S1: From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
S1: This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Tuesday,
S1: April 22nd. Australians love a battler. Images of shearers, Anzacs
S1: and gold diggers are deeply entrenched in our history. Politicians,
S1: of course, know that too. Why else do we see
S1: them in hard hats and high visibility vests? But a
S1: couple of moments in this election campaign have really hit
S1: a nerve. And they came from a blue blood Liberal
S1: candidate in Melbourne.
S2: I know my rent has gone up significantly. I'm a renter.
S1: And the opposition leader's son. In a press conference in Brisbane.
S3: He was waving like mad. But it doesn't look like
S3: we'll get there today.
S1: Frank Bongiorno, professor of history at the Australian National University,
S1: on what happens when members of the political class play
S1: down their wealth in order to commune with the common people. So, Frank,
S1: welcome to the Morning Edition. Now, we've had two high
S1: profile examples of, you know, quite prominent Australians, perhaps crying
S1: poor or poorer than they are over the last couple
S1: of weeks when they really are, you know, not so poor.
S1: So let's just start off with Liberal candidate Amelia Hammer.
S1: Who is she and what did she say?
S4: Um, well, Amelia Hammer is a candidate, uh, at the
S4: current election, Liberal candidate for Kooyong, which, of course, is
S4: traditionally a very blue ribbon Liberal seat. It was held
S4: by Robert Menzies, but was won by Monique Ryan at
S4: the last election as an independent. Um, she also Amelia
S4: Hammer that is also comes from a pretty well established
S4: Melbourne Liberal Party family, I guess. Uh, so her great uncle,
S4: I think it is, was, uh, Sir Rupert Hamer or
S4: Dick hammer, as he was better known. And, uh, yes,
S4: I'm old enough to remember when he was Premier, which
S4: was in the 1970s. But yeah, that's the background she
S4: comes from. And yeah, is is the candidate for Kooyong
S4: at this election.
S1: And the issue is, I mean, she's 31. She's incredibly
S1: accomplished in her own right. You know, she went to Oxford,
S1: I understand, but I believe she put herself forward as
S1: a renter sort of obviously, you know, the struggle to
S1: rent now obviously is a massive issue for young Australians.
S1: And she sort of put herself in that lot and said,
S1: I'm a renter. But then it turns out that that's
S1: not the full case. So what was the what's the
S1: full story?
S4: Yeah. So she is a renter, Samantha. She is undoubtedly
S4: a renter, or at least it seems she is.
S5: Well, Amelia Homer joins us from Hawthorn in Victoria.
S2: People in this community are actually really struggling with the
S2: cost of living. They're struggling to pay the mortgage. They're
S2: struggling to pay their rent. I know my rent has
S2: gone up significantly. I'm a renter. Uh, and.
S4: But she also appears to be an owner. And it
S4: turned out she owned properties, I think, in Canberra and
S4: in London, of all places. Now, I've rented in London,
S4: and I have to confess that the thought of buying
S4: didn't even cross my mind. And I was in my 40s.
S6: The elusive Liberal candidate for Kooyong has broken her silence.
S6: I think the reality is people, people.
S2: Acknowledge you can be both. You can be renting and
S2: you can also own a property. We also talk about
S2: the struggles of being a landlord in the state of
S2: Victoria at the moment, because that is really, really hard.
S4: The problem with it is that it feeds into, I guess,
S4: the most powerful stereotype we have of politicians, that they
S4: don't tell the truth or they don't tell the full truth.
S4: And I suspect that, you know, in this case, if
S4: she hadn't presented herself as a renter, if she simply
S4: hadn't have made an issue of, um, you know, her
S4: ownership of properties and all the rest of it, that, um,
S4: no one would have noticed, or if they had have noticed,
S4: it wouldn't have been damaging in any ways.
S7: Leah Hamer cosplaying as your average hard working Australian who's
S7: a renter?
S8: And it emerged yesterday that actually Amelia Hammer, while she
S8: does rent in the seat of Kooyong, she owns an
S8: apartment in Canberra and a flat in London.
