By ABC's Barrie Cassidy

Photo: The polls already show the Abbott government going backwards, against historical trends. (AAP: Alan Porritt)

The back flip on education funding makes one wonder if the Abbott government believes it has some good will to spend. It hasn't, writes Barrie Cassidy.

They all do it. They always have. Political parties make all sorts of promises and give guarantees in the run up to elections in order to push aside troublesome issues.

They know full well they might have to renege, and they'll pay a price down the track. But they also see in the middle distance, the spoils of office, and they can't help themselves.

Julia Gillard's such moment was when she promised there would be no carbon tax "under a government I lead".

She did go on to say that Labor intended to put a price on carbon and move to an emissions trading scheme. But no matter. It was branded a tax; Gillard ducked the pedantic argument; and the mother of all broken promises took flight.

Now, just three months into its first term, the Abbott Government has inexplicably gone down the same path.

The Education Minister, Christopher Pyne, has walked away from a key election pledge to embrace the previous government's school funding arrangements.

Is there a better issue to give Bill Shorten, as he tries to build his profile and his popularity, than education funding?

Mark Latham recently wrote that when Kevin Rudd left politics, Shorten was hit in the backside by a rainbow.

Lightning might never strike twice in the same place, but clearly rainbows do.

The Coalition's change of direction impacts on so many people; everybody associated with the education system. And it brings into play the most solemn of guarantees that Tony Abbott himself offered the electorate.

The Prime Minister in opposition promised to restore public trust; to do what he said he would do, by delivering on his promises.

He said the Coalition and Labor were "on a unity ticket" on education funding, and in office, there would "no surprises".

What's more, the move revives the kind of acrimonious debate that the electorate had hoped disappeared with a change of government.

So why has Pyne done this?

It's impossible to say at this point because the minister has so far said precious little that coherently and convincingly explains his fresh thinking.

As Jennifer Hewett wrote in the Australian Financial Review Wednesday:

Perhaps Christopher Pyne should go back to school. He clearly needs urgent remedial lessons in basic politics.

This is not to deny his basic arguments about the inherited shambles of the Gonski reforms in education.

But he gets an F for his ability to explain what the Abbott government intends to do about it - and, more importantly, what really matters for schools and their students.

Pyne says he has explained himself, but the press gallery doesn't get it. There are some reasonably intelligent people in the gallery. If they don't understand what he's on about, there's a fair chance a lot of other people are left shaking their heads as well.

Pyne has set himself a diabolical challenge. He can argue that the level of spending implicit in the Gonski reforms is unsustainable over time, and he can cast doubt on the reforms genuinely improving the quality of education. But how can he explain in those circumstances why the Coalition in opposition closed down the debate by signing up to the changes?

It may be that Pyne is partly driven by ideology and a keen desire to put his own stamp on education reform. So groundbreaking are the Gonski reforms that an incoming minister embracing them all has few options of his own.

Pyne is arguing technicalities, in that the reforms as outlined by the Gillard government were incomplete. But that already threadbare argument fell apart when the states - some of them under conservative rule - rejected the notion.

It doesn't help his cause that the O'Farrell government in NSW is on the war path. While Tony Abbott's government has been denied a honeymoon, the O'Farrell government is still broadly popular, maintaining the trust of the electorate.

Perhaps the Abbott Government has misread the election result and believes it has some goodwill to spend. It hasn't.

The 2013 election was first and foremost a repudiation of a divided and chaotic government, not an embrace of an opposition with fresh ideas.

In the lead up to the election, Essential Media Communications released research which showed the electorate didn't think much would change after the election. Their expectations were low.

Even though the Coalition's primary vote was high, only a third of the electorate thought the Coalition was ready to govern.

That is why the Coalition played negative politics so rigorously. It wasn't about a brave new world.

The polls already show the Abbott government going backwards, against historical trends. It's not yet buyer's remorse. The electorate will still be well pleased they got rid of the clapped out sedan. However, they might be starting to think the Tony's trade-in is not quite what they expected either.

Barrie Cassidy is the presenter of ABC programs Insiders and Offsiders. View his full profile here.

The electorate doesn't have buyer's remorse. Yet. - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)