Labor and LNP Cooperation in Unpopular Policies
By Denis Hay
Description:
Explore Labor and LNP cooperation, how bipartisan deals harm democracy, and how Australia can reform using monetary sovereignty.
Introduction
The Australian Labor Party has long stood as the champion of workers and the underprivileged. Yet, in recent years, it has become increasingly common to see Labor aligning with the Liberal National Party (LNP) on policies that Australians oppose.
This collaboration undermines Labor’s values and reinforces a belief that both major parties prioritise corporate and political expediency over public interest.
This trend brings to mind the saying: “If you lie down with dogs, you get fleas.” Labor’s alliances with the LNP may be politically expedient, but the consequences of adopting neoliberal and corporate-driven policies tarnish its reputation.
This article explores the historical and current implications of Labor’s cooperation with the LNP, its consequences for democracy, and pathways for reform.
Historical Context of Labor and LNP Cooperation
Examples of Bipartisanship
Labor and the LNP have often worked together to push through controversial policies, including:
1. The AUKUS Agreement
Labor and the LNP joined forces to commit Australia to decades of nuclear submarine deals.
The lack of public consultation and the massive redirection of funds from pressing domestic needs has led to widespread criticism.
2. Privatisation Initiatives
From utilities to transportation systems, both parties have supported privatising public assets, leading to increased costs for everyday Australians and decreased service accountability.
3. Restrictive Welfare Measures
Programs like the Cashless Debit Card, supported by both parties, restrict welfare recipients’ autonomy and stigmatize vulnerable Australians.
The Roots of Labor and LNP Cooperation
Political Expediency: Labor often aligns with the LNP to speed up legislation, particularly in a divided Senate.
Corporate Influence: Both parties receive significant donations from industries that receive help from neoliberal policies.
Media Narratives: Mainstream media often portrays bipartisanship as pragmatic, sidelining public opposition.
The Relevance of ‘If You Lie Down with Dogs, You Get Fleas’
This proverb highlights the inevitability of consequences when associating with questionable entities. For Labor, aligning with the LNP on unpopular policies tarnishes its identity as a progressive force. Here’s how the proverb applies to Labor’s current trajectory:
Labor’s Loss of Integrity
By aligning with the LNP, Labor increasingly adopts neoliberal values that contradict its traditional principles of fairness, equity, and public welfare. This compromises its integrity, leaving voters questioning whether the party still stands for their interests.
Public Distrust and Voter Disillusionment
When voters see Labor agreeing with the LNP on contentious issues, they perceive both parties as indistinguishable. This erodes trust, drives disillusionment, and fosters voter apathy. Bipartisanship may appear efficient, but it often sidelines the very citizens these policies should serve.
Reinforcing the Status Quo
Labor’s cooperation with the LNP allows neoliberal policies to dominate Australian politics, reinforcing economic inequality and limiting progressive reforms. This results in policies that prioritize profits over people, deepening the societal divides Labor once looked to bridge.
Damaging Long-Term Reputation
Labor’s willingness to “lie down with dogs” risks long-term damage. As the proverb warns, such associations leave indelible marks. For Labor, the “fleas” come in the form of diminished public trust, alienated progressive voters, and a tarnished legacy.
LNP’s Role in Unpopular Policies
The LNP plays a pivotal role in shaping and driving bipartisan policies that harm the public. Its neoliberal agenda prioritizes corporate interests, often compelling Labor to follow its lead to avoid political isolation.
Political Opportunism
The LNP uses bipartisan agreements to deflect criticism:
Shifting Responsibility: By gaining Labor’s support, the LNP portrays controversial policies as collective decisions, reducing accountability.
Framing the Narrative: The LNP justifies unpopular policies as being in the “national interest,” pressuring Labor to align to avoid appearing uncooperative.
Exploiting Media Influence: The LNP leverages its media allies to present bipartisanship as a necessity, suppressing dissenting voices.
