The big difference between Anthony Albanese and Bill Shorten
Until then, his team worried that he had lost his oomph, that he had come to the job too late and it was all beyond him. But with some energy and a fair dose of political acumen he provided something that had been missing for months: hope.
Another psychological fillip came with Newspoll showing the major parties level thanks to Coalition infighting over drought relief and perceptions the government talks too much and acts too little or too late.
READ MORE: Full coverage of the Labor review | Penny Wong talked out of quitting | Peter Van Onselen says Newspoll vindicates Albanese’s approach | Graham Richardson says the ALP must balance its blue-collar support with inner-city activists | Re-born Chalmers vows end to class-war
Labor MPs know the warm inner glow will pass, particularly given the magnitude of the task ahead, but they credit Albanese for slowly, maybe too slowly and perhaps too subtly in parts, repositioning Labor on key issues such as the economy with a greater emphasis on jobs, for re-engaging with business and, as the week showed, taking a more pragmatic approach on climate change.
Labor sat out the morally impoverished firefight ignited by the Greens’ Adam Bandt, over whether changing weather was responsible for the catastrophic fires, which was joined so vigorously by Nationals leader Michael McCormack, followed by a tactless intervention by his predecessor and would-be successor, Barnaby Joyce. The hysteria of the woman in Nimbin who attacked Albanese, although unfair, was at least understandable. The same cannot be said of some of our politicians.
Labor’s review rightly stated it could not “neglect human-induced climate change” because that would become an electoral liability, then added: “Labor needs to increase public awareness of the costs of inaction on climate change, respect the role of workers in fossil fuel industries and support job opportunities in emissions-reducing industries while taking the pressure off electricity prices.”
Sound advice, and not just for Labor, on the need to strike a balance between the legitimate concerns of people for jobs and the equally legitimate concerns they have about environmental disasters and the human tragedies that accompany them. Politicians should be able to worry about all of it, and have a duty to do their best to respond to all of it, without being branded arsonists or killers by the left, or raving lunatics by the right.
Labor’s responses to whether climate change was to blame were almost indistinguishable from the Prime Minister and other Liberals. Yes, climate change is a factor, but now, with people dying and houses burning, is not the time to fight those wars. Albanese has shifted rhetorically and substantially closer to the middle because it is the politically smart thing to do and because his MPs, such as Joel Fitzgibbon, have campaigned openly for it since the election.
If there is one salutary, if perverse, lesson that comes through clearly from Labor’s review of why it lost when it should have romped in, it is this: often the greatest perceived strength, in this case unity, became its greatest weakness. Unity is prized, but it can be overrated, especially if it is weaponised to stifle legitimate debate. There is a difference between sabotage of a leader and constructive internal discussions that spill out into the public arena, that test the leader’s ideas or policies, which have the potential to lead them over a cliff.
While Bill Shorten consulted allies during his long tenure, there was no serious questioning of the direction he set, publicly or privately, so they were all responsible for the disastrous policies and the narrative, such as it was.
One reason they did not question was because they were convinced they would win, a conviction reinforced by the polls.
One frontbencher, acknowledging questioning was not welcomed, particularly in the wake of the trauma of two leadership changes, regretted not speaking out but also observed it would have taken a “superhuman psychology” to break through the reinforcement the polls provided for a supposedly winning strategy.
Others referred to Shorten’s success in 2016, reducing Malcolm Turnbull to a one-seat majority, followed by wins in by-elections in July last year.
Jay Weatherill and Craig Emerson put it plainly in their review. A combination of arrogance, hubris and absolutism destroyed Labor’s best chance for success since Kevin Rudd in 2007, which has prompted commentary that Australia’s oldest political party could be on the brink of extinction.
“Labor’s campaign lacked a culture and structure that encouraged dialogue and challenge, which led to the dismissal of warnings from within the party about the campaign’s direction,” they wrote. And this: “High expectations of a Labor victory led to little consideration being given to querying Labor’s strategy and policy agenda.”
Their bottom line was that Shorten alone was not responsible for the defeat and shadow ministers have accepted responsibility for their part in it. However, there is no escaping, no denying the fact that Shorten, as a leader with an unfettered run who controlled everything for six years, must suffer the consequences.
The difference between Shorten and other opposition leaders who failed, then got another go, is that he had two consecutive, uncontested shots at becoming prime minister and fell short both times. There is no coming back from that.
The danger for Labor now as it was then is that Shorten cannot see it or accept it. Shorten has never taken kindly to criticism, and as Media Diary’s Nick Tabakoff reminded us in The Australian on Monday by reporting his gratuitous, graceless cursing of a government staff member, Shorten has a short fuse as well as a fragile, inflated ego.
His expressed desire to serve in parliament for another 20 years can be interpreted two ways. The kindest is that it was the mark of a man who never gives up; the second, that it was the mark of a man who refuses to face reality. Methinks the latter.
Any attempt by Shorten to foment mischief will be dealt with severely, if not by Albanese, then by caucus.
“Nobody wants to see Albanese fail,” was the way one shadow minister put it, saying there simply was no one else who could do any better, given what they now confront — a complete rebuild of Labor from the inside out.
Head knocks must be prevented
Prevention, especially minimising head knocks in training and competition, and strengthening concussion protocols must be reinforced in sport.
Hands off our little Aussie wombattlers
Won’t somebody please think of our sweet, furry bollards?
It was more solid than scintillating, nevertheless Anthony Albanese put in his best performance since becoming leader when he responded to the review of Labor’s election loss at the National Press Club last Friday.