S9: Trying to pretend to be something that you are not.
S10: She is a renter in Kooyong. She is young. And
S10: the idea that anybody would try and discredit her because
S10: of something that her grandparents have done, give me a break.
S1: And this brings us to the next example. Because then
S1: over the last week, we've had Harry Dutton. He is
S1: the 20 year old son of opposition leader Peter Dutton.
S1: He was brought out on the campaign trail. So why
S1: was he brought out and what did he say that
S1: you know, people really have become quite incensed over.
S4: Yes. Well, he's a 20 year old apprentice, and he
S4: was sort of brought into the Liberal campaign to talk
S4: about how difficult it is for young people to break
S4: into the property market.
S3: I am saving up for a house and so is
S3: my sister, Bec. back, um, and a lot of my mates.
S3: But as you've probably heard, it's almost impossible to get in, um,
S3: in the current state. So. I mean, we're saving like, mad,
S3: but it doesn't look like we'll get there.
S4: Um, it is undoubtedly difficult for young people to break
S4: into the property market, but yeah. Look, inevitably this raised
S4: the question about, I guess, the wealth of the Dutton family, really,
S4: didn't it? The obvious question that people were always going
S4: to ask and that they did ask was, well, are
S4: you going to help him into the property market? This
S4: notion of the bank of Mum and dad.
S11: You're doing pretty well yourself. Why won't you support him
S11: a bit and give him a bit of help with
S11: getting his house? I haven't finished the excellent points. I
S11: was making the next point as to why people should
S11: vote Liberal is that we can manage the economy.
S4: And of course the answer. In the end, although there
S4: was a bit of, uh, sort of toing and froing
S4: in the meantime. But the answer in the end, I think,
S4: was that, yes, he would be assisting. And I think
S4: that was probably a bad look because it emphasized the
S4: fact that Peter Dutton, the Duttons are in a much
S4: more privileged position than most people. And and so, again,
S4: that attempt to identify too closely with the circumstances and
S4: and aspirations of those who you're seeking support from probably backfired.
S1: And one thing I really wanted to ask you about
S1: was the fact that this is far from the first
S1: time that prominent Australians have tried to downplay their wealth.
S1: I mean, we actually have something of a history with this.
S1: So can you tell me about a time when this
S1: really was, you know, in particular a well rehearsed and
S1: accepted social tactic? You know, let's play this down.
S4: Yeah. I mean, I think particularly in the middle decades
S4: of the 20th century, you know, in the wake of
S4: the depression of the 1930s and the war, the Second
S4: World War, indeed, the First World War two, all of
S4: which had been, um, you know, experiences of austerity for
S4: many Australians as well as suffering, of course, I think
S4: political leaders did tend to play down their wealth. I mean,
S4: the one big exception we have is in the 1920s,
S4: and it was Stanley Melbourne Bruce who was the boss, effectively,
S4: of a family importing firm and who was immensely rich.
S4: You know, he did a Cambridge degree, ran the family
S4: business from from London for a time, was actually in
S4: the British Army in the First World War, had a
S4: chauffeur driven Rolls-Royce in the 1920s, wore spats which people
S4: used to ridicule a bit came to the Lodge and
S4: in fact he was the first inhabitant of the lodge
S4: in Canberra in 1927. I think he had his own
S4: butler as well. I mean, it was all pretty extraordinary,
S4: but look, people voted for him. So even back then
S4: people were kind of okay with this. Certainly the prime
S4: ministers you get after that, I think did cultivate a
S4: more modest image. There was a succession of them, uh,
S4: James Scullin, Joseph Lyons, John Curtin and Ben Chifley during
S4: and after the Second World War, even though in Ben
S4: Chifley's case he wasn't short of a quid either. He
S4: He was part owner of a newspaper. He was wealthy
S4: enough to give money away as donations. Even he as
S4: a labor leader, was pretty well off. But he really
S4: did cultivate this image of, you know, austerity. And when
S4: even Robert Menzies came to his long prime ministership in 1949,
S4: he was very careful, um, you know, not to present
S4: as someone who was immensely wealthy, largely because he wasn't
S4: immensely wealthy. I mean, he was certainly very solidly middle class.
