Federal election 2016: stick with me, pleads Shorten

A Bill Shorten concession speech has been a work in progress in the last days of the federal election campaign.

A Bill Shorten concession speech has been a work in progress in the last days of the federal election campaign, as Labor’s leader has prepared for defeat — while still hoping for victory.

For the Opposition Leader, the purpose of this speech — teased out during breaks on his campaign bus — has been all about getting the post-election “narrative” right.

But the words, if he does need to deliver them tonight, will be much more important than formally ­accepting the verdict of voters or congratulating the Coalition.

They would be a rehearsal for a big fight ahead — a set-piece battle in which Shorten would be forced to defend his position by providing reasons for Labor’s loss that distance him from blame. Shorten would need a sales pitch targeted at ALP audiences to justify why he should be given another three years as party leader in opposition.

Shorten’s overweening ambition since high school has been to become prime minister. He is not about to give up his quest for this prize — unless his party’s elect­ion seat tally unexpectedly remains static or goes backwards.

GRAPHIC — Newspoll

A defeated Shorten would be vulnerable. Anthony Albanese will almost certainly challenge for the leadership in the event of a Labor defeat. The clamour for ­Albanese to run would be deaf­ening, especially if Shorten could manage a net gain of only five to 10 seats. To be comfortable, Shorten needs 15-plus — or an outright win — according to Labor insiders.

This week, Sydney newspaper The Daily Telegraph called Albanese “the Left’s cult leader”, but he is also a far more popular figure than Shorten within Labor ranks generally, and came close to winning against him in 2013.

What makes Shorten’s position more vulnerable — and Albanese’s candidacy possibly inevit­able, along with a run by the NSW Right’s Chris Bowen — is the legacy of Kevin Rudd. Thanks to rules Rudd introduced during his brief second stint as PM, the leader’s spot automatically becomes ­vac­ant after an election loss, kicking off a month-long leadership ballot.

A result previously dependent on the majority will of the parliamentary Labor caucus now has the added ingredient of a postal ballot by the ALP’s membership that is worth 50 per cent. This time, Albanese could score more votes in the partyroom — the factor that tipped the result Shorten’s way last time, with the backing of his Right faction machine — after Albanese had won the popular vote.

Victorian powerbrokers Steph­en Conroy from the Right and the Left’s leader Kim Carr would stick with Shorten again because their futures are inextricably tied to his. Carr’s dislike of Albanese is another reason.

It is widely accepted that Short­en has performed well in this campaign. He has improved as time has passed — setting aside his desperate tactic of a bogus Medicare scare campaign, and falsely ­accusing Turnbull of a “gaffe” when he selectively requoted the PM talking about Shorten’s own credibility.

Labor’s budget costings have damaged Shorten’s credibility as well. If he loses, both he and Treasury spokesman Bowen are likely to be judged harshly for gambling with taxpayers’ money, and Australia’s economic future.

Shorten can promote his at times sharper campaign performance compared with Turnbull. The rest of his re-election pitch, if Labor loses, is expected to go like this: voters have tired of the ­revolving door of political leaders over six years, and now opted for stab­ility, which Shorten would ­accept. Indeed, he would encourage stability by urging his party to give him another shot too.

He would emphasise the world economy’s volatility and how the Brexit referendum result fed public anxiety, leading to the desire for continuity rather than change.

Lately, Shorten has test-run the argument that expectations of Turnbull as a progressive, compared with Tony Abbott, have not panned out. He is likely to develop this line, if necessary, to claim he is better placed than left-winger ­Albanese to woo the middle ground, while Turnbull kowtows to his party’s Right.

Above all, to his party, Shorten would promote his adherence to Labor principles of equality and social justice — while free of elect­ion campaign restraints on costed policies that have raised questions about his party’s fiscal credibility.

Bob Hawke’s reported comments just 24 hours before today’s election have played perfectly into Shorten’s suggested defeat “narrative”: the former Labor PM said Shorten had “come a long way” but Turnbull campaigned well, and was helped by Brexit.

Shorten’s main difficulty, for those inside Labor who have ­argued that he should vacate the leadership, is the complaint that “what you see is not what you get”, as a well-placed senior ALP figure told The Weekend Australian.

Election campaigns are scripted and rehearsed — but many within Labor are not clear what Shorten stands for beyond ambition, and getting the numbers.

Albanese, while from the Left, has backers in the Right, especially in NSW, who believe his “intrinsic decency” would project well with voters if Shorten lost.

Paul Keating’s rare appearance at an Albanese rally was possibly an important endorsement — but Albanese has difficulties too. As Labor leader he would face enormous pressure from the Left to water down policy on offshore detention centres.

Sections of the ALP wanting to reclaim the party’s lost outer-Sydney heartland fear he would pander too much to his inner-city, Greens-leaning constituency, and its objections to the planned WestConnex motorway, which is at odds with the interests of voters in the west wanting improved road access to where they work.

For the past seven weeks, NSW senator Sam Dastyari, an influential ALP figure these days, has travelled with Shorten on the campaign bus. Shorten will be watching which way Dastyari jumps after tonight, no matter what happens.