As the Prime Minister ends his first year with discouraging polls and dissent among his MPs, our original article is well worth re-reading. We have reprinted it below.

From The Australian, July 12

IN HIS first 10 months, Tony Abbott has yet to hit his stride. Although his government has avoided scandals — assistant treasurer Arthur Sinodinos stepped aside while the Independent Commission Against Corruption looks into his prior business interests — it has failed to set the political agenda, inspire voters and make headway on reforms that would preserve our lifestyle.

The Prime Minister is behaving and framing his language as if he were opposition leader. His priorities are still narrowly devoted to stopping the boats, ending waste and getting rid of the noxious taxes that were Labor’s negatives. Like Mr Rudd, he is locked into the daily tactic rather than the medium and long-term strategy that a nation’s chief executive must focus on. The Abbott team is characterised by zealous centralised control, with the hunting down of leaders to maintain discipline.

There is a pre-eminence of the “talking points” of retail politics rather than articulating a bold vision to voters.

It’s true that Mr Abbott has been hindered by a malfunctioning political system, a feckless political class and a disturbing broader culture not conducive to governing in the national interest. The new Senate, which looked and acted like a circus this week as the government tried to repeal the carbon tax, is a significant hurdle, but with delicate management, the upper house should not be an insurmountable obstacle. While not the first leader to encounter a hostile media, he does face a biased and deskilled fourth estate, with a flighty attention span. Mr Abbott is a good communicator. As he proved in opposition, he should trust his own finely honed instincts to cut through the clutter and social media detritus.

The Coalition is hampered by its short-run tactics and safe outlook prior to government. Labor was such a catastrophe that Mr Abbott was able to make the former government the issue. Simple slogans, internal discipline and a promise to be an adult government got Mr Abbott over the line. Yet something was lost in this crude schema — a three-dimensional, flesh and blood version of Mr Abbott. Voters did not get to know him as a “man in full”, as Mr Howard once described his protege. Nor did the Australian people learn about his aspirations and the policies that would keep us prosperous, outwardly focused, secure and peaceful. A leader was needlessly separated from his agenda.

After winning last September, the Abbott government failed to seize the moment, especially as Labor was in turmoil and humiliated. The Coalition was tentative and Mr Abbott seemed to disappear from public view, ceding the spotlight to Labor, the Greens and his media critics.

The government was also hampered by its foolish, over-egged rhetoric of a “budget emergency”. The prime issue was always a structural fiscal deficit, which needed to be fixed over the medium term. The findings of the National Commission of Audit should have nailed the case for budget repair but, haplessly, the Coalition sat on the material. Joe Hockey has not argued a nuanced case on fiscal action and he should have started the sales pitch for a tough budget after the December fiscal update. In the past, we have questioned whether he is the Coalition’s best option in Treasury. Mr Hockey’s well-made 2012 speech on the age of entitlement should have been developed. So far, he has failed as chief advocate for sound management and reform. On ending corporate welfare, particularly for carmakers, however, the Treasurer has been solid.

Yet Mr Hockey’s first budget has been a let-down, mired in a digression over equity. The ill-thought surcharge on high-income earners alienated friends and allowed Labor to frame the budget on the spurious issue of fairness. Mr Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme is an indulgence that detracts from the assault on the handout culture. The Prime Minister has shied away from outlining the wider story of what benefits would flow from the pain of winding back the spending overhang created by both Labor and the Coalition during the China boom’s surge in revenues. With the budget’s savings measures in peril, Mr Abbott and the Treasurer need to translate the consensus for fiscal repair among the nation’s top economic thinkers into a story that is understood by crossbench senators, one by one, as well as voters, especially aspirational suburban middle-income workers, who strongly backed the Coalition’s track record on economic management.

Mr Abbott has been unable to win voter faith because of a foolish strategy to keep him aloof from his ministers and opinion leaders. The executive team is inexperienced and there are several underperformers who are being shamed by the claims of able MPs on the backbench.

As well, the Prime Minister has erred on several fronts, inviting censure. During Shinzo Abe’s visit, Mr Abbott upset war veterans by saying Australians admired the skill and honour of World War II Japanese soldiers. His return to anointing knights and dames was a tin-eared mistake. The Coalition mishandled the appointment of Janet Albrechtsen and Neil Brown to a panel that vets ABC and SBS board members. The government was backed into a corner this week on asylum-seekers and should have gone outside its silly cone of silence about the origin of the latest group of boat people.

This lack of surety and big-picture storytelling has hurt Mr Abbott in the published opinion polls and helped Bill Shorten to escape scrutiny over Labor’s dismal legacy and utter unwillingness to be part of the budget salvage operation.

Instead of admitting the Gillard government’s social spending splurge on schools and disability was unfunded or that the nation was living beyond its means, Mr Shorten has opted for political expediency. It is too much to expect bipartisan reformism to protect future generations, as occurred in the 1980s, but Labor’s strategy cruels its own chances of returning to office.

It is conceivable that by Monday night Mr Abbott might be able to sit back, take stock and applaud himself for having stopped the boats and axed the carbon tax. It could be a signal moment as he ponders what is next on his agenda. Yes, that’s right, fix the budget and start to pay down the debt. The Prime Minister would do well to heed the lessons of both Paul Keating and Mr Howard, who both said that economic reform was a never-ending pursuit, and that leaders needed to bring the public along with them.

As Mr Abbott considers what to say and do next, we might remind him of what is his greatest asset and ask why he hides it under a bushel. This Rhodes scholar, active sportsman and father of three is a big-hearted, complex and irreverent man; intelligent and dutiful, yet energetically dedicated to national improvement and determined to live life to the full. The success of Mr Abbott’s agenda and bid for re-election will not be forged in secretive meetings with a narrow group of advisers. The Prime Minister must reach outwards, not shrink inward. He should lead the nation like a captain on the field, rather than a coach in the stands. He ought to be confident, canny and convivial enough to welcome Clive Palmer and his satellites into his office and his confidence. He must work with them. Mr Abbott is sufficiently wise and self-possessed to give Malcolm Turnbull a greater role, arguing the economic case rather than protecting his own turf.

The Prime Minister should be open and relaxed, entering into a constant discussion with Australians about the challenges and opportunities to come from reform, restraint and productivity improvement. Once in government, set-piece media events and tightly scripted interviews are not the way to win the public’s trust — if the Prime Minister doesn’t trust himself enough to drop his guard and say what he really thinks, how can he ask voters to put their faith in him? Mr Abbott has the right ideas about the nation’s future and the personal attributes to deliver on them; his most severe handicaps are his own. He surely comprehends he and his inner circle are not the repository of all wisdom. Counter-intuitively, as he listens more to others, he must give the people more of himself and his deepest thoughts, not curtail and ration himself in a poorly judged and self-defeating strategy to avoid political risks.