S4: But there was a sense with Menzies, and he lived
S4: in the lodge with his wife and his adult daughter
S4: for some of the time that, you know, they were
S4: kind of like ordinary Australians. Um, there's a wonderful anecdote
S4: from his daughter, Heather Henderson, who lived there in the
S4: early 50s where they'd, you know, they'd recycle cream cheese
S4: jars as, as glasses, as tumblers, as many of us, um,
S4: even a little bit younger, did, you know, because they always,
S4: you know, Vegemite and cream cheese jars always seemed too
S4: good to throw away. And so there was a kind
S4: of sense that they were, you know, first suburbanites in
S4: a suburban nation. And so I think that cultivation of
S4: not an austere image, but a modest image was very
S4: important in a lot of 20th century politics.
S1: Is this distinct to Australian politicians? You know, like, have
S1: American politicians similarly? Sort of, you know, you use this
S1: incredible phrase when we spoke right before recording and you
S1: said that there's this tradition among prominent Australians to almost, quote,
S1: invite people to politely overlook that they're actually filthy rich,
S1: I loved that. Is that distinctly Australian or does that
S1: exist in other countries as well?
S4: Oh no, you do certainly get it in other countries.
S4: I think there seems to be a Australian American politics
S4: where people are quite comfortable with political leaders flaunting wealth.
S4: If the Trump phenomenon, you know, is anything to go by. But,
S4: you know, it is worth thinking about some other examples
S4: from earlier in, you know, in the 20th century. Jimmy
S4: Carter presented a very austere, Homely image as a kind
S4: of ordinary peanut farmer, even though he was a very
S4: highly educated one. It's kind of there is, you know,
S4: those two strains there in in the American system. What
S4: we're talking about here is not really a condition of
S4: Australian politics. It's a condition of mass democratic politics. And
S4: I think in Australia we are prepared to tolerate significant
S4: levels of economic inequality. But we're very intolerant of people
S4: really drawing attention to it and pretending that that makes
S4: them somehow socially or morally better than other people. I
S4: think we're we're hostile to the idea of class in Australia,
S4: and that sort of sometimes deceives us into the idea
S4: that we're a classless society. We're not classless, but we
S4: certainly don't like the idea of of class. And I
S4: think back to Tony Abbott's revival of knighthoods, for instance.
S12: The news came over the radio that we'd made Prince
S12: Philip a knight on Australia Day, and I won't say
S12: what I said because it was on television. But I thought,
S12: this is going to be a really bad day.
S4: One of the problems with that is that it smacked
S4: of this idea of people, you know, calling themselves sir,
S4: which we'd been comfortable with perhaps in an earlier, more
S4: British period and more hierarchical period.
S13: I'm really pleased that the Queen has seen fit to
S13: award knighthoods in the Order of Australia to Prince Philip.
S14: I think that was a universal shock at Prince Philip. Oh, God.
S1: I mean, I think it's safe to say that Tony
S1: Abbott was actually pilloried for that. I mean, wouldn't you
S1: say that that was sort of instrumental in his political downfall, ultimately?
S4: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it's quite clear from all the
S4: accounts that it helped to mobilise opposition with within his
S4: own party to his leadership because it spoke to a
S4: lack of judgement, a lack of the common touch, a
S4: sure touch. Um, yeah.
S15: Well, I wanted to ask you this because.
S1: Before we started recording, you said that there is something
S1: particularly Australian, at least in settler culture here, where there's
S1: been an emphasis on the common people. You know, the
S1: idea of being in touch with the common people. So
S1: tell me about that. You know, why do we have
S1: that here?
