Will courage, caution or brutal populist politics win the next election?

The narrative of the “cautious government” Albanese adopted during the 2022 federal election campaign needs to be replaced with a bolder vision.

The latest round of opinion polls indicates stronger support for the Liberal–National Coalition, with a recent Morgan poll revealing a 50.5 per cent two-party preferred voting support for the L–NP, leaving the Labor Party trailing at 49.5 per cent. And of course, there are the usual caveats of the inherent unpredictability of polls this far from an election—18 months away—and the only poll that matters is the one on election day. This has now developed into a trend, as all polls have shown a drop in the commanding levels Labor had recently held—between 53 and 61 per cent support up until September, now hovering around the 50 per cent mark.

While governments would prefer to be ahead in opinion polls, reflecting on the period between 2013 and 2022, during the Coalition’s period in government, the polls often painted a different picture. Despite trailing in the polls for a substantial part of their tenure, the Coalition clinched victory in the closely contested elections of 2016 and 2019, underscoring the volatility and potential for last-minute shifts in political landscapes, despite what the opinions polls might be saying.

Notably, these recent polls suggest a rise in populist sentiment, fueled in part by the provocative rhetoric of the leader of the opposition, Peter Dutton, who had railed against issues ranging from parliamentary representation to national security, the Voice to Parliament, complaints about “wokeness”, terrorism, and ramping up fear on China, appears to be garnering favourable results for the Coalition. The pervasive nature of this populist outrage is anticipated to persist in the political discourse for the foreseeable future, as it’s clear Dutton has not much else to offer, certainly not much on the policy front, and with the backing of the mainstream media, it’s clear that Dutton feels that this is the right political formula for success.

But is this a cause for panic in the Labor government? Even in light of opinion polls which have been more reliable since the debacle of inaccurate and misleading polls during the 2019 federal election, the question of their reliability remains, as well as acknowledgement that polling data alone does not guarantee an accurate prediction of an election outcome. Despite this current lead for the L–NP, projections—if they held until the next election—still indicate a more likely scenario of the Labor Party forming a minority government, rather than the Liberal–National Coalition being able to do this, adding an extra layer of uncertainty to the political landscape.

The other factor is that opinion polls tend to fluctuate, although that hasn’t stop the mainstream media claiming these polls spell massive troubles for the Labor government, the Sydney Morning Herald publishing a headline: “Three signs of decay in the Albanese government”, an unusual headline for a government that is only 18 months into its term, with the article suggesting that it’s a government in terminal decline. In any case, the Morgan poll published today showed a bounce back for the Labor government, back up to 52.5 per cent in two-party preferred support, to 47.5 per cent for the L–NP, so it’s obvious that many in the conservative media are jumping the gun.

While they are keen to amplify any negative issue for the Labor government—either real or imagined—if the media really wanted to ramp up controversy, they could look no further than the leadership of the Liberal Party.

It was only last week that there were rumours of a leadership spill within the Liberal Party, with speculations about potential successors such as Andrew Hastie, Paul Fletcher, Sussan Ley, Simon Birmingham and Jane Hume—even though the latter two reside in the Senate—but each of these candidates have their own set of challenges and considerations, competence and relevance being among those.

While there have been many predictions of Dutton’s political demise—he’s still there—the final two weeks of parliamentary sessions in November and December—this week and next—and known colloquially as the “Killing Season” in Canberra, might provide the stage for late year political dramas. If the opinion polls have been narrowing for Liberal–National Coalition, how might they fare with a leader who displays more gravitas, more depth and, at least, a more positive agenda? Could this issue be playing on the minds of Liberal Party members of parliament in the final parliamentary days of 2023?

Labor’s missed opportunities and the call for a more aggressive stance

Within the current Liberal Party leadership, there might be a dearth of quality leadership and lack of any policy substance and, in this situation, the Labor government should be in a commanding position, electorally. But it’s not. While there have been criticisms that the Voice to Parliament referendum expended too much time and energy of government—and relinquishing political capital within gaining any political reward—there have been concerns that the Prime Minister has been focused on other political matters, rather than domestic issues, such as cost of living, housing, and inflation.

