Labor’s answer is so simple it’s embarrassing

The Canberra bubble and Paul Kelly is determined to end Labor:

The Labor Party now resembles two rival constituencies fighting each other — their origins embedded in the party’s past and its ­future — a conflict that extinguished Labor’s hopes at the May election and a chasm that nobody knows how to bridge.

This week the 91-page review of Labor’s 2019 election loss chaired by former minister Craig Emerson and former South Australian premier Jay Weatherill ­offered a devastating assessment of Labor’s campaign blunders under Bill Shorten, but the report was almost devoid of any solution to Labor’s crisis of competing identities.

In the end the report backed the Labor status quo. It confirmed Labor as a permanent party of dual identities. It believes Labor has no option but to remain a champion of progressivism, the tertiary-educated, high-income cosmopolitans focused on climate change, social justice, inclusion and, increasingly, identity politics while it argues that Labor’s great challenge is to rediscover and win back its traditional, lower-­income workers in the suburbs and the regions.

Anthony Albanese and his frontbench share the same conclusion. They embrace the review’s bedrock assumptions. The task Albanese and the Emerson-Weatherill review have set Labor is heroic: it must reconcile the cultural tension — certain to intensify — between urban, well-off, self-righteous progressives and the alienated, more socially conservative workers facing poorer incomes and weaker services.

Albanese said on Friday he aimed to change “the culture of our party” by restoring trust, respect and aspiration as Labor virtues. He wants core changes to the policy agenda and platform. He has defined a timetable for renewal and outlined the policy principles that will define Labor under his leadership: jobs and the economy, a fair Australia, infrastructure, climate change action and national security. The pivotal questions for Albanese are: what are the cultural changes he envis­ages and is he capable of integrating the rival constituencies that now ­define the ALP?

This is a test most social democratic parties around the world have failed. The key to grasping Labor’s dilemma lies in the difference between tactics and identity. The Emerson-Weatherill review is about as frank as any published critique can be of a party’s election loss. It is lethal on the 2019 campaign blunders and the failure of Shorten as leader, with strong messages on how Labor must ­rethink its tactics, policies and ­organisation.

The Labor review was not honest. The ONLY thing that mattered in the loss was the QLD wipeout. Holding six of 30 seats in the third largest state leaves Labor without hope. It held 19 of 30 under Rudd. That is a swing of 26 seats. I mean, come on.

Labor MUST recapture at least five QLD seats for it to govern. Yet, bizarrely, the review offered only a couple of sentences on it.

Kelly’s analysis is right to the extent that QLD represents the working class branch of the two Labor indentities in tension. But he is completely wrong that it is diffuclt to address. QLD has not swung to the Coalition but to nationalist fringe parties that preference the Coalition. Ipos facto Labor must outbid the Coalition on nationlaist politics. Der.

This is not some terrible outcome that burns to the ground everything that Labor stands for. On the contray, nationalist politics has a strong Labor tradition. Nor does it necessistate giving up on climate change, multiculturalism or other equity issues that drive Labor’s progressive wing. You simply:

  • have a popualtion policy that halves immigration below 100k (and cuts temporaries), still massively generous, to manage house prices, debottlencek cities and take pressure off wages;
  • manage climate change with a very clear eye on the QLD coal district losers with big stimulus and transition policy;
  • shift rhetoric away from an obsession with lifestyle fairness to economic fairness and national interest.

You’ll lose a few votes to the Greens but so what? Those preferences will flow back anyway. They’re not going to go to Fuhrer ScoMo.

Nordic progressive parties already did it and won in landslides, via Nicholas Reece, principal fellow at the University of Melbourne and is a former Secretary of the Australian Labor Party in Victoria:

After years in the political wilderness, the last 12 months has seen centre-left political parties win elections in Denmark, Sweden and Finland through a combination of attention-grabbing policies and shrewd political strategy.

The Nordic democracies have long been a source of public policy inspiration for social democrats in Australia. But as the Australian Labor Party picks up the pieces after its shock election loss in May, it should study both the policies and politics of the centre-left parties in the land of the Vikings.

I had the opportunity to meet with General Secretary of the Danish Social Democrats Jan Juul Christensen in Copenhagen this month, who outlined how his party charted its return to power at the June election. As the architects of Denmark’s cherished ‘cradle to grave’ social welfare system, the Social Democrats wanted the election to be fought on their policy strength. “We wanted to make this a welfare election, to overturn the years of austerity and make the welfare of the Danish people the top priority again,” Christensen said.

To do this the Social Democrats first needed to neutralise the immigration debate that had caused their working-class voter base to desert them for a conservative anti-immigration party not dissimilar to Australia’s One Nation party.

In 2018 – citing the need to protect the Danish welfare system – the Social Democrats adopted many of the hardline positions of the then-conservative government on immigration and refugee policy. According to Christensen, the policy shift was challenging for the party but allowed it to move onto its policy strengths – and this is where the creative new policies came to the fore.

The Social Democrats committed to new spending on health care and education, but the policy that really captured public imagination and brought home the political bacon was a new retirement plan.