S4: Yeah, I guess the images that we've most cherished, um,
S4: the kinds of characters or types, if you like, that
S4: we've tended to turn into national legends have often been,
S4: you know, of the common people, in fact, often of
S4: the common man, because there's a very strong sort of
S4: sexist bias in this, too. We've tended to uphold men
S4: more than women as, as, you know, kind of national types. But,
S4: you know, you can go right back to, um, the
S4: convict era, um, the shearer, the worker in the pastoral
S4: industry and the sheep industry. The shearer was very important
S4: as a national type, the gold digger, um, going right
S4: through to the, the Anzac, I think these were all
S4: kinds of images that we've tended to, to uphold. And yeah,
S4: they do validate manual labor and they elevate manual labor.
S4: And of course we've had the phenomenon haven't we, of
S4: the tradie treaty in in recent years. And politicians always,
S4: always dressing themselves up in hard helmets and hi vis
S4: gear again to kind of perform this identification with ordinary
S4: working people, even though we know that so many Australian
S4: employees today would never go anywhere near either a hard
S4: hat or a hi vis, but politicians seem to want
S4: to be pictured in that sort of garb. And I
S4: think that, again, has a lot to do with the
S4: very long standing images of, you know, what it means
S4: to be Australian and what it means to be most
S4: authentically Australian. And I think that's where that comes from.
S1: And it's not just politicians, though, isn't it? Because I
S1: know that there was a spike in spoofs on social
S1: media mocking Melburnians like in their 20s for wearing really
S1: beat up clothing?
S16: No, that's a prize for looking cool. A government incentive.
S16: Where do you get cool clothes like that? Melbourne.
S1: And sort of taking on the aesthetics of poverty almost,
S1: you know, because it was fashionable.
S16: Literally a maccas bag. It's Balenciaga.
S1: And I just wanted to find out. Is this something
S1: you've ever noticed at the Anu where you teach? You know,
S1: because I know this is definitely a fad that comes
S1: and goes for sure.
S4: So that's poverty chic or something? Yeah. Um, look, I mean,
S4: I'm sure my students would tell me that they genuinely
S4: don't have any money and need to to go to
S4: op shops, and it's probably true. I mean, I guess
S4: students are very often, aren't they, in a sort of liminal,
S4: in-between place where they might come from middle class backgrounds
S4: and their parents might be pretty well off. But once
S4: they get to university, they often don't have a lot
S4: of disposable income. And so, you know, there is genuine
S4: student poverty. Of course, many students are are under a
S4: lot of pressure. But I think, Samantha, that also goes
S4: back to, you know, a very old certainly back to
S4: the 19th century notion of Bohemia, because really that's in many,
S4: in many respects what bohemianism and Bohemia was about. It
S4: was about the the sort of impoverished artist or writer, um,
S4: who was essentially, you know, making a great virtue of
S4: the fact that they were impoverished as a part of
S4: a kind of image of what it meant to be
S4: an artist and what it meant to be a writer,
S4: and also what it meant, of course, to be a student.
S1: And I guess just just to wrap up, Frank, I
S1: wanted to bring it back to Amelia Hammer and Harry
S1: Dutton because I'm wondering if, you know, presenting themselves as
S1: being among those who are struggling to make rent or
S1: scrounging up the money for a house deposit? Is it
S1: because really, people are just now sick of the facade
S1: that we don't live in a classless society when we
S1: obviously do?
S4: Yeah. And the big issue is wealth more than income,
S4: isn't it? Because, you know, what we've been seeing is
S4: massive transfers of wealth across generations, which are perpetuating intergenerational injustices.
S4: So if you're lucky enough to have parents who either
S4: give you assistance or leave you money in a will,
S4: you often turn out to be very well off. If
S4: you're not in that situation, uh, you're at the bottom
S4: of the heap often, and I think that that sense
S4: of intergenerational, uh, inequality, lack of equity is certainly it's
S4: become a really major feature of our politics. It's undoubtedly shaping, um,
S4: voting patterns. I mean, we know from all the research
S4: that young people are really leaning left now. I think
S4: it is related to the very real sense that Harry
S4: Dutton was, you know, drawing attention to, I mean, he
S4: was dealing with something that's real enough and that is
S4: that many younger people do feel locked out of a
S4: whole range of things that their parents, and certainly their
S4: grandparents were perhaps able to take more for granted. And,
S4: you know, I think that that is producing a different
S4: kind of politics and perhaps less patience with some of
S4: these ideas that we can just tolerate very large wealth inequalities.