Certainly, these are causes for concern for the electorate, and these might be some of the reasons for a drop in Albanese’s political support, but the main reasons relate to basic politics: the new Labor government failed to capitalise on its opponent’s vulnerabilities, especially when they were in such a weakened state.

There’s no doubt that the Liberal Party found itself in such a position after the 2022 federal election loss, and basic politics suggests that it’s best to keep an opponent down, ensure an opposition’s protracted struggle and make sure they cannot get up again.

However, the inherent challenges of being in government for the Labor Party have been compounded by the need to rectify the many issues that accumulated over the past nine years and were neglected by the Coalition. The business of government is difficult, but it’s essential that a government monitors the actions of the opposition, and implements tactics to negate their role. While the Labor government may have proceeded with the task of government since May 2022, they may have inadvertently provided the tools and opportunities for the Coalition and Dutton, to regain political ground, and not capitalised on Dutton’s political vulnerabilities. The Coalition government was laced with incompetence and corruption during most of its time in office between 2013–22. Why is the Labor government not trumpeting these failures on a daily basis? Where are the ringleaders who can promote this message to the electorate?

Albanese said that he wanted to model his leadership style on the Hawke government but while Bob Hawke governed effectively, he was also ruthless—as was Paul Keating—with his opponents during the 1980s, Andrew Peacock and John Howard. This suggests an imperative for the Labor government is for Albanese to adopt a more aggressive political stance, considering the historical tendency of the Liberal and National parties to play hardball politics.

The Coalition plays ruthless and brutal politics when they’re in government—seemingly at the expense of good governing—and it partially explains their historical dominance in federal politics, where they have been in office for almost 70 per cent of the time since federation in 1901. Albanese needs to master this art of political warfare, otherwise, he’ll be subsumed by Dutton’s own brand of brutal politics, which is the art of obfuscation, misinformation and a base populist narrative. The narrative of the “cautious government” that Albanese espoused during the 2022 federal election campaign needs to be replaced with a bolder vision for where he and the Labor government wish to direct the country towards.

Global populism and the continuing dilemma of the “Idiot King” syndrome

In the global landscape of politics, outright populism and deception didn’t go into retreat with the electoral losses of figures like Donald Trump in the U.S., Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil or closer to home, when Scott Morrison lost the election in 2022, or when Boris Johnson departed British politics earlier this year. The recent election in Argentina unveiled Javier Milei as the new President, also known as el loco (the “crazy man”) into this line up—yet another leader with echoes of right-wing politics and associations with the far right, who seems to be a combination of all those predecessors who lost office, replete with wild “chainsaw” media stunts, a wild black hairstyle, and an outrageously eccentric personality.

Despite lacking the buffoonery of some these counterparts, Dutton shares an attachment to right-wing ideologies, raising questions about the global trend of electing leaders who lean towards ultra-conservatism, libertarianism, and rely on falsehoods, misinformation and disinformation, in collaboration with the conservative media.

Trump, Bolsonaro, Johnson, Morrison—and going back further to Tony Abbott—all lasted one term or less, arrived into power offering simple solutions to complex problems, and failed to solve any of them. And despite the consistent failures of these types of leaders to address and solve complex issues, they continue to be elected, posing a paradox that challenges the efficacy of established political systems.

Dutton, who perpetuates lies, fear, and division, all amplified by a media that hangs on his every word, continues this trend. In the current climate of Western democracies, where bombast often triumphs over substance, there are concerns about the effectiveness of traditional political approaches, and the Labor government, despite applying complex solutions to intricate problems, is failing to deal with the challenges of navigating the contemporary media landscape dominated by sensationalism and quick fixes.

The Labor government—and Albanese—needs to find a solution swiftly, and while a failure to do so might not result in them becoming the first one-term government in almost a century—a minority government is more likely in this scenario—it’s best to adopt a different approach sooner, rather than later. The underlying message is that the electorate is after hope and certainty, but simplistic blame-shifting approaches that offer quick fixes seem to resonate—as can be seen with the rhetoric from Dutton—even if they ultimately exacerbate problems. If government is so easy, why didn’t the government that Dutton was a part of for nine years, solve any of the problems they left behind?

Government is complex, but so is the challenge of countering the allure of populist leaders, and a multi-pronged approach involving a different type of political strategy might be needed to address the roots of these issues and appeal to a more politically savvy and discerning electorate.