…A third important component to the Social Democrats’ policy agenda centred on environmental policy with the 2018 European heatwave making climate change a priority issue.

The party responded with a promise to “make Denmark a green superpower again”. Framing the debate around national pride, the party committed to ambitious emission cuts. Job creation and industry development was central to the policy, with a doubling in green research to support new cleantech industries and a pledge to build three massive offshore wind farms creating thousands of local manufacturing jobs.

It’s bloody simple. Get on with it.

Houses and Holes
Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)


  1. Labor could learn a lot from Mette Frederiksen. Clare O’Neil may be the only Labor MP that is actually paying attention.

    O’Neil says while she supports most ideas in the progressive box, Labor also needs to engage in the conversation about political correctness. “Not everyone with a concern about the immigration rate is a bigot,” she will say. “Not everyone with a hesitation about changing gender roles is sexist. Not every social change is inarguably a good one.”

    She says Labor will not be able to implement social change without a mandate “and if Australians feel they can’t question assumptions and positions in conversation with us, they will find someone else to talk to about it. The current environment can see political discourse descend to a form of tribal performance art.”

    • Labor are fool for ignoring immigration, but I guess they are so deep in the Canberra bubble that they don’t understand that it is a lurking issue. Here’s one of the improvements their committee recommended to help them win the next election:

      Labor should develop a coherent strategy for engaging more fully with culturally and linguistically diverse communities, including Chinese Australians.

  2. Does anyone remember the 1989 flick “Weekend at Bernie’s”? (Hint, about two young insurance accountants who after being invited to their bosses beach house find that he is dead. So, in order to keep the party going they have drag his copse around and fool everyone that he still has a pulse.)

    Well, that seems to be the ALPs script too. Craig Emerson and Jay Weatherill fronted the cameras with their ideological Bernie. Problem was, although their Bernie began dying about 30 years ago, he’d been seriously stiff for a good decade. But Craig and Jay played it straight and Penny Wong refused to answer questions, all hoping that the stapled on toupee and lipstick of their Bernie review would get them through.

    Well, it won’t. The ALPs Bernie is ripe and stinking up the place something shocking. Everyone has thus far mostly jollied them along, feeling sure that nobody could be so thick for so long. After the Shorten catastrophe (another corpse dragged around the nation met with painted on smiles) it’s just too much to expect ‘Weekend at Bernies II’ to be a hit.

    This was the ALP’s jumping the shark moment. Because everyone knows that they threw workers and average Aussies from the Neoliberal Express and Chinese Love Boat years back. It is exactly the same problem in the USA, UK and France and people are sick to death of pretending that it isn’t.

    It is bloody simple, either get on with it or die. Let The Greens choke on a terminal dose of identity politics at the next election and move on the Danish model (broadly the Scandinavian model now). The ALP is dead as an effective political force if it tries more Weekend at Bernie’s stunts.

    What next from the brilliant 20 year old teen movie political strategists at the ALP? Are we going to do a remake of ‘Re-Animator’ with Bill Shorten or maybe ‘Risky Business’ with Jim Chalmers?

    • I agree completely with all that.

      But I also think the ALP will continue dragging that ideological corpse around, and that people with views like myself will never vote ALP again, never vote Green (again, for those that have done so in the past)………..and patiently sit and wait until genuine socio economic reform returns.

      • We don’t have the time to sit and wait for a responsible leader
        from Ian Dunlop in today’s SMH;
        “The scientific rationale for emergency action has been well established for years. The world is currently on track for a temperature increase of 4.5 degrees by 2100 which would trigger global collapse long beforehand. Even if the Paris Climate Agreement voluntary commitments were implemented, and there is little sign of that happening, temperature increase would be 3.5 degrees probably long before 2100, a world of social chaos. A 1.5 degree increase, which now implies extremely dangerous climate change, is assured by 2030, irrespective of any action taken.”

    • The LNP serve the 0.01%.

      The Greens aspire to serve the 99% by bringing down the 0.01%.

      The ALP aspire to serve the 0.99% by bringing down the 0.01% while abandoning the 99%. I guess it would be morally and ideologically difficult to come up with a coherent policy for that.

      • China PlateMEMBER

        Do they really aspire to bring down the 1%(ers) really. I think that’s just it, they don’t. Just like those dudes at Bernie’s they try to please everyone and therefore please no-one

      • For the Greens and ALP, the top 30% and 0.01% are interchangeable.

        Also, the greens no longer seek to serve the 99%, they (like all political tribes) are quite happy to serve their socially progressive 0.01%. The other 99.9% whom may disagree or question their dogma are not yet woke enough to understand their own stupidly and moral inferiority.

        • Jumping jack flash

          The thing that Labor don’t understand is that the 99% all want to be the 0.01% and also believe that the Libs are the ones to get them there.

          There is no more “noble worker”. The noble worker died around 2001 and now is replaced by the “aspiring investor”. The “aspiring investor” believes, rightly or wrongly, that the Libs can make their dream a reality.

          This is due to clever marketing over several decades.

          Labor need to make it known that as a political party they have just as much (or more) sway to bestow the necessary amounts of debt onto their people so they can achieve the lifestyle they believe they deserve. The only thing that stands in the way of success or failure these days is simply the amount of debt that can be obtained.

