JUST as drowning men clutch at straw, struggling governments reach for populism whenever the tide of political opinion looks like consuming them.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Changes to food labelling laws and foreign investment that weren't on the horizon a few days ago - or in the case of the former, ruled out just last week - are now at the centre of the government's agenda.
Foreign investors will now likely face a $5000 "application fee" to buy residential real estate worth less than $1 million, or a $10,000 fee for properties worth more than $1 million.
The policy very well may play into the hands of voters in big cities, where house prices continue to skyrocket, and Chinese buyers make for an easy scapegoat.
The government will also keep a much closer eye on the overall purchases of Australian agricultural and residential property, a policy likely to assuage those who believe the entire country is at risk of being sold off and shipped north.
Slapping a new tax on people wanting to spend money in this country seems to be completely contrary to mainstream liberal thought, and it also sends the wrong message to the Chinese investors upon whom Tasmania has pinned much of its economic future.
Fortunately for the federal government, foreigners don't have the chance to vote against the policies that hurt their economic interests. But they can send their money elsewhere.
Fortunately for the federal government, foreigners don't have the chance to vote against the policies that hurt their economic interests.
But they can send their money elsewhere.
Country of origin food labelling laws aren't necessarily a bad idea, but Prime Minister Tony Abbott just last week said such measures would create unnecessary cost and red tape pressures on businesses.
His comments were more or less in sync with Liberal Party mantras of less regulation and free trade.
But with people falling sick across the country with hepatitis A linked to imported frozen berries and an unpopular leader keen to Do Something about it, suddenly we have action.
Note, however, that it's not the kind of action that actually would have prevented the tainted berries from hitting supermarket shelves.
It's not so much policy on the run as policy while you wait.
The prominence of Nationals ministers in both announcements also gives an indication that the Liberals' Coalition partners have extracted their toll for supporting Mr Abbott's leadership.
Despite the transparency of this new populist push, it is far more palatable than what is being offered from the opposition, which has diligently avoided making policy decisions at all, let alone difficult ones.
It's also worth remembering that in a debate during the last election, prime minister Kevin Rudd raised tougher foreign investment restrictions as a failed attempt to save his government.
Politicians often cite the "pub test" as the benchmark for ideas such as those unveiled by the government this week, as though good decisions are often made while drinking.
If you asked the front bar what they thought of a free beer policy, there's no doubt they'd get behind it. That doesn't mean it's a good idea.
In the current climate, politicians thinking about the next election look like long-term thinkers.
Surely it's not too much to ask for a thoroughly developed policy platform that has been researched, evaluated and then argued in the public sphere.
If anyone finds one, I'll be in the pub.