By Denis Hay
Why Does Labor Seek Support from the Disgraced LNP to Pass Legislation?
Description
Analysing why Labor seeks LNP support and bypasses Greens, passing laws affecting Australia’s political landscape and using public money.
Introduction: The Puzzle of Labor’s Legislative Strategy
Labor’s collaboration with the LNP for passing legislation has raised questions about its political strategy. If the legislation is beneficial, why avoid the Greens and other progressive MPs? This article unravels the complexities behind these decisions and their implications for Australia’s political landscape. We’ll explore the motivations, consequences, and potential reforms to ensure that legislation truly serves the public.
Labor’s Strategic Reliance on the LNP
1. Historical Context: Labor’s Legislative Alliances
Labor’s history of seeking support from the LNP is not new. This strategy reflects a broader trend where parties prioritize stability and perceived centrism over ideological alignment. Labor’s shift towards neoliberalism has made it more amenable to conservative policies, resulting in a partnership with the LNP that undermines progressive agendas.
Neoliberal Influence on Labor’s Policy Shifts
Labor’s policies have increasingly mirrored neoliberal economic principles, focusing on market-driven solutions. This ideological alignment with the LNP on economic matters has helped their cooperation on legislation, especially concerning financial and corporate regulations. The influence of neoliberalism on both parties has eroded the distinct policy lines that traditionally separated them, making collaboration more possible.
Supporting Reference: Neoliberal Influence on Australian Politics.
2. Motivations Behind Seeking LNP Support
Labor’s reliance on LNP support stems from several strategic and ideological factors.
Political Strategy and Power Dynamics
Labor often faces a choice: engage in complex negotiations with the Greens and crossbench members or secure a more straightforward agreement with the LNP. The latter is often seen to avoid political fragmentation and keep control over legislative processes.
Perception of Stability: Aligning with the LNP allows Labor to project a stable image, particularly to centrist voters who may be wary of progressive policies.
Centrism as an Electoral Strategy: Labor’s focus on appealing to a broad voter base, including those sympathetic to conservative policies, has led to compromises on key issues, from economic policies to social welfare reforms.
Ideological Alignment with Neoliberal Policies
Labor’s shift towards a centrist, neoliberal framework means it often shares common ground with the LNP, particularly on economic issues like budget surplus targets and corporate regulations. This alignment reduces the ideological friction in legislative negotiations, making LNP support a convenient choice.
Supporting Reference: Labor’s Ideological Shift.
3. Consequences for Policy and Governance
This reliance on LNP support has profound implications for policy outcomes and public trust.
Legislation Favoured by the LNP
Labor’s partnership with the LNP often results in legislation that favours corporate interests over citizen welfare. For example:
Tax Policies: Recent tax cuts helping high-income earners were passed with LNP support, sidelining calls from the Greens and crossbench members for more progressive taxation.
Environmental Regulations: LNP-backed legislation tends to weaken environmental protections, undermining Australia’s commitments to climate action.
Marginalization of Progressive Policies
Relying on the LNP sidelines progressive policies, as seen in the debate over climate action and social welfare reforms. Labor’s reluctance to collaborate with the Greens and other progressive MPs prevents the implementation of robust policies that could address systemic issues such as housing affordability and environmental sustainability.
Erosion of Public Trust
Voters perceive this collaboration as a betrayal of Labor’s progressive roots, leading to disillusionment. Public confidence in Labor’s ability to stand for citizen interests diminishes, contributing to political apathy and disengagement.
Supporting Reference: Impact of LNP-Labor Collaboration.
The Cost of Legislative Compromise
1. The Human Impact of Diluted Legislation
When Labor chooses LNP support over progressive alliances, the result is often legislation that does not address the needs of vulnerable communities. For instance:
Social Services Cuts: Legislation that prioritizes budget cuts over expanding social services disproportionately affects low-income families, the elderly, and marginalized communities.
Inadequate Climate Action: Compromises on environmental policies mean Australia falls short of its climate goals, worsening issues like bushfires and extreme weather events that directly affect citizens’ lives.
