Stamp Of Authority

The Age

Friday July 19, 1996

Michelle Grattan

John Howard's strong nerve in the gun debate has boosted his standing while Tim Fischer's loyalty has brought him trouble, writes Michelle Grattan.

JOHN HOWARD and the Queensland Nationals have been anything but mates. In fact, he has extremely unpleasant memories of them. In 1987, the mad Joh-for-Canberra Nationals shot down his chance of the prime ministership. He did not buckle under their assault, but nor could he prevent their destruction of the federal coalition.

Today Howard, who nine years on led the coalition to a win that included a near clean sweep of Queensland, addresses the state Nationals' conference in Townsville from a position of strength. In the final stage of his battle to get common tough gun laws across the nation, he's making sure he personally exerts maximum pressure on all recalcitrants.

The guns issue has revealed much about Howard's leadership style, and quite a deal about that of the Deputy PM, Tim Fischer.

It might leave a few hair lines in the coalition relationship and that between Cabinet and the back bench. But it has further strengthened Howard's authority within his Government and the community, and shown that he holds stronger hegemony over Fischer than does the National Party.

Howard's strategy has been, at each stage of the guns issue, to take a stand and force those who want something softer to choose between confronting him or accepting. There has been plenty of opportunity for critics to put their views.

But the changes they have achieved have been very limited.

Howard knows the policy on guns is as much symbolic as substantial.

However extensive the crackdown on weapons, it can never be total. This has been used by those wanting changes to argue that softening would not matter. It would, however, have cost Howard moral authority, and he knew he mustn't cede that.

When federal and state police ministers met in Canberra on Wednesday, Howard had already said no to crimping of semi- automatics. But some states fought on, proposing that guns be remanufactured to cut their firepower.

Howard refused to countenance this; as a result agreement was not unanimous. Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory left the meeting declaring they would take the matter to their Cabinets on Monday. Some states claimed the Attorney-General, Daryl Williams, had at one point agreed with the remanufacturing plan. Canberra denies this. Fischer said later he had asked Williams about the claim; he had said it wasn't true.

After the meeting, the Northern Territory Chief Minister, Shane Stone, and Queensland's Premier, Rob Borbidge, indicated they would have little option but to accept the majority position.

The Federal Government has been most worried about WA, from which mixed signals are coming. But the expectation is that WA is likely to fall into line.

Howard's threat that he might run a referendum frightened Queensland, the NT and WA, which believed it would succeed and mean an even more restrictive gun law. It is also now clear, however, that Howard doesn't want to have to resort to a referendum. It would be expensive - $50 million - and a big diversion. If one state did hold out on Monday, it now appears unlikely Howard would resort to the referendum. By signalling this, he has tossed a point to state hard-liners.

Fischer has stuck loyally to Howard, despite a lot of rank- and-file party pressure. He is not about making trouble for his Prime Minister (and accepts the need for a tough gun law).

But yesterday, among his National Party constituency, he was emphasising not how he had remained firm but the extent to which he'd fought for some compromises.

``I remain committed to a strong and fair set of gun laws on a uniform basis which will see every bolt-action rifle - low-powered, medium-powered and high-powered - and every break-action shotgun retained by legitimate sporting shooters, recreational shooters, and farmers - and in the last case pump-action shotgun and certain semi-automatics," he told the Queenslanders.

He said he had gone in to bat for certain concessions, which had been delivered. ``And I batted on shotgun magazine modification.

" Which has not been delivered.

The National Party organisation hasn't felt the need to hang in publicly with the Prime Minister, its own leader, or the Cabinet. On Thursday, the party's management committee urged the PM to back down and allow weapons to be modified.

It asserted that the police ministers' meeting had reached ``uniform agreement" on this, claiming Howard had then rejected that agreement. It accused him of not thinking the issue through adequately.

It made no mention of Fischer, simultaneously sparing him from criticism over the guns issue and ignoring him. At the Queensland conference yesterday, Fischer is said to have privately expressed disappointment about the fate of the remanufacture plan. The conference, where feeling is running high, was set to discuss guns in closed session last night. Like Fischer, Borbidge can't help being singed on the issue.

At the end of its statement, the management committee changed subjects, urging the Government in its Budget to honor election promises on the diesel fuel rebate for farmers and miners.

One question prompted by the Nationals' problems over guns is what ramifications other issues hitting National Party electorates will have for NP ministers and backbenchers, and coalition relations. The Budget will be the first and most serious test. Regional Australia will feel the pinch from Budget measures that cut services. The diesel rebate seems likely to be protected for most farmers, but miners appear likely to have the benefit reduced. The swathe cut through the regional development programs and staff this week is a taste of things to come. The Nationals' unease about cuts could link in with a backlash from some states. WA, in particular, feels it is not getting much of a deal from the Howard Government; cuts in services and miners' fuel would worsen the discontent, already inflamed by Mabo.

Fischer and the Nationals need a strategy for coping politically with what cuts are made. Perhaps the approach adopted by Fischer on guns gives a clue for their handling of other issues: to say, ``We stood up for our followers, but there were other considerations. Anyway, without us things would have been worse for our constituency." With guns, the overriding consideration was the community demand for gun control. With the Budget, it will be the fiscal ``hole", which this week the Government announced had grown. Interviewed last weekend, the Minister for Primary Industries, John Anderson, flagged the approach of letting one's personal stand be known, when he indicated he'd put the case to colleagues on diesel fuel. Are we seeing the Nationals developing a doctrine of qualified Cabinet solidarity?

The tactic is a way of trying to deflect some pain; in relation to Fischer and guns, it will be only marginally successful.

Paradoxically, the issue that has enhanced John Howard's leadership has put some dents in Tim Fischer's. Howard has benefited by being seen as so much his own man; Fischer has lost out in some quarters by being regarded as Howard's creature.