Neoliberal Ideology as a Driving Force
The LNP’s policies are deeply rooted in neoliberalism, which prioritizes market solutions over public welfare:
Privatisation Push: Selling public assets reduces government responsibility while increasing costs for citizens.
Austerity Measures: The LNP’s obsession with budget surpluses leads to reduced funding for essential services.
Welfare Stigma: Restrictive welfare measures, framed as “fiscal responsibility,” marginalize the most vulnerable Australians.
Impact on Democratic Institutions
The LNP’s influence goes beyond policy:
Corporate Lobbying: Both parties rely on donations from industries like mining and defence, leading to policies that help the few over the many.
Stifling Alternatives: Electoral laws and funding structures limit the influence of minor parties and independents, perpetuating a two-party dominance.
The Costs of LNP-Driven Policies
Economic Inequality: Privatisation and austerity measures disproportionately harm low-income Australians.
Erosion of Public Services: Cuts to health, education, and welfare leave Australians struggling to access necessities.
Public Disillusionment: Citizens grow increasingly distrustful of political institutions dominated by two-party compromises.
Reclaiming Labor’s Core Values
Rethinking Priorities
Labor can restore its credibility by:
Investing in Public Services: Fully fund education, healthcare, and housing to meet citizens’ needs.
Utilising Monetary Sovereignty: Embrace Australia’s ability to issue currency to fund public welfare instead of supporting neoliberal austerity.
Reforming Tax Policy: Reintroduce progressive taxation to ensure corporations contribute fairly.
Rebuilding Grassroots Connections
Labor must re-engage its voter base:
Host public forums to listen to citizen concerns.
Empower grassroots campaigns to influence policy decisions.
Promoting Democratic Reform
Strengthening Accountability
Donation Transparency: Mandate real-time reporting of political donations to limit corporate influence.
Independent Oversight: Set up a robust anti-corruption commission to hold politicians accountable.
Expanding Representation
Proportional Representation: Allow greater parliamentary diversity by enabling minor parties and independents to influence policy.
Reforming Electoral Laws: Simplify pathways for citizens to challenge entrenched political power.
Why This Trend Matters
Implications for Democracy
Weakened Trust: Voter disillusionment with bipartisan compromises undermines democratic engagement.
Stifled Innovation: Entrenched power in two party’s limits Australia’s ability to adapt to changing societal needs.
Long-Term Risks for Labor
Progressive voters may shift to the Greens or independents, weakening Labor’s electoral relevance.
Labor risks becoming indistinguishable from the LNP, alienating its core base.
Conclusion
The proverb “If you lie down with dogs, you get fleas” warns of the inevitable consequences of associating with problematic entities. Labor’s alignment with the LNP on unpopular policies compromises its integrity, erodes public trust, and reinforces neoliberalism.
To regain its standing as a progressive force, Labor must embrace bold reforms, rebuild grassroots connections, and champion policies that prioritize public welfare.
By breaking free from these associations, Labor can reclaim its identity and offer Australians the representation they deserve.
Question for Readers
Do you think Labor can regain its identity as a progressive party? What steps should it take? Share your thoughts below!
Call to Action
If you found this article insightful, explore political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty on Social Justice Australia.
Click on our “Reader Feedback” menu. Let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!
Additionally, leave a comment about this article below.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
9 comments
Login here Register here-
Harry Lime -
Hotspringer -
paul walter -
Andyfiftysix -
Pauline Westwoid -
Canguro -
Denis Hay -
Michael Taylor -
Denis Hay
Return to home pageDenis,you’ve outlined all the reasons why Labor will be a minority government (at best) next time..with the proviso that not too many people have lost their collective minds and follow the example set by the yanks.We should be hoping for a sizeable enough crossbench to force Labor into remembering their roots,and put the citizenry first.
Albo has been bitterly disappointing, and I doubt that he could ,or should remain as leader,there’s got to be more than a few disgruntled members in team Labor.There’s far too many stale ‘lifers’ left, and a sizeable shake up has got to happen both in their ideas and their personnel.Given the decisions made so far,there’s still plenty of time to fuck themselves up,and put constable Dutton in charge of a fast train to Shitsville.we’ll soon find out.
