Labor leader is winding clock back to the future

Bill Shorten has chosen his political mentors well. Bob Hawke, Paul Keating and Bill Kelty are Labor’s giants of pragmatism and long-range vision. When all is said and done, this trio of reformers was able to strike a winning balance between the interests of capital and labour. Their genius was to pursue bold policies in the national interest — exposing the economy to competition, broadening its base, improving its flexibility, raising the pool of savings — while lifting living standards, wealth and opportunities for working people. After the debacle of Gough Whitlam — who, Paul Kelly once wrote, embodied “the 1960s grandest delusion: that continuous prosperity was Australia’s destiny and that politics was about the distribution of wealth, not its creation” — from 1983 to 1996 Labor showed it could be trusted to grow the pie.

In an interview with Troy Bramston today, the Opposition Leader winds back the clock in describing how he would run his government if Labor wins the coming election. Mr Shorten intends to channel Mr Hawke’s “consensus and connection with the electorate” and Mr Keating’s “forensic advocacy” of policy. They are excellent models of action. So far, however, voters have failed to connect with him. Mr Shorten is known as an exponent of slogans and “zingers” rather than as a policy wonk. Mr Shorten, a minister in the governments of Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd Mark II, has seen disunity up close — and has been a catalyst for, and beneficiary of, internal dysfunction.

Since becoming ALP leader in October 2013, Mr Shorten has held off leadership rival Anthony Albanese and kept the show together. “If you can’t manage your party, you can’t manage the government and you can’t manage the nation,” Mr Shorten says, adding that as dealmaker-in-chief he would find mutual value, build coalitions and work closely with business. That’s the spirit of the 1980s Accords, which helped to limit wages growth and create a boom in employment. Mr Shorten presents as a transactional leader. Sticking to deals builds trust, he says. Thus Mr Shorten consults, is an attentive chair of shadow cabinet, resolves factional disputes and seeks common ground.

In his pitch to readers of this newspaper, Mr Shorten vowed not to be a “handmaiden” for unions. Yet two weeks ago, the Labor leader began pushing, in lock-step with ACTU boss Sally McManus, the unions’ living wage campaign. He declared the election would be a referendum on wages, said the labour market’s price signals no longer worked. Last week, Mr Shorten railed against “fat cat” employers and the Big End of Town. Sometimes Mr Shorten sounds like “Consensus Bill” Hawke, and then, as the audience changes, he shifts to speaking like “Class Warrior Bill” McManus.

To his and Labor’s credit, Mr Shorten has laid out many positions ahead of the campaign. While they do not yet amount to something as radical or comprehensive as the Coalition’s Fightback package of 1993, it is a big improvement on Kevin07’s cosmetic, “my turn” shuffle into office on what proved to be an empty policy kit bag. Mr Shorten wants to, even believes he can, fundamentally change the country. “I’m not just fighting the government,” he tells Bramston, making the case for a transformational leadership. “I’m fighting the sense of disillusionment within Australian society that politics can’t change anything, it’s just a toxic swamp, and that’s why I want to put forward positive ideas.”

Mr Shorten is setting a high rhetorical bar. Is this vanity, with Labor riding high in the polls? Can he actually meet the expectations he is raising? Mr Shorten is a consummate player in our power politics, a fixer. Perhaps only an insider can reform the system. In any case, there are big questions the Labor leader needs to address on key policies, such as the start date for curbs on negative gearing and capital gains tax, the full cost of the party’s carbon emissions plan and use of Kyoto carry-over permits, and the fine details of how it would change the industrial laws to secure the living wage for the lowest paid. Will Mr Shorten govern for all Australians, as he claims? Or has Labor decided groups, such as self-funded seniors or small-business owners, are worth sacrificing? If Mr Shorten wants to secure a strong mandate he will need to be forensic like Mr Keating and fill in policy gaps. Mr Shorten claims he will be activist and interventionist, ambitious and inclusive. If he has correctly read the national mood — and polls say yes — Mr Shorten will be prime minister: “If I win the election I’ll even have more authority than I do now, not less.” As Mr Shorten’s mentors proved, real authority comes not just from winning but by matching words with actions.