The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Australian Labor Party: incestuous, secretive, sclerotic > Comments

The Australian Labor Party: incestuous, secretive, sclerotic : Comments

By Peter McMahon, published 13/7/2005

Peter McMahon argues that even with Lindsay Tanner back on the ALP's front bench, the party is still in dire straits.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
This article expresses what we feel is true but can't afford to admit to ourselves. With the demise of the Democrats as a force in politics where do those who believe in social justice and progressive goverment turn to? Lindsay Tanner is a voice of compassion and reason as his contributions to this site attest. If he has no chance then we have no chance.
Posted by crocfella, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 4:19:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Labor is out of touch because its not in the "reform minded centre" on economic issues the way Blair is in Britain. The schlerotic nature of the ALP did work in the 1980's because Keating didn't pay attention to the problems Labor had with economic reform.

Is Labor wanting to win enough that will it reach out to middle Australia -- the way Blair reached out middle England -- even if that is at the expense of some of its' traditional values!

Political primaries are the only long term method of connecting Labor to electorates in the outer-suburbs on the centre-right.
Posted by Corin McCarthy, Thursday, 14 July 2005 2:01:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The ALP barely has a pulse, the heart has stoped and the brain is being deprived of oxygen.
Posted by Tieran, Friday, 15 July 2005 10:17:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Corin Mccarthy,
What is this centre right you talk about? If you are trying to sell the ALP on the third way, you should know that Blairism is based on the Hawke/keating strategy, with a dash of Gladstonian imperialist notalgia thrown in for the Daiy Mail readers. What is 'middle Australia'? What groups live there? How much do they earn? Are they in debt? Do they rely on secure jobs that include overtime and penalty rates to allow them to particiapte in the 'aspirational economy'? The term 'middle Australia' is short hand twaddle that echoes Howards 'mainstream'. It is rhetoric, not analysis, and is a very poor basis for doing the hard yards of policy development and political mobilisation.
Posted by fedup, Saturday, 16 July 2005 4:50:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Labor needs to recognise that the political spectrum has shifted markedly to the right.

I think this happened in part as a natural realignment after the Labor years when Hawke and Keating took the country much further to the left than the vast majority of Australians wanted. They fostered the idea that anything white/anglo-saxon/male was bad while anything multicultural/non-white/feminine/gay was good. They destroyed our national self-confidence with a spurious debate about identity and our place in the world. By 1993 middle Australia was well and truly over the politically correct madness of this era. It was only a politically naive Hewson who allowed Keating to run the mother or all scare campaigns (over the GST) and allow Hewson to snatch defeat from the jaws if victory. By the next election in 1996, and three more years of Labor moving the country to the looney left, middle Australia was so fed up that all Howard had to do was keep his mouth shut and say nothing to achieve a landslide.

At that time the country was much, much further to the left than Howard would have liked. He patiently began to move the country in the direction he wanted.

If Labor wants to regain government they need to pick up where the country is now and then begin to move it in the direction they want. This means, initially at least, accepting a big move to the right to match the aspirations of the people (not the urban elites). But when you look at the ideologues which make up the party, I don't think they'll be able to do it until they've tasted defeat for a long time to come (a bit like Britain's Labour before Blair).

Tanner's suggestion that Labor shift it's emphasis from wealth redistribution to creation would be a good place to start.
Posted by Josh, Saturday, 16 July 2005 4:59:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Peter

Thanks for your article. As an "ex" Labor voter I find your analysis very interesting.

I am 57 years of age. Dad was a hard core Labor man who believed in social justice issues. When I look back it is clear that he held and practised "feminist values" with respect to people's rights.

So, it was easy for me to vote for Labor at my first chance. And I did so for many, many years - with a swing here and there to the Democrats.

But after Hawke and Keating I lost the plot. I have since voted for the Libs - not because I favour their ideologies so much as the fact that they have some{ideologies}.

Labor has lost the plot! I can't find their ideologies in practice. What are their ideologies in 2005? They are out of touch with reality - well for me and Corin. They are not a team and they do not have a manager. Without team spirit and good management businesses always fail.

Tieran - your post had me in stitches of laughter. Good one!

Josh - thanks for your post - very interesting.
Posted by kalweb, Saturday, 16 July 2005 7:27:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fedup - Labor now looks like the Democrats in the US, it can't actually win because it won't engage the communities who decide the elections - in America it is the Mid West and South.

For Labor as an example - in the 1980's - it held seats like Aston quite well. Whilst the demographics have been against continued victory in that seat given current policies - Bill Clinton or Tony Blair wouldn't write off those kinds of seats would they! They would see them as their bread and butter.

Labor has to accept that to win say 80 to 90 seats which would be a proper mandate - it has to accept the true centre ground reform positions on widening education to skills based trade far more, tax and industrial relations: to repeat 1998 again and get more votes on a static platform but still loose - looks very likely to me.

On tax a framework for investment opportunites is as important as progressive taxation - and in an age of global capital probably more so.

Genuine reform of IR would be an acceptance of the difficulties in compliance by small business but fairer reform than Howard's. Go and see the MUA dispute to see Labor's problem's in being in the centre on workplace issues - it needed a position that matched or bettered the productivity of and provided fairer outcomes for workers than Howard's position. I could write a whole 2,000 essay if you want Fedup!
Posted by Corin, Sunday, 17 July 2005 8:23:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you, Peter.

As an ex-member who tried to be active for 6 years in the ALP I just feel so sad that we have no effective opposition to the Howard era. All you said about ALP I experienced. And I just can't see anyone who is currently visible who will be able to reform the party.

The internal culture is just so corrupt.

Perhaps a woman leader, like Gillard might provide a circuit breaker. Beasley just sounds so hollow. Rudd seems to have gone past his best before date. And heaven preserve us from Swan.

But the tragic things is that the ALP is back in the pre-Whitlam days, during which the faction mafias rule the roost for the benefit of its annointed. Winning the elections was quite secondary to winning personal advantage.

Chek
Posted by Chek, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 12:19:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I completely agree with the column. The Labor Party, save some few exceptions, have been going through the motions. Federally they have no real leadership, passing on two capable people in Rudd and Gillard and failing to recognise others within their ranks. In the States, it is the failure of the Liberal/National Coalition across the nation and not the brilliance of the Labor Governments. If the Coalition were to have real leaders in the States and not their current crop, then Labor would have a real fight on their hands.

Labor has not grabbed hold of the policy agenda for quite some time and unless they have talented and capable leaders who can do that, then they will have to live off Coalition failures in order to survive at elections, rather than winning over the nation.

The issues about the nation moving to the "right" or "left" make a false impression on people that the voters are immoveable. They can be moved if they feel either the need to, or the desire. If they feel neither the need or the desire, then they will not move for the ALP.
Posted by Seang, Sunday, 31 July 2005 6:57:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Never has so much been written and said about the chronic and infectous illness plaguing the bloody Labor Party.

Never have so many Labor supporters and commentators put up suggestions and counter opinions on how to fix this illness.

And finally, never have so many 'once were Labor supporters' been so utterly disinterested.

A tit bit from that famous dead parrot sketch is appropriate: (perhaps we should rename it the Dead party sketch?)

Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it!

Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.

Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!

Mr. Praline: The plumage don't enter into it. It's stone dead.

Owner: Nononono, no, no! 'E's resting!

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~ebarnes/python/dead-parrot.htm
Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 31 July 2005 8:55:37 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy