By Crispin Hull

Former barrister Malcolm Turnbull almost invariably constructs a plausible argument, and very often constructs a convincing one.

It didn’t take much to make a convincing argument to justify his move against Tony Abbott. He said his main reason was Abbott’s failure to present a solid economic narrative.

Guilty as charged. Abbott’s failure to do that stems from his character as a fundamentally ideological being. For a start, Abbott has never been hugely interested in economics and finance. More importantly, for him, economics, budgets, tax and industry policy are merely tools with which to pursue ideological objectives. They are not, for him, the practical tools to give people more prosperous lives.

Maybe it is because Abbott is not especially concerned about material well-being. His austere accommodation in Canberra; his roughing it in northern Australia; and his punishing physical exercise regimes illustrate this.

Turnbull, on the other hand, is more a man of the world who likes material comforts. Look at his house. He has done well in business and sees the need to get economic fundamentals right and to get finance and tax right.

On the other hand, the Abbott Government’s policies so often did not add up. The GP co-payment – an ideological punishment for the poor – would have cost the health budget more than it saved in the long run.

The withdrawal of car-industry subsidies was an ideological bash at government intervention which ultimately is going to cost more than it saves.

The pre- and post-election ideological opposition to the government-owned NBN will put Australia behind the rest of the developed world in communications.

The determination to kill the mining and carbon taxes (moves which Abbott could have let the Senate block with little effort) have hurt long-term government finances. 

Abbott’s opposition to effective measures tackle climate change will inevitably result in trade sanctions by countries which are pulling their weight. His ideological winding back of assistance to renewal energy has cruelled a valuable nascent Australian industry.

In short, time and time again, Abbott’s ideological decision-making has resulted in dumb economics. The results can be seen in the worsening economic figures.

With any luck, a Turnbull government will be more pragmatic and effective.

Abbott might have been forgiven if his policies on the non-economic side resonated with the Australian people. But, no. His fuddy-duddy social policies and captain’s picks highlighted how out-of-touch he was. Knighthoods, opposition to gay marriage, holding out for Bronwyn Bishop, the list goes on.

In a way these are the misdemeanours that are just the icing on the cake of the fundamental felony – allowing ideology to defeat sound economics.

The head-kicking, Opposition Leader won government, but having won it didn’t know how to govern.

And Turnbull? The consultative, compromising, constructive Turnbull in Opposition never looked like taking government in an election. But now he has got it, his style is likely to be such that no-one will ever look back on the Abbott prime ministership as “the good old days”.