S4: I like that the notion of the late historian John Hirst, uh,
S4: who talked about a notion of egalitarianism, of manners where
S4: everyone could kind of relate to one another as equals,
S4: as as as citizens, if you like. And I think
S4: that has been quite a powerful concept in Australian history that, um,
S4: you know, you can have wealth inequalities, but the people
S4: should be able to meet one another in social settings
S4: and in the civic sphere as more or less as
S4: equals rather than through modes of deference, which I guess
S4: we tend to associate with Britain in particular. I mean,
S4: I love the story told by the journalist, late journalist
S4: Phillip Knightley, wonderful Australian expatriate, very famous Australian expatriate journalist.
S4: When he was very young, he was hired by Keith Murdoch, um,
S4: Rupert's father, um, as a kind of assistant for a time,
S4: and he was waiting outside a big city hotel for
S4: Murdoch to come and pick him up. And he was
S4: looking at all his posh cars, um, you know, coming
S4: into the hotel and trying to guess what kind of
S4: car Keith Murdoch would turn up in. And what happened
S4: was that Keith Murdoch turned up with Rupert Murdoch, his son,
S4: driving a dirty old ute, and they sort of piled
S4: Phillip Knightley into the dirty old Ute while they drove off.
S4: And Knightley reflected in telling this story, it's the kind
S4: of thing that would be unthinkable in Britain, where you
S4: don't have that kind of egalitarianism of manners. But in
S4: an Australian context, for a Knight of the realm, as
S4: Sir Keith was and, you know, a wealthy, upper class family,
S4: really in an Australian context, to do that was nothing
S4: out of the ordinary. And that's really what Hirst meant
S4: by an egalitarianism of manners. And I think it still
S4: sits there as a kind of model in our civic
S4: and our political life.
S1: So it's okay to be wealthy, as long as you
S1: don't pretend that you're better than somebody else or you
S1: don't lie about it, essentially. Are those are those the
S1: norms that basically, I guess, have been flouted here? You know,
S1: perhaps by just not being upfront about it.
S4: Samantha, I reckon you could write the ethics manual on
S4: this now after, because I think I think that that
S4: puts it absolutely beautifully. Yeah. There's nothing simple, I think about, um,
S4: the ways in which Australians deal with the whole issue
S4: of equality. Yes. It often seems to have its. Its
S4: internal contradictions and even its hypocrisies, but it's nonetheless real.
S4: And when you see it in action, um, you can also,
S4: I think, perceive its power in those moments of, of
S4: pressure and scandal, perhaps that we can see it come
S4: out in election campaigns are famous for being pressure cookers,
S4: aren't they? Where people do and say things that they,
S4: you know, you often just scratch your head, don't you?
S4: Why did they do that? Why did they say that?
S4: Even experienced politicians are under, you know, levels of scrutiny
S4: that are unusual, um, for them. And I think that
S4: brings out some of these kinds of, you know, really
S4: often deeply entrenched aspects of our culture that you mightn't
S4: see at other times. So elections can be real, you know,
S4: almost theatres, I think, for the performance of those kinds
S4: of things.
S1: It's absolutely fascinating. So thank you so much, Frank, for
S1: your time.
S4: Absolute pleasure. Samantha. Cheers.
S1: Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by myself
S1: and Tammy Mills. To listen to our episodes as soon
S1: as they drop, follow the Morning Edition on Apple, Spotify,
S1: or wherever you listen to podcasts. Our newsrooms are powered
S1: by subscriptions, so to support independent journalism, visit The Age
S1: or smh.com.au. Subscribe and to stay up to date, sign
S1: up to our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a summary
S1: of the day's most important news in your inbox every morning.
S1: Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris.
S1: Thanks for listening.