Unfortunately for the country, you are spot on. Put the duopoly last!
Ive felt that Labor has often held the hope of integrity for the public.
I would have thought, ten years in the wilderness for Labor might have taught the ALP leadership the cost of alienating the rank and file and the masses.. Not a hope. Perhaps it was too late anyhow. After all the industrial base is gone and with it hope of finance outside of corporations. The last decade has seen the ALP parliamentary elite, led by the likes of Marles, side with the tories on issue that are paramount, such as releasing details of FTA’s, FOI’s, surveillance and data intrusions and efforts to geld media, from cuts to the ABC, to worse servility in involving the Murdochs. Then there are issues of corporate accountability (Banks), Price Waterhouse, robodebt and privatisations, down to the public service itself.
Neoliberalism embraced by the ALP has led to attacks on public infrastructure and the notion that government is of and for and from the people rather than for the benefit of a few oligarchs.
Globalisation of the neo liberalism sort was said to open a brave new world. But it seems to have changed the outlook from the fair go mentality to the tax dodging of offshore TNC’s and foreign countries involved in obscure negotations for billion dollar contracts that are paid for by us with contracts and negotiations specifically hidden from public view.
As Gaza has shown, we have lost our sovereignty itself in the non-disclosure and backing off from legitimate comments, even on issues grossly at odds with aussie interests and values. We now seem to be a sort of “Vichy”protectorate wit those once trusted now seeming to operate n behalf of those whose interests are antithetical to Australia and its needs.
Labor’s problem is that it has accepted the neocon agenda as the right coarse. Only it wants to do it properly. This is the fault of us dickhead voters voting against labor when they had serious policies……we voted back the dumb ones. The can has been kicked down the road so many times, you have to wonder at the seriousness of their endeavours. The timidity of their intellectual output is what frightens me. Super was the last big fuckup. Soving a problem of ideology with another manufactured industry. It would have been cheaper for everyone to just raise the fucking pension. Somehow, there is a disonance in our intellectual output. Streamlining and efficiency only works for the private secotor…. governments , not so much. We prefer to be creative, add another layer. The department of overseeing entitlements is bigger than the entitlements. Robodebt was a classic extrapolation of the mantra the liberals chanted over the years…..still waiting for criminal charges. As i said labor agrees with all the shit only it wants to do it legally and better. And then when they have the power, they refuse to use the political capital to actually make a difference. This is fertile land for people like Trump.
The department of entitlements is such a big part of the system. For me it became reality when i got divorced. I was already a pensioner too. It insisted to know what capital i had after the divorce. Who in their right mind thinks i will have more after? Then when the forms were submitted…..they werent found and my pension was terminated. After another wasted three hrs on the phone, my forms were suddenly found in the intray…pension fully restored. These issues are a clown show of ineptitude and inefficiency. It costs more to regulate than for somebody to use common sense. A couple of million people can attest to the stupid system we have.
I’m sorry, but I find it difficult to read an article which keeps repeating an ungrammatical American phrase. The correct form is ‘lie down with dogs.’
I agreed with the thesis. I am one of many Labor voters who will not vote Labor again.
@Pauline Westwoid, I’m sorry too, to read of your distress in the face of an ungrammatical American phrase. It’s challenging, I admit, to be burdened with a hypersensitive awareness wrt how words are presented on the page… all those finicky aspects like lexical appropriateness, awareness of syntactical norms, correct spelling as well as correct tenses, not to overdo it but for the purists it’s a
jinglejanglejungle and also way beyond time for us Aussies to institute our own version of the hallowed Académie Française; we very much need to safeguard our grammar from falling into the jingoistic and vulgar patterns that typify much of American discourse.Lay down with dogs, indeed! Well-spotted, like a Dalmation.
Hi Pauline, thank you for pointing out my error. I have now corrected the article on my website.
And I have changed it here, too.
Thank you, Michael.