          The downtrodden, “noble worker” used to be a badge of honor, now it is just an embarrassment. Synonymous with “bogan”.

    • Absolutely nailed it
      Yep the ALP is trying to do a low budget remake of “Weekend at Berrnie’s” staring the usual assortment of mummified suspects.
      Personally I don’t believe that real change (of the sort that’s required) is even possible within the ALP because their very reason for existing, the dichotomy of Labour and Capital, no longer holds true. Labour and Capital are no longer opposing forces, balanced by the electorate flip-flopping between governments led by the ALP and LNP, both parties are equally irrelevant, both strategies belong in a time vault, only to be reopened if there is irrefutable evidence we’ve gone through a worm hole and returned to 1950 .
      Unfortunately, if history is a guide, this sort of multi-party political/social irrelevance leads to the break-up of nations.

        • No I think it is more a function of true Productivity no longer being necessary, nor for that matter desirable in post growth societies.
          This balancing act was always about Productivity and Capital value maximization by trading off against the cultural/social value of Labour. With the right balance every worker was a consumer and the whole system feed back in a virtuous loop…our political parties divided ideologically along these lines and basically rode into history on the coat tails of Productivity.
          But if Productivity is dead than so are the parties that rode its coat tails.
          Negative Interest rates, insane house prices, proliferation of BS jobs, centralization of work these are all manifestations of the same problem, which in my opinion is the adjustment to a post Productive society.
          One Party, two parties , ten parties it really doesn’t matter, they’re all trying to optimize the same old problem.
          The real problem today is maintaining the relevance (value) of Labour and thereby ensuring that Capital and by extension savings can also maintain value.
          IMHO the great 21st century can kick ends when this social contract is seen b y all to have failed. .

          • Jumping jack flash

            Exactly this!

            Workers are no longer required, at least not in the capacity as they were back when Hawke was so successful.

            All that is required now is debt, so the perception that a particular political party has a better control over the availability and maintenance of debt/debt value, is going to be worth a lot at the polls.

      • It just so happens that i was emailing back and forth with a mate over the weekend about why the western world has effectively drifted closer to one party states since about 1980.

        In Australia the ALP has been a key part of this dynamic, and its integration into the dynamic is what is costing it now – until it clearly states the limits (and the limits of its involvement) to that dynamic.

        Below is what i wrote (initially vis Islamic society)


        …………..In my opinion one of the the underlying causes of the rise of Trump, and Brexit, and even the alienation from the political process here is that western people have lost a few things they had a generation ago, which has brought ‘western’ existence to be more akin to the lives of ordinary people in the Islamic world.

        A generation or two ago (circa 1980) I reckon you would get some sort of agreement among most western peoples (US, Europe etc) that.

        1.  Democracy (as they practiced it) delivered better outcomes for them than communism, dictatorships etc

        2.  The economic pie was allocated with greater ‘fairness’ in the western world than elsewhere

        3.  That capitalism (as then practiced – with more regulation than now) had in the post WW2 era led to more creative, more diverse economies which provided greater opportunities for people

        4.  That a relatively free media was a mainstay of both the democratic process and the capitalist dynamic in these societies

        5.  That laws and regulation were a key factor in promoting a considerable degree of integrity vis all the above in terms of ensuring effective social returns from the dynamics in play – harmony, veracity, rights to have opinions acknowledged

        As we look towards 2020 I think it would be true to say for much of the western world that 

        1.  Living standards are no superior for many people than they were circa 1980 and existence is more precarious

        2.  Real wage outcomes are on average no better than they were in 1980, which has been masked by debt and the rise of 2 income families

        3. The economic take of the 1% is bigger than it was circa 1980

        4.  The ‘democratic’ process has not provided an alternative to the above and appears unlikely to do so

        5.  That capitalism (as it is now practised – with much less regulation) is now the only model seen by the political process and is the source of anxiety for many people – from costs, opportunities for their children, and the durability of their employment.

        6.  That this capitalism has effectively bought the democratic process (lobbyists, corruption, funding of politics) and owns the mainstream media (so that there is a lack of examination of issues underlying discontent and social anxiety – and of course onto corruption – and distracting from the examination of causes of discontent (inter alia)

        7.  That the capitalism buyout of the process means that laws are not about ensuring effective social returns from the dynamics in play, but are rather about ensuring compliance with the status quo – the anxiety, the take of the 1%, the costs of living etc – and ultimately about protecting the political vested interests of the status quo.

        From there I would observe that if the substitution of ‘meaningful economic growth’ with debt, or economic competitiveness with individual or family based anxiety or stress, blew the belief in the economics out of the water, then as much as anything it was the 2003 ‘weapons of mass destruction’ based invasion of Iraq, which blew the self respect of the western political system(s) amongst their own people out of the water and the belief in their mainstream medias along with it

        I would observe, as gloomy as it may seem, that the 2020, dynamic is pretty much par for the course in the Islamic world.  The laws, the media, the politics are all about ensuring they are controlled and dont threaten the political status quo.  The same would hold (I would argue) for dictatorships in China or Russia.

