Anthony Albanese promised a culture change in politics. Where is it?

’Mr Culture Change' Anthony Albanese is having a tough time turning it around. Original artwork by Emilia Tortorella

You might remember Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s announcement last year, following his election victory, that he wanted to “change the way that politics operates in this country”. He would, he declared, ensure parliamentary “culture change” for the better.

“I want it to be more respectful,” he said, also writing the day before the election that “Australians have conflict fatigue,” and were “tired of politicians who don’t step up to their responsibilities and pick arguments rather than seek outcomes”.

You had only to watch the recent performance of the clueless Clare O’Neil in parliament to see how that undertaking turned out. Having proved to be one of the most incompetent members of a most incompetent government, the Home Affairs Minister made despicable slurs against those holding her accountable.

As reported, O’Neil had been caught unawares last month when the High Court ruled that NZYQ, a child rapist and unlawful non-citizen, could not be detained indefinitely if there was no reasonable prospect of deporting him. Subsequently the government released NZYQ and 147 other detainees, including rapists, paedophiles and murderers, from detention.

Then began the comical oscillation. Appearing on Sky News on November 19, O’Neil dismissed Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s demand the government introduce legislation for their reincarceration. “Have you had advice that’s not possible,” political editor Andrew Clennell asked.

O’Neil’s response was unequivocal. “Absolutely, it is not possible, and I know that Peter Dutton knows that”. But only 10 days later she was telling ABC News Breakfast: “Our government is now going to move quickly to establish the toughest possible preventative detention regime”.

This is making policy on the run. Not surprisingly the Opposition refuses to support the bill, saying it is insufficiently robust. In a bizarre outburst in parliament last week, O’Neil repeatedly labelled Dutton a “protector of paedophiles” over the Coalition’s stance. This, from someone who failed to prepare a legislative contingency plan in the lead-up to the High Court’s decision, resulting in sex offenders and other high-risk criminals being dumped en masse and unmonitored in the community.

As for the “protector of paedophiles” label, that is twisted and risible. If we are to extend O’Neil’s fallacious reasoning, NZYQ’s legal representatives are similarly culpable for appealing for their client’s release. So too is the full bench of the High Court for deciding as it did. Play your infantile blame game to the end, Minister, and you will discover it was another woefully inept Labor government that allowed NZYQ to arrive in Australia by boat in 2012.

So what did Mr Culture Change say of his minister’s remarks? When asked last week by 3AW talkback host Neil Mitchell about the incident, a mealy-mouthed and dithering Albanese instead criticised Dutton for being “focused on just politics”. As for whether he condoned O’Neil’s comments, he repeatedly insisted he was accountable only for what he said. Mitchell might as well have been talking to a government backbencher.

Now contrast Albanese’s feeble excuse with what he told the Sydney Morning Herald just days before the last election. “The job of the prime minister is to lead and the leader of a team has to accept responsibility for the big calls that are made on the field,” he said. Excellent point, Albo. When do you intend starting?

As for Albanese’s aspirations for a respectful parliament, his should heed his own sermons. Last week he called out members of the Opposition who had attended the inaugural Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference, led by conservative commentator Jordan Peterson, in London. It was, sneered Albanese, a “cooker-fest”.

That reflects poorly on Albanese for more reasons than one. He of all people should not criticise his opponents for going overseas. And that brings me to my next point. Exactly 49 years prior to Albanese’s parliamentary snipe, The Age voiced concern about then prime minister Gough Whitlam’s decision to leave the country for five weeks.

Noting that the newspaper “has never been in the business of criticising prime ministerial trips out of hand,” the editorial questioned Whitlam’s judgement in conducting these visits when “the scorching winds of inflation will be whistling round the nation’s ears”. Sound familiar?

“[H]e is to fly off in grand style, leaving behind echoing calls for austerity and restraint. He is to meet European leaders, talk with officials of the European Economic Community and exchange words with the governments of minor donor countries. And what trip would be complete without a helicopter tour of historic ruins in Sicily? The point is that there are a few recent ruins – and several potential ones – on the Australian economic landscape at the moment. Mr. Whitlam is making his journey at the wrong time and in the wrong fashion.”

To equate both men is a tad unfair. Whitlam was urbane, witty, articulate and charismatic. But like Albanese, his was a chaotic administration, and he too could not control his ministers. And like the incumbent, he sought refuge in frequent overseas sojourns.

But to put this in perspective, Whitlam had been in office for two years at the time of that editorial and had made eight overseas trips during that period. Conversely, Albanese has been in office only 18 months but travelled overseas on 21 occasions.

No doubt the modest Albanese would say in response that his counsel is much sought after both domestically and internationally. But behind this self-image is a shallow provincial trying to compensate for his inadequacies. Last year at a press conference in Perth he was asked about the downfall of then British prime minister Liz Truss. He offered token commiserations but could not resist chortling at the Tories while marvelling at his own administration.

“I must say, I’ve been in office about five months, I’ve met with two British prime ministers so far, and obviously will have contact with the third,” he said. “Here in Australia my government is stable, is orderly, the adults are in charge.”

The adults are in charge? Yes, that is exactly what I thought yesterday when I saw Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus turn purple-faced and beady-eyed when Sky News political correspondent Olivia Caisley asked if the government should apologise for mismanaging the fallout from the High Court’s decision. Pointing his finger, gesticulating furiously, spluttering, ranting, yelling, and demanding Caisley be silent – this, everyone, is our nation’s First Law Officer keeping us safe. Witness yet again the Albanese respect vibe resonating throughout the building.

Former immigration detainees running rampant in the community is just one of many crises this government is facing. But there is only one issue that occupies Albanese’s mind. He does not want to talk about how his government will reduce inflation, or power prices, or the cost of living. Delivering the annual Gough Whitlam Oration in Sydney last week, Albanese warned of “the conservative worldview” which treats “change as a force to be feared”. What followed was so predictable.

“We see that very much with the current Opposition,” he said. “An Opposition that have learned nothing from the past and offer nothing for the future. An Opposition determined to define themselves only by what they are against.”

Could this really be the same Prime Minister who, when interviewed just last year by the Herald, said of the Morrison government, “I think that the former government acted like an opposition too much”?

Lastly, Albanese might want to reflect on what he told a Sunrise audience only days after he took office.

“It really hit home when people start to call you ‘Prime Minister’ and you realise that you are not looking around for someone else, it’s actually you” he said.

It will not be long before others are looking around for someone else to fill that office. It should be an interesting, if not happy, new year for Labor.