All of a sudden the world and his pet poodle purport to have crucial advice for Tony Abbott, as the prime minister struggles in the polls and comes under effective attack from an envigorated opposition and poisonous left-wing press, seemingly lurching from communications mishap to communications disaster. An honest approach to funding the ABC gets hijacked by a foolish election-eve soundbite. Sensible FoFA amendments get drowned in juvenile ‘big bad banks’ rhetoric. An arguably honest quip about our naval construction skills causes a political meltdown.

Recently, that erudite claque of writers affectionately dubbed ‘the right wing hunting pack’ have been eager to offer up a shopping list of quick-fix prescriptions; from advising Mr Abbott to rediscover his ‘mongrel’ to popping Scott Morrison into the Treasury slot. Aghast at such effrontery, some – such as Speccie fave Terry Barnes – have cautioned against the potential damage that these conservatives may end up inflicting upon their own. His point being that a less-than-perfect Abbott government is still vastly preferable to a Shorten-led, or even worse a Plibersek-led, socialist undergraduate fandango. Others, like James Allan (another favourite) find such circumspection beyond the pale, as he explains in this week’s issue.

So what gives? Are the right panicking, or is there merely a frustration that Mr Abbott appears to be not ‘right’ enough? In many ways, the criticisms of Mr Abbott are driven by a clear lack of an ideological Coalition narrative. Love them or hate them, everybody knew exactly where leaders like Margaret Thatcher, John Howard and even the supremely centrist Bob Hawke stood on most issues (other than ankle-deep amongst the lilies, as Peter Coleman reveals in this issue). Too much uncertainty surrounds Abbott’s ‘story’ – if indeed there is one. As this magazine has repeatedly demanded, that needs to be fixed. The budget blues can largely be slated to two glaring faults – confusion, and self-contradiction. Both problems that stemmed from a flawed desire to play ‘fair’, (ie pander to the left) rather than to play effectively (ie cut spending decisively and dramatically).

One salient point is that no matter how gentle Mr Abbott is with the left, his enemies in too many parts of the media will still attack him regardlessly – always with rabid ferocity. So why bother even attempting to find a media-friendly, centrist position? The squeals of protest could hardly get any louder than they are at the moment. Mr Abbott’s various centrist offerings (abandoning 18C, taxes at the top end, a generous paid parental leave scheme, talk of ditching the medical co-payment etc) more often than not fail to find favour. Certainly, they haven’t bought him many new friends on the left side of the playground. Mr Abbott is at his most effective when he’s punching hard and his aim is true. If we may offer up more unsolicited advice, perhaps it’s time Tony dusted off the boxing gloves and got back to what he does best.

Team ABC

To wit: the risible 5% cuts to the ABC and SBS, which should have been greeted with sighs of relief and a nod of adult acceptance by most sensible people, merely created a maelstrom of invective from the pampered classes. There is not a person in small business or any part of the private sector who would not only find the mooted downsizing unexceptional, but would see few major problems implementing them. Indeed, it beggars belief that the large scale redundancies and other measures Mr Scott is imposing are really necessary to meet Mr Turnbull’s modest demands.

The ABC presenters and head honchos Mr Scott surrounds himself with are amongst the highest paid in the Australian entertainment industries. When, after a lengthy struggle, the Australian published their salaries last year, the cries of outrage from those concerned were only matched in volume by the gasps of surprise from envious rivals at other networks and in other (non-subsidised) media.

With many salaries topping the quarter million mark, in an organisation that lacks the ruthless uncertainty and carrer tightrope of private enterprise, it is clear that employment at the ABC (and to a lesser extent SBS) can hardly be described as ‘doing it tough’.

Rather than sacking swathes of people – based on some Orwellian numerical self-assessment criteria a more sensible approach would have been to ask all staff to accept an across-the-board pay cut, with the ‘stars’, those who benefit indirectly from a taxpayer-funded ‘celebrity dividend’, taking an even larger cut. For the team.