These compromises have long-term implications, perpetuating social inequalities and environmental degradation. The public, particularly those who voted for progressive change, feels increasingly disenfranchised.
Emotional Toll and Disillusionment
The belief that Labor is willing to compromise core values for political expediency leads to a sense of betrayal among its traditional voter base. This emotional toll is clear in declining membership and support for the party, as voters turn to alternative parties or disengage from politics altogether.
Supporting Reference: Voter Disillusionment with Labor.
2. Undermining Democratic Processes
By bypassing the Greens and crossbench members, Labor undermines the democratic process. The Greens and other MPs stand for diverse viewpoints that are crucial for a robust parliamentary debate. Excluding them from significant legislative decisions marginalizes these perspectives and weakens the democratic process.
Loss of Representative Diversity
This approach narrows the range of perspectives considered in legislation, leading to policies that do not reflect the diverse needs of Australian society. It perpetuates a system where the interests of a few outweigh the common good, fostering cynicism about the effectiveness of democratic institutions.
Supporting Reference: Challenges to Democratic Representation.
Advocating for a More Inclusive Legislative Process
1. Embracing Collaboration with the Greens and Crossbench Members
Benefits of a Diverse Coalition
Collaborating with the Greens and crossbench members can lead to more comprehensive and effective legislation. For example:
Climate Policies: Engaging with the Greens can strengthen environmental legislation, ensuring that Australia meets its international commitments and mitigates climate risks.
Social Welfare Reforms: Collaboration with progressive MPs can lead to stronger social safety nets, addressing issues like homelessness and income inequality more effectively.
Building a Progressive Alliance
Labor can form a progressive alliance with the Greens and other crossbench members to push through legislation that genuinely helps Australians. This would involve:
Negotiating on Common Ground: Finding shared goals, such as healthcare reform or environmental protection, to build a cohesive legislative agenda.
Transparent Policy Development: Engaging with stakeholders and the public to develop policies that reflect the needs and aspirations of all Australians.
Supporting Reference: Benefits of Progressive Collaboration.
2. Reconnecting with Voter Base through Policy Transparency
Policy Platforms Aligned with Citizen Needs
Labor must commit to policy platforms that align with the needs of its voter base. This involves:
Developing Clear Policy Positions: Communicating policy positions clearly to differentiate from the LNP and avoid perceptions of ideological compromise.
Engaging with Community Concerns: Conducting consultations and forums to ensure that policy platforms reflect the concerns of the community, particularly on issues like healthcare, housing, and climate action.
Rebuilding Trust through Accountability
Labor should implement mechanisms for accountability, such as independent reviews of legislation and public forums for policy discussion. This would show a commitment to transparency and responsiveness.
Supporting Reference: Policy Transparency and Public Trust.
Reclaiming Labor’s Progressive Vision
Labor’s reliance on LNP support to pass legislation is a strategic choice that compromises its progressive principles. By prioritizing political expediency over collaboration with the Greens and crossbench members, Labor undermines democratic processes and alienates its voter base. To regain public trust and create meaningful change, Labor must embrace a more inclusive approach, aligning its policies with the needs of the Australian people.
Call to Action
If you believe in a more transparent and inclusive political system, share this article and join the conversation on how Labor can better serve Australian citizens. Explore more resources on our website: Social Justice Australia for insights on building a compassionate and ethical political system.
Question for Readers
Do you think Labor’s strategy of collaborating with the LNP is justified, or should it seek alliances with more progressive parties to achieve meaningful reforms?
Social Sharing
Share this article with your network to spark a discussion on how we can hold political parties accountable and advocate for policies that serve the public interest.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.
[textblock style=”7″]
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 gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
The Greens and Independents are coming for the cosy duopoly,threatening the status quo,and they are crapping their collective trousers.Change is already under way and it won’t be denied.The Greens are where Labor should be on policy ,but neoliberalism has emasculated them, and the Teals have taken over where a moderate Liberal Party used to be.As for the Nationals,they are a hugely over represented pack of halfwits: exhibit A Littlebrain.
