Labor’s campaign launch was in Brisbane, so there had to be a Go-Betweens song. “Spring Rain”, specifically, with that instantly recognisable guitar opening. “When will change come? Just like spring rain.” Except, it’s not falling down like sheets for Labor, at least not with 13 days to go; it increasingly looks like a tight contest with only a few seats in it.
Given how shambolic the Coalition campaign has been despite Scott Morrison’s endless mugging for the cameras and News Corp’s cheerleading, it’s tighter than it should be. Labor’s two big risks — a detailed and risky platform, and an unpopular leader — could yet prove fatal.
That’s how Bill Shorten’s got to where he is now, by being brave on policy and letting his opponents and the media underestimate him. But all of that will count for nothing if they don’t get across the line on Saturday week. Shorten will go the way of John Hewson, who led in the polls for most of the 1990-93 parliamentary term but was run down in the final week by Keating.
So Labor’s launch at Brisbane’s Convention Centre, just down from the Go-Between Bridge, was light on the coronation stuff, eschewing the more grandiose stadium-style auditorium for a flat ballroom reminiscent of Julia Gillard’s deliberately downmarket 2010 launch.
No one wants to repeat the mistake made by the British Labour Party in 1992, when it assumed it would knock off John Major and proceeded to celebrate accordingly at its launch.
Instead, Labor hammered unity and diversity. The shadow cabinet was seated on stage, like an overdressed choir, to emphasise Labor’s stability over the last six years. Paul Keating, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard were introduced to wild acclaim — the fact that all of them had launched successful challenges to seize the prime ministership was naturally left unmentioned. This was about stability. And unity. Stability and unity.
I’d tipped Keating to sit between Rudd and Gillard but the two younger ex-PMs were together without apparent discomfort, perhaps swapping stories of being betrayed by Shorten.
Proceedings were led by Annastacia Palaszczuk, MC and the day’s designated Proud Queenslander, before handing over to Penny Wong to perform attack duties; then deputy Tanya Plibersek, then Chloe Shorten. In between was a painful video of cabinet members praising their leader’s deft leadership skills, just to remind anyone who might have forgotten that Labor was a Stable, United™ team.
There was an extended Yugara welcome to country, easily the highlight of the whole event, and it would have been preferable to simply watch that for the next hour, but politics intervened. Labor senator Pat Dodson spoke about the party’s Indigenous policy, launched that day — A Fair Go For First Nation’s People (a cringingly awful name given the concept of the “fair go” has always automatically excluded Indigenous Australians — a “fair go” is impossible when dispossession and occupation remain the founding, but unrecognised, acts of Australia). A series of female leaders. A discussion of Indigenous policy. The contrast with the Liberals was being illuminated with searchlights.
What had Shorten saved for his launch speech? The days of backloading campaign promises are coming to an end, what with 660,000 pre-poll votes having already been cast by Friday evening, tracking at not much under twice the rate of pre-polls at the 2016 election, itself a record.
You wouldn’t pick it, but Labor went for yet more health spending. If Labor does manage to lose this election, the obsessive focus on health will be subject to some overdue revisionism, not so much on how it is a Labor strength, but on how important it is for voters. It’s most important, according to voters themselves, but that’s a stated, not revealed, preference — albeit one of long-standing status.
Shorten unveiled what had already been flagged in the media ahead of the event — nothing in politics can ever be revealed in a speech anymore; all must be dropped to journalists ahead of time — that Labor would direct $500 million to emergency department waiting times, because no one likes waiting at Emergency, especially not with an upset child.
The other announcement was a tax break for business to hire both younger and older workers. This was the moment when Shorten’s speech actually came alive, when he spoke of older unemployed workers whom he sees “at every one of the town hall meetings I have been at. There is always very well-dressed, quiet, older people, often clutching, in a plastic sleeve, their CV. They do not speak up in the middle of a meeting, they come up to me at the end of the meeting. You can see it in their eyes. There is a sting of rejection. There is a sense of injustice. This recurring question: why won’t someone give them a chance?”
But there was an even more compelling linkage to be made here, one that would have stitched Labor’s long list of spending promises in health and every other area together, and its (limited) commitments around wages growth. That feeling of being left behind, of having done the right thing and played by the rules only to be ignored as no longer having anything to offer, is a potent source of disaffection and electoral alienation. It is driving people further left and further right (often the same people at the same time), fueling the rise in minor party votes and the fall in voter turnout — and enhancing the appeal of wealthy manipulators of disaffection like Hanson and Palmer.