        We have drifted towards one party state, and it is the ALP which has done the most drifting…..

        • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

          The roughly 7 or 8 mins of summary from 52.25 to the end of Episode 4 of “Century of the self” beautifully explains the corner “The left” has painted it self into with its embrace of merged Freudian psychology and the sophisticated focus groups born out of Consumerism.
          (To much Bernays sauce as skip would say)

          With out reconciling and in my view rejecting this phenomenon “The Left” will continue to have little to offer and be so similar to the “The Right” as to leave us all in the “Democratic West” with no real Democratic alternatives at all!

          I’m trying to get as many of my fellow ALP members to watch this series, especially episode 1 and 4 to try and at least get more people in the party thinking about what is really wrong with our leaderships embrace of this Shyte.

        • Interesting thoughts, I’ll take some time to read it this evening but for the rest of today I’m off
          wrt to what i said above about Post Productive society, I think it ties in with what you’re saying because large parts of the world were not arranged along Productive lines. I have many friends form Eastern Block countries that regale each other with stories of just how F’ed up things really were (from a Make/ Production perspective) under the Soviet system. China was the same right up to the mid 1990’s, Africa and South America were complete basket cases , so a small fraction of the worlds population Produced most of the consumable goods and profited from this position. All that changed when the wall came down.
          Today many Chinese manufactures are far more efficient at creating product than any Aussie firm, the same goes for many former Soviet republics and many parts of S.America.
          Everyone got on the Productivity bandwagon and thereby destroyed the advantage that limited geographic Productivity delivers.

        • I agree with that summary. Deregulation and the delusion of taking public investment out of innovation, along with feeding the cult of the CEO and fattening the finance industry from the public policy, has led to the decline of the West.

          Now days the desperately cynical and mercurial nature of politics is red, raw and in our faces 24-7 along with the fact that there is no real vision or belief driving the ALP that seeks to redress this problem at its root cause. It gave up on such needs for a naked embrace of the market.

          Their historical ideology is no longer a large enough fig leaf to hide the manure heap gravity of neoliberalism around which our society’s orbit decays as the ‘new labor’ types dominate the ALP. It is not switching leaders that matters, but running scared in the dark looking for light switches and a light bulb moment as short term fixes for a generational issue that began 30 years back when they marched to the Right.

          That the ALP could offer up Shorten and then think Albanese is the solution shows how desperately sad it has become. You can’t fake belief and principle and if the ALP is too cowardly to admit the problem and reinvent itself honestly they are dead to me. Craig Emerson and Jay Weatherill nailed down the lid. Because if you are lost in the wilderness don’t blame the compass and say that you were robbed – blame your lack of navigation skills and the mistake of employing hairdressers rather than cartographers and surveyors. These buffoons think that a media performance will convince everyone that they’ve found the path to the next waterhole – this time. Nope. It just made a bad situation worse and even the vultures have started to tire of the wait. Not too many people want to eat a dead cat thrown onto the table, even if you keep telling them that it’s a chicken.

    • Just happy to be ‘there’ is how I see it. Not a bad gig being in opposition; vision and aspiration are superfluous nowadays and none of them care a whit and it shows magnificently.

    • Weekend at Bernie’s is a classic. The ALP not so much.. they are destined to remain in opposition at this rate unless they change, but it seems everyone else is wrong and Labor is right. The unwashed just don’t know what’s good for them yet.

    • Very good. Plus the review took months, 96 pages of palaver, only to say what disgruntled Labor MPs said Sunday May 20 – our policies were too complex for the ignorant and uneducated. We was robbed.

  3. Sweden is deporting cheap 3rd world labour.

    I have no problem with this. It’s their country and they can kick out whoever they want.

    Sweden is a soverign country and entitled to decide who comes and goes and how long they stay. Sweden obviously has decided to maintain their sovereignty. It’s a pity Australia doesn’t take a similar stand and look after Australians first.

    Perhaps the political parties in Sweden are not funded by landlords? Mr Crispin Hull says the biggest obstacle to cutting immigration is the fact that the Aussie political parties are funded by billionaires, landlords, lazy retailers, and developers.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      The skills shortage argument is always the first point made by ALP apparatchiks whenever I suggest a halving of our immigrant intake.
      More than a few immediately start to talk about the much needed University professors we must have for our booming Export industry,… Education (vomit).
      And for all the Researchers needed by CSIRO etc.
      It’s clearly a scripted response designed to baffle the rank and file plebs but fewer and fewer people are buying this BS.
      Such individuals make up a tiny proportion of our intake and need not be excluded after a halving of our overall intake.

      Simply upping the minimum pay a Skilled visa holder must be paid to 100k pa would have us training a hell of a lot more of our own young people not to mention increasing wages for a lot of less skilled jobs.
      Try getting that through as a branch proposal though.

      • Thanks for the insight.

        Online, another lie I see is “the population of Sydney is growing due to the natural birth rate and interstate migration”.

        The birth rate has been less than 2 per woman since 1978 – so 100% of the population growth is due to immigration.

      • The University professor is an example of what is wrong : foreign imported lecturers on contract is closing off the future career path of local post-graduates.