Surely it’s to be celebrated as an example of bipartisanship and working across the aisle, defying US GOP and Fox culture, to gridlock legislative processes and liberal democracy?
And the Greens, why are they so precious and seen as an alternative?
I agree with Penny Wong and many ALP normies who despair at the Greens’ issues, tactics and culture being such a broad church of RWNJ ecology types through to the left.
Bob Brown’s hero was Menzies, he was a member of the young Libs and he also indulged some dog whistling of immigrants and population growth for alleged environmental and societal issues, when SPA was trying to have public figures oppose immigration.
However, Greens are remiss on carbon regulation, own members’/voters’ NIMBYism and running stunts masquerading as working with ALP and allegedly for liberal democracy.
One knows a former Greens state candidate who exemplified the issues, chosen at 40 years as they were one of the younger branch members, Brit immigrant who echoed the SPA, TAPRI & subscribed to the far right business blog MB, venting about (non white) immigrants and population growth, spoke of the ‘great replacement’, deemed Australians to be all morons and something big was going to kick off (Christchurch… then they ran a mile…..)
So on the Greens, thanks but no thanks as ALP generally has better and broader policies, if they can get past RW MSM, LNP, their own voters/members, and the Greens.
PS On this duopoly talking point or BS that minor parties complain about, in UK demanding PR for themselves, but ignore an unelected Lords begging for PR? i
It’s an old Kremlin tactic of ‘whataboutery’ to deflect from perps by linking to others eg. blaming US, NATO, EU etc. and Ukraine for invading itself by the right to run protection for Putin.
Locally RW MSM tries to get at and nobble older ALP types and others by having them complain that both parties are the same, so don’t vote; more glib BS for low info persuadables and voter suppression tactic (eg Trump’s ‘swamp’ & Voter ID etc.l
Andrew, so linking the rapid growth in levels of existent human population as being attendant with levels of environmental degradation and decrease in levels of localised biodiversity is somehow linked to absolving Putin of any blame for voluntarily ordering Russian forces to invade the Ukraine?
‘Interesting’ take.
This is another of those really valuable articles you see here for the lack of anything better from the mainstream.
Briefly, Labor’s timidity remains a long term source of exasperation and I can’t tolerate its conseravative outlook at the moment, although Dutton seems boxed in so maybe that approach also works in a distant sort of way. Fancy not even commenting appropriately after the pager attack!
Is it just me or is there some sort of techno hitch, whole sentences seem missing?
Tha ALP conveniently cosying up with Dutton will very likely cost them votes, and possibly seats, at the next election.
The bulk of this bleed will not flow right to the coalition, nor left towards the Greens, but will more likely directly benefit Teal candidates.
Last election the teals swelled their HoR numbers considerably, largely at the expense of coalition complacent and arrogance.
Based on Albanese’s habit of deploying flippant dismissal when Teals articulate valid community concerns, I suspect next time round the Teals will directly benefit from a backlash against perceived ALP arrogance in government, and might even end up holding the balance of power.
Question for Readers
Do you think Labor’s strategy of collaborating with the LNP is justified, or should it seek alliances with more progressive parties to achieve meaningful reforms?
Am I mising something here ? It is not in Peter Dutton’s DNA to collaborate with Labor – the last opportunity was with Malcolm Turnbull but those day are gone.
Internationally, regionally – the Indo-Pacific (particularly in East and South East Asia) and domestically, there are huge issues at play that link to Europe, America, the Middle East, Africa, South-Central Asia and Russia. To think that Oz has huge mineral and energy reserves, and a locale that insulates us from the issues, is simplistic, wrong and naive – and yet probably the viewpoint of a significant proportion of folks in Oz. The reality is we are inextricably linked and reliant on the rest of the world, whatever their stripes.
