary if it wastes any more time with the petty retail politics of set-top boxes or pink batts. A firm focus on the long-term national interest is the best, and only, hope Labor has of saving its skin.