        • My Labor candidate trotted out the skilled migrant line. I asked her if making bubble tea was a skill she said we need to create more opportunities for skilled migrants to use their skills.

          • …wow….if we need to make more room for skilled immigrants to use their skills, then there isn’t a reason for them to be here in the first place…

            I don’t mind skilled immigration, but let’s make sure the local kids are getting skilled training and job placement first

        • More truth than you can imagine in that statement.

          If can’t be bothered to teach your own children and instead import your teachers and intellectual elites from another culture, then allow them to teach and educate your children, you can hardly be surprised if the values and cultural underpinnings that they instilled in your kids more closely reflects the values and interest of their own culture and people than your own.

          The end of Western Christian civilisation began when we outsourced our Universities and intellectual class to the educated elites of another culture. The Culture War we are suffering through now is nothing more than the death throws of 2,000 years of culture being extinguished as its smothered under these imported people and values.

          • 100% Stewie. Nikola’s views in the 26-reasons-to-never-vote-labor article are quite similar to my own. A first generation Australian trilingual dual national with European heritage that is disgusted with the state of play in Australia. Everything from legalised thievery to pandering to mental/cultural mental illnesses. Anti natural, anti family, and above all inherently anti human mentality is what’s in vogue.


          • Culture does indeed matter Ubietz – and those who recognise that it does are the ones who are most likely to see their values perpetuated into the future.

            It amazes me that people think it is of no importance today, when there is not a single society or culture in the world to have emerged from all of human history that have been complete culture-less barbarians. It remains to be seen how long a civilization can perpetuate itself once it descends back into barbarism.

            It only took Rome a couple hundred years, although in today’s information age, turbo charged with mass migration I expect us to be done within 50 years.

      • Worked in an area of consulting that did visa applications for a few years. Rarely ever saw a skilled visa application that wasn’t in substance a training or wage dodge.

      • We know what the LNP’s motivation is to ‘open teh gates’ but I’m confused when it comes to the ALP: are they just the other side of the LNP coin or are they that wedded to progressive ideals that there can be no compromise?

  4. Wrong people make wrong policy.
    The answer is about how the function and structure of the party has permitted the weird attitude to it’s constituents and the Nation’s future.

  5. reusachtigeMEMBER

    It is important that we crush the Labor party now and into the future as their main goal is to turn everyone trans-gender via secret drugs and “nip and tuck” operations while you sleep. I’d hate to look trans-gender so I hate the Labor party. They are the party of evil. The Liberal Nationalists are our party of good. They just want us all to be successful, not homo.

    • More importantly (and indeed chillingly) there are moves afoot to have the Gubbermint legislate what you can and can’t eat and in what quantities. Think about that for a second. Every day more freedoms are being withdrawn. We will be living in an Orwellian nightmare before long.

      People are free to take unilateral steps to ‘do their bit’ should they wish but to have quotas imposed, that will make little or no real difference anyway – that’s some serious BS.

      • That’s true

        IF the true cost (including carbon outputs) was factored into beed/etc its price would more accurately reflect the opportunity cost to grow more grain/fibre for direct human consumption

        Science is now lining up behind plant based diets en masse

        • Science is free to line up however it likes — it can deliver its sermon from high on the mount but people should still be free to choose either way. In the same way that people choose to smoke cigarettes despite the info available.

          What I object to, in principle, is the Govt telling its citizens what they can and can’t do. That sets a very bad precedent and is part of their transition from public servants to overlords. It should be resisted at all costs.

  6. Can’t fault your three dot points, H&H. It is that simple.

    The Review suppresses entirely the migrant-parent fiasco, which cost them big in Sydney. On coal, transition, structural adjustment, bribe, doesn’t matter what you call it, just do it.

    • +1 I can’t believe they didn’t mention the parent migrant fiasco. It was 1 reason I put them lower in terms of preference votes. The fools.

      • They’re probably well aware but if they admit it publicly then it’s difficult to put it back on the policy agenda in the future.

        Mind you, I’m fairly certain that when they get back into power they’ll just press ahead and implement it anyway. Because it’s the ‘right’ thing to do.

      • For me that was the nail in the coffin. I was steeling myself to vote for these idiots, but that policy just enraged me.

      • Before the election I spoke with a Labor party member about this policy. When pressed about the increased costs to medicare and the overall burden on the public health system, he said that Medicare is supposed to be for everyone and the idea that someone was less deserving because they hadn’t spent their working life contributing via the tax system was simply anathema. It took a while for them to reluctantly concede that bringing in more migrant workers would suppress wage level, but this is the level of idiocy we are dealing with.

        Former Labor stalwart Graham Richardson voting for Liberal Dave Sharma has made the news, but it’s worth looking at what he has said:

        “Richardson said politicians needed to prioritise the needs of people in Australia before shifting their attention to global or niche issues. It was a reference to Dr Phelps, who fought for action on climate change and the treatment of offshore refugees during her brief stint in parliament. Too much attention was being paid to “tales of woe from people who’ve never done a thing for this country”, Richardson said.”

    • If Labor couldn’t be honest to themselves with this review they never will be. They didn’t and they won’t be.

