Unpacking Albanese: pragmatic policies meet old-school sales pitch

After a year of a growing insistence from commentators that Anthony Albanese had to urgently step up, cut through and get aggressive right now — even as Labor developed a substantial polling lead — the Labor leader has finally launched his own election campaign.

Yesterday’s speech — equal parts John Howard-style “headland speech” and policy address — was designed to define both the package and the salesman on offer from the opposition after allowing the government to keep the spotlight on itself in a disastrous end to the parliamentary year.

The salesman pitch seeks to make a virtue of Albanese’s lack of cut-through: “I may not always be the smoothest talker, but I can promise you I’ll always tell it straight.”

In fact Albanese used to be one of his generation’s best political speakers — not in the classical sense, personified by Malcolm Turnbull, the only decent orator in Australian politics since Gough Whitlam, but in a blunter, what-you-see-is-what-you-get Australian style that Paul Keating turned into its own art form, half Shakespeare-half scumbag, in a virtuosic display of vernacular.

But since becoming leader Albanese has succumbed to a common fate — one that Julia Gillard suffered from — of installing a leadership filter over his mouth in order to project what is assumed to be a more statesperson-like image. Just as Gillard needed someone throwing grenades at her to bring out the brilliantly articulate, punchy woman inside, these days someone has to rile Albanese for Albo to emerge and call his opponent boofheads.

More important was the issue of character. Albanese wants to be seen as an old-fashioned Labor figure, not so much Hawke and Keating as Curtin and Chifley: “I didn’t grow up with a sense of destiny. I was raised in a council house not far from here, by a single mum on the disability pension. Our dreams were modest. I learnt the value of a dollar. All mum ever wanted for me was a better life than the one that she’d known.”

Other recent Labor leaders have traded on their actual working-class origins, but Albanese’s story of being raised by a single mum in a Sydney council house, complete with the Catholic schooling and the footy, resonates more — even if he never drove a locomotive. In line with that, he pitches a prime ministership of “responsibility, decency, and integrity”, the sort of values that he says have been abandoned by his opponent.

If the salesman is channeling mid-20th century values, the product itself is very different. This would be a pragmatic, business-oriented Labor government in the Hawke mould: “I want to unite the country with my vision and plans for a better future. One in which unions and business work together for the common interest.”

Labor’s climate plan, Albanese proudly noted, had been backed by the Business Council. Not a “top end of town” in sight.

Scott Morrison “chooses to divide. He chooses to play politics. He chooses to pit people against each other. To pit state against state.” Albanese wants “to bring the nation together. Because what guides me is knowing that we have to work together if we are to move forward as one. I want to unite the country with my vision and plans for a better future.”

It’s a valid distinction to draw. Morrison does indeed like to exploit and encourage division. He gives succour to anti-vaxxers and violent extremists, plays favourites between states, and sells victimhood to powerful groups and the solution of being able to kick down at minorities. The founding ethos of his government is “looking after its mates” and he gives his donors seats in the most powerful forums so they can dictate policy.

But which approach is the more politically wise?

Polarisation means there is a substantial proportion of the electorate that has no interest in being brought together. Extremists who have embraced political violence. Anti-science zealots who want to undermine public policy. Conspiracy theorists who regard those who disagree with them as agents of a sinister cabal. Progressives more interested in policing identity-based language than effecting social change.

Albanese’s hope is that such people are already rusted on to whichever side they vote for, and swinging voters — not enough of whom swung to Labor in 2019 — will be attracted to a message of less politicking. To sweeten that deal, he offers more childcare assistance, higher wages growth, a bigger manufacturing sector and a jobs-rich transition to net zero.

Albanese’s product is one for the disengaged, not the base — less politics, less division, more good things like Australian manufacturing, pay rises and cheaper childcare. Now comes six months of saying it over and over until the disengaged actually hear it.

Did Albo get it right? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name if you would like to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say column. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.