Labor still dithering over policy and political strategy TROY BRAMSTON Follow @TroyBramston 12:00AM JULY 9, 2019 Richard Marles, Labor’s deputy leader, told me a fortnight ago that the party was going through a “grieving process”. It would take some time before fully comprehending the reasons behind its shock election defeat and settling on a policy and political strategy for the next few years. Marles is right about the need for Labor to examine comprehensively why it failed to win key seats and suffered huge swings in many of its held seats, keeping many with only slim margins. But Labor cannot afford to remain in the doldrums for long. Its policy and political strategy during the past month has been a mess. The Coalition racked up a major political win with the passage of its $158 billion tax cuts through the parliament. The government was able to negotiate the legislation through the Senate with the backing of four crossbenchers, sidelining One Nation and the Greens, and not needing Labor’s support. Labor’s approach to the tax cuts could not have been more muddled. Leader Anthony Albanese and Treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers argued strongly against supporting stages two and three of the tax cuts. They wanted to bring the second stage forward and defer the third stage. Labor Senate leader Penny Wong criticised the crossbenchers who backed the government’s tax cuts. But, having argued against the tax cuts for months and proposing a series of changes to the package, Labor voted for it. Labor only did so because the government had struck a deal with the crossbench to see it legislated. By that stage, it didn’t matter what Labor did because the Coalition already had the numbers in the Senate. It gets worse. Having opposed the tax cuts but voted for them, Labor is not ruling out going to the next election with a pledge to repeal the third stage. So Labor may promise to repeal a legislated tax cut. Is it serious? The Coalition will hang this around Labor’s neck like an albatross for the next three years. Labor has had more positions on the Coalition’s tax package than there are in the Kama Sutra. Labor remains divided on the tax cuts. Some in the party wanted to oppose them because of their regressive design while others pragmatically wanted to accept that the government won a mandate for them and move on to other issues. Those who have argued for these positions in the shadow cabinet and partyroom have conceded that the handling of this issue has been a shambles. On that, at least, they are united. It has exposed a deep fault-line about what Labor believes in and who it represents. For now, there are serious concerns within Labor’s senior ranks about tactics and strategy. Albanese was all over the shop on the tax cuts. It took weeks for Labor to settle on a final position and it did so only minutes before the pivotal vote. For all his faults, Bill Shorten ran a smarter show than Albanese. Nevertheless, I applaud Albanese for having the guts to expel John Setka, the rogue militant Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union leader who has been convicted for harassing his wife, Emma Walters, in the most vile and menacing terms. Shorten would never have taken on the CFMEU. But Albanese’s handling of Setka’s expulsion also has worried Labor MPs. Albanese made it clear Setka would be expelled, declaring himself to be judge, jury and executioner. But, at Setka’s request, Albanese delayed a meeting of Labor’s national executive to formally determine it. Setka now seeks an injunction in the Victorian Supreme Court. The saga goes on. If it is already decided, what was Albanese waiting for? Labor has established a campaign review chaired by former South Australian premier Jay Weatherill and former federal minister Craig Emerson. There was opposition within the party to appointing Emerson, so a panel with first-rate campaign experience was also established. It comprises former party officials senator Anthony Chisholm, NSW MP John Graham and former West Australian assistant secretary Lenda Oshalem. Australian Services Union assistant secretary Linda White is also appointed. Labor’s review of the 2016 election campaign was a farce. Individual chapters were written by a dozen or so people. It was not made available to party members. MPs had to go to the party’s national secretariat to read it under close supervision. There was no accountability against the recommendations. It was a waste of time. Noah Carroll, Labor’s national secretary, has seen the writing on the wall and resigned. He was likely to have had support to stay. Labor’s campaign organisation was dysfunctional. Carroll was seen by many to be secretive and controlling, and failed to devise an effective strategy that inoculated the party against attacks on its policies. Yet he told senior Labor figures they had won the election. Paul Erickson, Labor’s assistant secretary, is the frontrunner to succeed Carroll. (Albanese has told colleagues he would prefer former assistant secretary Nick Martin.) Erickson is a hard Left factional warrior who idolises British Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Two years ago, he argued that Corbyn was “within the mainstream of postwar social democracy” and his radical agenda could be “just as effective here”. British Labour is rotting from the head down. It is attracting 18 per cent of the vote, the lowest in polling history. Corbyn is unelectable. If Australian Labor took Erickson’s advice and shifted further to the left using Corbyn as a role model, the party would confirm it has learned nothing since the election and would consign itself to more years in the political wilderness. .