  7. Its simple HH alright. Labour’s open borders China loving progressives cannot bring themselves to meaningfully cut immigration. The inherent contradictions in the party cannot be reconciled. It will not change.

  8. The population of California has gone from 5 million to 40 million in less than 100 years. It would appear that this future, at an even more extreme rate, is what our major parties (Greens, Labor and the LNP) have planned for Australia. This is with no mention of water, environment, amenity, equality, fairness, wage suppression, poverty etc. It is patently clear our environment and our infrastructure is on the verge of collapse on these growth rates. Our amenity has already collapsed.

    There is nothing wrong with immigration but we need a sensible growth rate with a plan that manages all the variables, not just a plan to grow at break neck speed, Labor/Greens have positioned themselves as the biggest and the fastest of the big Australia proponents.

    • But the growth rate of California is slowing in the short term, the medium term and the long term.

    • California is America’s most multicultural state. From a social point of view California is also the ultimate expression of Meritocracy.

      Thoughtlessly combining the two together will inevitably result in the dystopia that is emerging there – unparalleled wealth juxtaposed alongside incredible poverty, the likes of which are seeing the re-emergence of medieval diseases like leprosy and the plague.

      The Red Queens game that the meritocracy encourages has everyone running as fast as they can, each trying to out do the other, and staying exactly where they started. Even more perversely it turns every man into his own slave master, ordering himself to give up more and more of his life.

      Meanwhile Multiculturalism within the Meritocracy results in every population group eventually running up against its own populations groups inherent median capability barrier. This inevitably leads to broad social and ethnic stratification as IQ and the meritocracy form a great societal and economic filter.

      Both these two forces work to fragmented society. Once filled with competing interests and capabilities it becomes so much easier to set one group against another, and pretty soon you no longer have a society, but an economic zone.

      As it goes with California, so it goes with Australia.

      • California is not very multicultural : it is Hispanic. Already the Hispanic population is larger than the white population, and soon all of the US will be more Hispanic than white as well.

      • I read an article on the weekend by a guy who’d moved from LA to a little town of 2500 people in Idaho. He explained all the differences in the new town. High on the list he signalled his virtue and bemoaned the lack of diversity as the town was about 99% Caucasian, which left him feeling removed from the national debate on race in the US yadder yadder. He then described how astonishingly law abiding the place was, with people leaving cars unlocked, houses unlocked, wallets on tables in the gym etc. The only crime was young people getting drunk and making noise on Friday night. And it was really friendly, with people helping strangers etc. It was pretty much paradise.

        I was amazed that not only didn’t he make any connection between the lack of diversity and all the good things that followed from it, he actually complained about the lack of diversity.

        • Diversity brainwashing does that to you – it takes untold time, effort and money to train a society, culture and people to hate themselves.

        • It’s the underlying culture rather than the lack of diversity. Japan and China are both mono-cultures. You can leave your doors unlocked in the Japanese countryside, in China countryside everyone has a heavy steel gate that is locked at night. The modern Chinese culture have no moral and is rotten to the core.

          One disturbing example happened recently in China last week. A 9 year old boy was bashed to death by a mentally ill man over a period of 20 minutes in broad daylight. During that time, there were over one hundred on-lookers who looked on and just took videos of the bashing on their mobile phone. The police eventually arrived but it’s far too late. There are two issue for anyone who wants to be a Good Samaritan in China :

          1) There is no legal protection for someone saving the child. If someone uses force and ends up killing the mentally ill man, that person will be charged and have to pay compensation to the family of the deceased as well. This is a real case : someone stopped the abduction of a neighbour’s child by a kidnapper, accidentally killed the assailant with one punch, and is found guilty of manslaughter.

          2) If the boy ends up being brain injured and require expensive medical treatment, anyone who is involved will be found liable to pay compensation. The Chinese court once famously ruled in the Peng Yu case “the only reason why anyone will help another is when they’re guilty of a crime and trying to cover it up”, and that has been the law of the land since.

          • So….. culture matters.

            I have no doubt that what you say is true Ronin – it accords with many stories I have read and videos I have seen. The lack of personal insurance in China has lead to the perverse outcome from the perspective of valuing human life, where if you hit someone you are better off reversing over them to make sure they are dead, in order to avoid paying to support them for the rest of your life – there are plenty of horrific videos of Chinese accidentally running over, then deliberately reversing over children, to support this statement.

            I’m not sure if the Chinese cultural values of today mirrored the same values prior to the cultural revolution or extended back into antiquity. I understand that the cultural revolution had a far greater impact on the basic function of Chinese society than many Westerners assume. I do know that the “Death by a thousand cuts” (or Lingchi) was a reserved for the most heinous of crimes – apparently killing your parents. Anyhow, I don’t know enough on the subject of Chinese culture and their cultural history to comment further.

            The issue is, and one that I keep making, that under the guise of Multiculturalism it no longer matters what or who the values of the underlying society belong to – under Multicutluralism they will soon be submerged within the flood of competing people and values – as is increasingly the case in California.

