Mark Riley: Peter Dutton is determined to deny Labor wins on anything

Nick McKim was ecstatic. And he didn’t care who knew it.

The Greens’ economic justice spokesman flashed a broad smile to all and sundry as he walked along the corridors of Parliament on Tuesday.

“Yes!” he was heard to exclaim.

The reason for his joy? Word had just come through from the Opposition party room that it had decided to block the Government’s Reserve Bank reforms.

With the Coalition out of negotiations, the Greens would now be dealt in.

They had been gifted the casting votes.

The Government now needs the Greens and two Senate crossbenchers to have the reforms passed.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers called it “an unfortunate development”.

But he is determined to see his RBA modernisation plan through, declaring “all options are on the table”.

The Greens’ options are more like demands.

They want to retain and increase the Government’s never-used powers to overrule RBA rate decisions.

They also want powers for the RBA to direct retail bank lending towards particular asset classes, like renewable energy.

No wonder Nick McKim is smiling.

The Coalition’s decision came as something of a surprise to many observers.

But it probably shouldn’t have.

It is in keeping with the central tenet of Peter Dutton’s approach to Opposition politics, which is to deny the Government easy wins on anything.

Tony Abbott employed the same tactic to brutal effect, painting the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments as weak, ineffective and unable to carry the parliament on major policy.

Several totemic reforms were still carried out in that tumultuous period, carbon pricing and the NDIS among them.

But forcing excruciating negotiations on every scintilla of change with fractious and unpredictable crossbenches in both chambers fed a broad impression of uncontrolled political chaos.

Dutton is trying his best to create the same impression with the current Government’s major reforms. The RBA, housing, Nature Positive and superannuation on paid parental leave packages are just the latest.

An identifiable pattern is emerging.

The Coalition negotiates right up until the point that the policy goes to the leader’s office for a sign-off.

Then, the call is either “slow” or “no”.

It is as if each proposal is put beneath a political negative-a-scope to discover a principle — any principle — that could justify blocking or delaying its path.

Once identified, the principle instantly becomes inviolable.

If the Government concedes to that principle? Find another one.

Having forced the Government to negotiate with the Greens, Dutton then attacks any subsequent deal as evidence of an extreme Labor-Greens alliance.

Cynical? Yes. But it’s also effective.

It does help when the principle accords with the opinions of independent third parties who have legitimate gripes about the policy.

Shadow treasurer Angus Taylor found the backing of former RBA governors Bernie Fraser and Ian Macfarlane for his.

Both agree with him that opening membership of the monetary board to a wider field of candidates will shift the majority influence on rates decisions from the RBA’s own representatives to a collection of outsiders who may not be as compelled by the bank’s internal recommendations.

But injecting that extra level of independence is a key objective of the reform process.

The Government believes it is well past time that some real-life experience joined the fiscal pencil heads who inhabit the RBA’s top table.

That doesn’t mean simply collaring the first punter who wanders down Martin Place and making them an RBA board member.

But it does mean adding members willing to question the RBA’s internal advice and represent the interests of battlers and grinders.

It isn’t as if that advice is unimpeachable.

RBA assistant governor Sarah Hunter conceded as much in a refreshing blast of honesty this week.

She admitted the RBA’s projections were rarely accurate. That’s because they are only educated guesses — if highly educated ones — made in a roiling sea of economic uncertainty.

Angus Taylor is standing on the principle that all current members should retain their positions on the new monetary board.

That means no outsiders at least until someone retires.

Chalmers has signalled that he might accede to that demand if it meant the reforms pass.

But he suspects that Taylor’s inviolable principle would only be replaced by the next one uncovered by the negative-a-scope.

Meanwhile, Nick McKim walks the corridors of Parliament with the smile of a Cheshire cat.