Luke Foley’s in the game and keen to take on Premier Gladys Berejiklian

Luke Foley: ‘The vision is for NSW to be the most prosperous, harmonious and fair state in the nation.’ Picture: Tim Hunter.

There are two elderly men in Long Bay and Berrima prisons who may cost Luke Foley the opportunity of becoming NSW premier, and he knows it.

The jailing of former NSW Labor ministers Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald in the past 15 months is likely to be front of mind for voters when they cast their ballots on March 23 next year. It is the Opposition Leader’s job across the next 12 months to convince the eight million citizens of NSW that the party has changed — that the structures that allowed those powerbrokers to flourish and use their power for evil ends no longer exist.

With record economic growth and an infrastructure program the envy (they say) not only of the nation but the world, the Berejiklian government should be well in front, but is not. A Newspoll published in The Australian this week found the government at 50-50 on the two-party preferred measure and down two points to 38 per cent on the primary vote.

The history of NSW tells us that the Coalition must get more than 52 per cent of the vote to win a majority of seats — because the leafy north shore votes go overwhelmingly the Liberal way in safe seats. So Foley is officially in the game — he could possibly sneak into power by forming a minority government.

And the fact he is in the game angers Premier Gladys Berejiklian, who knows that she has been part of a largely good government that made the critical decision to sell the electricity poles and wires. That decision, endorsed through the 2015 election of Mike Baird, has led to tens of billions being spent on road and rail infrastructure to attempt to solve Sydney’s chronic problem of urban congestion.

So what’s the reason for the unsatisfactory polling? Some controversial decisions have sucked the life out of the government’s vote. The decision to spend $2.7 billion on stadiums is a bridge too far for many voters. Sydney has become a construction zone and hardly any of the projects will be finished after two terms of Coalition government. Population growth and perceived overdevelopment worry people. The cost of living is biting, too; new motorways mean more tolls.

In an interview with The Australian this week, Foley did not go as far as former premier Bob Carr's famous line, “Sydney is full”, but he nonetheless point to a stance on immigration that differs from that of the government — he wants to push for a national population policy in government.

“I think if you had the state governments at the table with the commonwealth, rather than the commonwealth setting the migrant intake number on its own, I suspect the number would come down a bit,” he says.

Foley’s argument — echoing Tony Abbott’s recent pronouncements — could prove popular among voters.

“NSW Labor today is a very different beast to what it was in the years 2007-11 (Labor’s post-Carr term in office). I was not a minister in that government,” Foley points out.

“Overwhelmingly, my frontbench is comprised of people who’ve entered the parliament since 2011 and I’m entitled to say that I was Macdonald’s harshest critic in the Labor Party and I’m the bloke who moved against him and sought to strip him of preselection because of my concerns about his conduct.”

But does he concede the past corruption scandals could prevent him from winning office?

“I certainly think I have to make a case about the changed nature of NSW Labor, but I’m the only leader committed to a very strong and powerful corruption fighter,” Foley says, pointing to the Coalition government stripping funding from the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.

So, what would a Foley Labor government stand for?

“The vision is for NSW to be the most prosperous, harmonious and fair state in the nation. I don’t think the prosperity’s shared fairly at all. You’ve got many people in precarious, insecure employment with not nearly enough hours to provide a good standard of living for their families,” Foley says. “I think (the Berejiklian government is) an extremely flawed government. Their case for themselves is about their road and rail building projects; it’s not about much else. And I would say many of those projects are in the wrong places, being appallingly delivered and subject to huge cost blowouts.”

In terms of “harmony”, he talks about not accepting Pauline Hanson’s One Nation preferences; the Liberals and Nationals have not ruled it out.

Foley also tackles the argument the Coalition is much better at managing the economy.

“The Labor Party’s governed the state for a clear majority of years over the last century and the fiscal management’s always been very prudent and cautious. The last Labor government did deliver 15 budget surpluses in 16 years. You go back to Bill McKell, Neville Wran, Bob Carr — a hallmark of those Labor administrations is that they were very fiscally cautious, and I bring exactly the same approach.”

Foley says his government would be about “schools and hospitals before stadiums; we’ve committed to an unprecedented schools spending program. When it comes to transport, we have different priorities to them. Our priority’s western Sydney.” He would not build the northern beaches road tunnel proposed by the Coalition, and “we won’t be ploughing an F6 through the Royal National Park”.

With Labor’s Newspoll primary vote at 34 per cent, Foley concedes he needs to work harder on recognition. What is shaping up in about 12 months is a fairly personal campaign. Berejiklian makes no attempt to disguise her disdain for Foley. And Foley, when asked about his rival, speaks with the same lack of respect. “I think she’s a No 2, not a No 1. I think she tries hard but I don’t think she’s a leader,” he says. “The constant backflips and backdowns, the inability to set course or set an agenda different to her predecessors.”

So was Baird more impressive as a leader? “Yeah, I had my differences with him but you knew what he was on about.”