            This leads to the other default outcome in Multicultural societies – when you are no longer united in cutlural values and society can no longer come to a mutually acceptable solution in order to solve the problems that it collectively faces together, the default solution is to allow the market to price in the solution.

            This is the ultimate reason why Australia’s, and indeed the entirety of Western nations, welfare system is under attack and why it is being replaced with market based, user pay systems.

            Money does not discriminate and has no prejudices.

    • These ‘catastrophic’ bushfires forecast for Tuesday could put a dent in things. The gubbermint will have to speed up the visa application process to replace the lost humans 😉

      GDP growth …. ‘sound economic management’.

      • As someone amidst this right now, some sensitivity may be needed around fires and lost lives.


        • This only the begining.
          Ian Dunlop in today’s SMH
          The scientific rationale for emergency action has been well established for years. The world is currently on track for a temperature increase of 4.5 degrees by 2100 which would trigger global collapse long beforehand. Even if the Paris Climate Agreement voluntary commitments were implemented, and there is little sign of that happening, temperature increase would be 3.5 degrees probably long before 2100, a world of social chaos. A 1.5 degree increase, which now implies extremely dangerous climate change, is assured by 2030, irrespective of any action taken.
          Greg Mullins Ex Fire chief just returned from California .

          Good luck to all of us HC, last night heard from friends in the Night Cap area, the Rain forest is ablaze.
          From my place, just east of lismore we have better visibility today, maybe 3 k’s, the last few days it’s been 500 mters.
          A picture , they say, is worth a thousand words.

  9. Alp dont want to know. The party is stuffed. My local alp member is a virtue signaler and the alp is infected with union hacks and soy boy virtue signalers

    If albanese did this tmw he would win in a landslide

    • eerrr, that didn’t work out so well for the Nazis.
      The Reich shall last for a thousand years.
      Or that Ozymandius bloke eirther.

  10. It all hinges on the Fitzroy, Paddington and Canberra baristas. If this ain’t written in their skinny chai soy lattes they’ll never get the hint. Working class roots my @rse.

  11. How much longer are we to be subjected to the gaslighting of the false tropes which constantly tells us that those who still vote ALP/ Greens are thoughtful and considered types as established by the unquestionable qualifier of a few years at university and who are on universally high incomes , whilst the deplorable ex-ALP voters are all mouth breathing, check-out attendees who can’t maintain a thought in their heads ?

    If university attendance is a guarantee of intelligence then please explain the vast amounts of people who complete a useless degree which will provide nothing more than for their careers than a HECS debt ? And if income is truly a measure of cognisance, this means that the average plumber is smarter than most of those working at the CSRIO . And that Nick Kyrgios is one of the cleverest people in Australia.

    • Universities used to be places where intelligent people went to learn but also to challenge the status quo. They were hotbeds of activism. Now they’re inhabited by supine drones, tamed by screens, who wrote-learned everything they ‘know’ in order to get themselves a place in once-illustrious establishments; them and a bunch of outsiders whose sole aim is to get their hands on another passport and a host of handouts including free medical care and a state pension.

      What a shambles — all aided and abetted by immoral and incompetent public ‘servants’. We need a reset. Soon.

  12. No, its simple. The ALP leader just needs brown around his lips from sucking up to Rup. The boy wouldn’t understand what was happening.

  13. The ALP can beat the Green in the inner city seats as well if they target the voters who care about the environment. Limiting immigration should be framed in terms of sustainability, and frankly, the Australian environment is not doing too well right now.

    • Pfffft. What are you on about? Half the joint is burning down and we’re fast running out of water. Things are just fine.

    • In case you haven’t noticed, greens voters stopped caring about the environment in any meaningful way decades ago. Diversity and rights is what the greens and greens voters care about.

    • The Labor environment credentials are tarnished by their support for LNG.
      They want to Frack the whole country
      In NSW Eddie Obeid and Ian MacDonald 2 labor Ministers wrote some of the most reprehensible legislation ever devised,that stole property owners right to their land.
      The Petroleum (Onshore )Act 1991.

  14. Importing lots and lots of socially conservative immigrants while virtue signaling is self defeating.

    • You and I can see it but progressives are not very bright – by default.

      Don’t get me wrong – they think they’re utter geniuses and walk like it too, but no.

  15. It is a struggle to see much success in the future of the ALP when basically every media outlet in the country from the ABC to Sky News is aligned with the Coalition in at least rhetoric if not outright support.

  16. “Labor MUST recapture at least five QLD seats for it to govern. Yet, bizarrely, the review offered only a couple of sentences on it.“

    Too bad Labor has said it lost because of the religious, dumbos and idiots, the financially unstable and coal miners – and that these were over-represented in Queensland!

    Can see the pre election memes and saturation advertising already.

  17. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    Lots of people saying they’ll never vote Labor, but they don’t want to vote for the LNP or Greens either.
    Yet Via preferences most of your votes will go to Labor or the LNP anyway.
    Unfortunately for Labor all our “Populist parties” are centre Right (at best) with no “Populist” centre Left alternative for protest votes to be directed back to Labor, I’d say Labor is going to be Fked for quite some time on that factor alone.
    A alternative centre Left “Gunnamatta” party would get my vote,…hell I’d probably join it!
    But would the Toadying corporate Media allow it enough oxygen to have any kind of Chance?
    How many votes would be required to get a new party off the Ground?
    A million?
    A take over and reform of the ALP would take less than 50 thousand people.

