Turnbull's mouth digs a hole
I said on day one that Malcolm Turnbull did not have the communication skills that his then media boosters were claiming.
Now James Jeffrey describes how Turnbull's dislike of using one word when 100 will do got him into such strife yesterday:
(O)nce the prime ministerial gob has been triggered, there’s no stopping it — especially when a simple “yes” or “no” would make life so much easier.
Yesterday ... Turnbull was thrown a chance to keep things straightforward — and dodged it nimbly.
Journalist: “Prime Minister, can you rule out softening Australia’s gun laws in exchange for passing through the (Australian Building and Construction Commission) Bill?”
Turnbull: “Can I just say to you, I’m not going to speculate about negotiations with senators. I’m certainly not going to negotiate in advance. We’ve got a number of — as you know — we don’t have a majority in the Senate so we will be talking to all of the senators and seeking to secure their support for this important legislation. We believe we will win their support and any negotiations we have will be with them.”...
Labor MPs could scarcely believe their luck — the government’s weekly cock-up had arrived early.
Turnbull just can’t say no. A clear, definite, one-word answer which sets out the government’s position and what he believes.
As a result the Prime Minister again looks reactive and distracted by a side issue which should never have been allowed to get to the stage of a parliamentary debate...
(A)sked about the suggestion from David Leyonhjelm that he could support the Coalition’s building union control laws in return for easing restrictions on a shotgun Turnbull couldn’t just say “no”.
Concerned about negotiating in public with the crossbench Senators, Turnbull twisted and turned and gave the opportunity for a political campaign to suggest he was going soft on gun laws and betraying the Howard legacy.
When asked on ABC radio, Turnbull... put up a complicated argument about responsibility being with the state and general governments collectively.
When forced into parliament by Bill Shorten and a growing impression he was going to horse trade on gun laws for union laws, Turnbull eventually unequivocally ruled out change.
But the damage was done: Labor was again on the tactical front foot, Turnbull looked under pressure and was made to look like he’d changed his position. He hasn’t changed his position but he’s failed to simply say no and move on.
Labor has created another distraction away from the Coalition’s core agenda.
(Thanks to reader Peter of Bellevue Hill.)