And in that regard we have global obligations that significantly affect our domestic security and functionality, in trade, economy, ecology and defence. After say 40 years of intense neoliberalism, and in that, America’s hegemonic embedment of its MICs and private equity domination, the rapid depletions associated with neoliberalism has been well recognised, but it is proving very difficult for all to extricate themselves. People became accustomed to meoliberalism’s bling, unsustainable growth and wealth aspiration all driven by massive and often irrecoverable debt accruing down the generations.
In the wake of the LNP’s feckless incompetence and further embedment in neoliberalism, Labor has been left with a prodigious task of reform, and given the stickiness of neoliberalism, it is a massive and slow-motion juggling act to be performed over time, through intense vulnerability for the entire world. Whilst everyone is wondering and whining with their expectant hands out, it is not possible to fulfil everyone’s ambitions all at once. Reform has to be carefully crafted over time, or it will fail together with our wellbeing.
It’s not like the ‘old days’. The application of the core values of the traditional voter base has to be modernised to cope with the current vulnerabilities and rapidity of change through high-tech, financial complexity, skilled labour and brainstrust shortage, and political precarity, globally and domestically. Suffice it to say that Labor has little choice but to work from within the neoliberal system extant, moving out of it by reform, as is slowly being attempted by many globally. For example Labor utilizes the large and competitive private equity sphere in its renewable energy CIS scheme where the govt puts out competitive tenders where it provides revenue underwriting on a ‘floor’ and ‘ceiling’ basis, which reduces utilization of taxpayer funds, yet accelerates the project rollouts, providing both incentives and risk minimization for the state and in some cases resumption of the asset over time. This leverages the massive funds accumulated in private equity via the devices of neoliberalism.
This is not Labor moving into neoliberal policy, but utilizing the inactive funds accumulated via neoliberalism – neoliberalism that is failing because of its inability to create beneficial projects of its own making. It could be seen as a socialistic clawback from neoliberalism.
Of course, the guile of msm (especially led by the Murdoch tentacles), and Labor’s political competitors seeking their sinecures, frame it for their own purposes as ‘Labor becoming neoliberal’ and / or stupid from any perspective. A notion to which I do not ascribe, in the main I see it as divisive political blah blah, which Labor has to navigate very carefully.
Unfortunately, by the wiles social media and the mainstream media, people are being deterred from thinking, and encourged towards individulaized rights, absolutism, extremism and sensation, which tends to make everyone angry about everything, and full of a need to blame, rather than negotiate and compromise for the greater good.
So I see the fundamental premise of the article as flawed.
some interesting posts. Still worth a shot, this valuable site.
I completely understand why Labor refuse to collaborate with the Greens. The most obvious thing about the Greens is they have absolutely no idea about how to actually run a country. They are solely focused on a couple of minor issues for which their demands are totally outrageous and obscene with the cost of these obscene and clearly not their problem. And that is my point – they have their demands on certain issues and will hold the entire country to ransom (like a spoiled child), they don’t care about the cost or even that it is not even possible, they will just do a complete dummy spit if they don’t get their way. The rest of the country and the economy can go to hell, they want what they want.
pw,
Me tends to find it far less so than in days of yore, but i appreciate the tone of Denis’ articles
They make a sincere attempt to propose some potentially positive improvements, and are framed within relatively realistic parameters (the art of the achievable & all that).
It seems to me that Labor will soon be reduced to minority government. I am not the only Labor voter who has been frustrated and disappointed by what I hoped to be a bold, progressive Labor government instead of this mediocre, compromised one.
I’m waiting with bated breath at the imminent announcement of P Duddy and his brain fart about the LNP nookalear policy (with added invaluable input from Gina no doubt…kissy, kissy, Gina).
“Yes, we have a nookalear policy. We can’t tell you how much it’s going to cost because Gina…kissy…kissy…hasn’t finished setting up her nookalear power station construction companies yet.”
Great analysis of why both soft-Labor and the not-really-Liberal parties are bleeding primary votes at every election. With luck this entrenched political duopoly will soon be overthrown.