    Sigh,…. yet we’ve all been programmed to not really give a FK though haven’t we.
    Political party member is about as “Cool” a thing to be as Boy Scout leader, Catholic priest or real estate agent.
    Making one the subject of ridicule and revulsion.
    And yet if more people don’t activity participate more nothing will change.

    • If the party is ignoring the current party membership, what makes you think “A take over and reform of the ALP would take less than 50 thousand people.”
      Why would they not just ignore those people as well? They are quite successfully ignoring the whole electorate.
      You come from a mistaken belief that the leadership “represents” the members of the party and the electorate.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        There are democratic structures within our 2 main parties that must be attended to.
        An active and demanding rank and file can not be ignored by the leaderships.

        There ARE pathways to completely reforming the ALP and the LNP.

        This is why the leadership of both parties do so little active recruiting of new members.

        The “leadership” want just enough people to hand out the flyers on election day without having to answer to a sizable and demanding broard based membership.

        I bring up often What I view as an insincere and cynical feminist policy of parachuting women into safe seats as MPs and yet at the same time putting Zero effort into recruiting females into the Rank and file.
        Most meetings and shindiggs Ive attended over the last 4 to 5 years are 80 to 90% male!
        Much inward drawing of breath is heard whenever I bring up the fact our Party does so little recruiting.
        I have seen none! in all my years in the Party

        The very FACT the leaderships of our Major parties don’t want you to Join should be reason enough in itself to do so!

        • “There are democratic structures within our 2 main parties that must be attended to.”
          Are these similar to the democratic structures that must be adhered to that produce a parliament so in tune with the will of the people?
          And why aren;t these structures already producing a party that reflects the will of it’s members?
          If the current policy platform is truly the will of existing members then start a new party as the current membership is useless.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            It’s just a simple numbers game Bj,….the thing is the current membership has been pacified and marginalised out of decesion making.
            But that could be changed a hell of a lot easier than creating a New Party from scratch.

          • Your arguments seems not particularly logical.
            50k people could change the party policy direction.
            Party doesn’t reflect current members views because “current membership has been pacified and marginalised out of decesion making”
            but “There are democratic structures within our 2 main parties that must be attended to.
            An active and demanding rank and file can not be ignored by the leaderships.”

            It’s a thing.

          • It’s real simple BJ, you take over key branches and party positions by having a galvanised and centrally led 50k “new members”. You get them to join in the right numbers and right places and steam roll the establishment with simple numbers that win every internal issue put to vote. If it’s done right you already have enough key branches/positions locked down before the rusted hiearachy catch on and then you get the current members on side by selling them the truth – we’re taking over because this party has lost its way. Boom, ALP 2.0. This is what those right wingers did with the Young Nationals, didn’t work because they used complete numpties.

            I was invloved in a plan to do this already here in SE QLD, we couldn’t get enough numbers because no one gives enough of a fcvk when it comes down to actually sacrificing some of your free time for making change. This was 8 years ago, maybe people would be more willing now….

    • The preferences system is grubby and frankly, immoral. True democracy is subverted by this system, as is making voting mandatory.

    • “A take over and reform of the ALP would take less than 50 thousand people.”

      50 thousand could also start their own party, so why work with the corpse of the Labor party?

      Party of the move to not work with the Labor party, is to abandon those that remain there.

      There human dross that voices much of Labor party ‘virtue’ shouldn’t be considered something worthwhile of being absorbed, of being compromised with. It needs to be left behind as the new, sole representation of 2020+ ALP, and then go through cataclysmic failure and destruction.

      Be woke, go broke.

      • Yup. New party could be called True Labor!

        Almost the entire working class would defect leaving the current party with a progressive rabble

      • 50 thousand could also start their own party, so why work with the corpse of the Labor party?

        Because roughly 1/3 of the population will vote Labor, regardless of what Labor are actually saying or doing.

        Taking advantage of that is a lot easier than getting 1/3 of the population to change their mind.

        Especially when you have an electoral system like ours.

  18. Jumping jack flash

    It was easy for the Libs, all they needed to do was to do a bit of social engineering. They were just about there.
    It is much, much harder for Labor because Labor is still associated with poor people. The workers.

    No “worker” wants to stay a worker these days. The worker has been replaced by the “aspiring investor” who just needs a bit of debt to get their dream going. The worker doesn’t expect that Labor will get them the debt they need.

    That said, if Labor was to go down the nationalist road, then they may be able to leverage a Donald Trump-style win. However the person in the hotseat will need to be a Clive Palmer or someone else obscenely rich to be able to pull that one off with any credibility.

    • Latham could pull it off easily

      He has the common sense and no-bullsh1t approach to sway your average bogan/queenslander
      He’s charismatic and a good communicator

  19. The leadership of the ALP is too corrupted by virtue signallers to be reformed. Nobody listens to anything they say any more. They are objects of ridicule and are doomed.