“Our economy is not working in the interests of working people,” Shorten said, correctly — the crucial Vic Fingerhut-derived framing of the economy for progressive parties. But judging by the polls, the broader sentiment of alienation remains beyond Labor’s efforts to capture despite a suite of policies intended to lift wages growth, give low-income households more cash in hand and make health and education services more accessible.
It’s not just the economy that’s not working in the interests of working people — it’s the political system as well. Despite a launch that showcased the best of Labor yesterday, it’s not clear the opposition is addressing that. An effective campaign to do that would deliver votes in sheets. And then, when would change come? Just like spring rain.
At least Labor has presented *real* policies. What has the Coalition given us thus far? Just more of the same re: tax cuts, & an extension to cyber-bullying laws that aren’t even working in the first place. Yawn.
‘…perhaps swapping stories of being betrayed by Shorten.’
A neat observation, Bernard. But it’s not as though Rudd & Gillard are unfamiliar with the art of knifing a colleague. Nevertheless it showed maturity by them to accept adjacent seats.
Imagine Turnbull & Abbott in a similar scenario….
I thought they looked pretty relaxed really! Political water under the bridge maybe…
I guess we will have to wait for the votes to be counted to see if it will the the massacre I am hoping for! I am daily feeling quite cheered by Labor and their policy releases, its a nice feeling for a change!
Yet another analytical critique of things Labor, an ever so slightly mocking tone to the report that manages to totally ignore the now woeful state of affairs regarding the 4th estate. It is not just those sitting targets the ‘Newscorpse cheerleaders’ that are responsible for the one sided reporting of this election, MSM in general have shown that this worrying trend of the last 7 years, of denigrating one side in it’s entirety whilst misreporting when not actually propagandising the other will likely continue after the election too.
I agree – my sense of this campaign is that Shorten has continued to be hounded by the MSM and the ABC, to a disturbing extent. Morrison has repeatedly been allowed to get away with a collection of fluff, avoiding answers to probing quesdtions, mistruths and blatant lies, whereas every utterance by Shorten seems to be on the cusp of outright scandal that the MSM is ready to seize upon.
Personally, I have been disappointend by Shorten and Labor. Not because they are doing badly and I will still vote for Labor, but because they are just not doing well enought to really demarcate Labor’s offering from the vacuous promises and claims from the LNP – the LNP in fact is essentially offering no policies, but trying to sell their alleged “economic management” credentials and saying that alone warrants re-election. Those alleged credentials are, at best, a product of their own imagination and the myth that Labor has a history poor management of the economy (unsupported by any genuine analysis of the comparison between past Labor and LNP governments). The reality is that Labor’s economic record stands up wel, excpet perhaps by comparison to Howard who had a boomn and spashed it all buying votes with unaffordable tax cuts that continue to provide serious economic drag to this day (at least $170.0 billion, most of which benefits the top 30% of income earners and most of which goes to men compared to women).
To my mind, this election comes down to two simple questions and the answer to both has been forming in my mind for 6 years. The first is; “does Labor deserve to govern?”. Perhaps the answer to that question is still a little clouded – its tax policies are credible, but perhaps lack nuance. Still, for me the answer is yes.
The second question is; “does the LNP deserve to be re-elected?”. For me the answer is, without equivocation, no way in this world. For 6 years I have winessed corruption on an unprecedented scale (not easy in politics where greed and corruption abound), abject stupidity, economic mismanagement, racism, homophobia, slogans, jobs for the boys (stacking the AAT and various government Boards with mates), government for the rich at the behest of the rich, intellectual vacuity, blatant lies and a disturbing trend towards greater levels of authoritarianism and quelling dissent.
The LNP Is not a government of the people for the people and it has to go. In a country where tax avoidance “costs” the revenue something like 6 times the “cost” of Centrelink benefits fraud, but it is still the poor who are demonised and attacked by the LNP, it is not hard to work out who the LNP favours with its overall policy direction.
Yet another analytical critique of things Labor, an ever so slightly mocking tone to the report that manages to totally ignore the now woeful state of affairs regarding the 4th estate. It is not just those sitting targets the ‘Newscorpse cheerleaders’ that are responsible for the one sided reporting of this election, MSM in general have shown that this worrying trend of the last 7 years, of denigrating one side in it’s entirety whilst misreporting when not actually propagandising the other will likely continue after the election too.
Well said.