My post yesterday on the Queensland election and what it means for the ALP's future drew some criticism along the lines that a) internal structures don't matter much because the voters don't care and b) the ALP has been in trouble before and has come back. These are good and valid points, but I think they are not relevant this time, here's why.
Organisational structure does matter
The popular idea that the voters don't care about organisation and structure is itself a symptom of Labor's problems. Labor used to see itself as a 'movement' not just a professional political party. It saw the involvement of a large section of the community in the movement, particularly through the union movement, as a particular strength. In fact, the ALP was Australia's first mass party and its arrival forced the conservative side of politics to become more inclusive and seek the participation of community-based organisations. A few weeks ago I wrote a piece that explores the long-term decline of the ALP's base. Essentially the decline of the blue collar workforce, and blue collar unionism, has seen the ALP's base shrink. One reason for advocating a move to some form of primary style preselections is to re-engage with a broader base and to regain some sense of the party as a movement, a party of the people as well as for the people.
Why it won't be easy to come back this time
The second point relates to the one above. The decline in the ALP's base has become reflected in a preciptious fall in the ALP's primary vote.
There have been 43 federal elections. Exclude the first three, when the ALP was establishing itself as a serious contender, and 1931 and 1934 when the ALP in NSW was split from the federal ALP, that leaves 38. Of those 38, the ALP's primary vote has fallen below 40 per cent on just 7 occasions.
The first occasion was in 1966 (39.98%), the next occasion was 1977 (39.65%), both of these election outcomes were historic and disastrous defeats for the ALP (and both prompted internal reforms). The next occasion was 1990 (39.44%), which saw the emergence of the Greens and their displacement of the Democrats, the first time the ALP actually won an election with a primary vote below 40%. Note that all three occasions here the ALP vote was just a tick under 40%.
The ALP then lost the 2001 and 2004 elections with 37% of the primary vote, the cumulative result of these two defeats was to give the Howard Government control of the Senate. Then the ALP "won" the 2010 election with 37%, and its reliance on the Greens has become more formal and obvious. It is doubtful that the ALP can win with anything below 37%.
Over the past 20 years, the ALP has relied on a strong flow of preferences from the Greens, but it is doubtful that this can continue to save Labor from the consequences of its declining base. For a start, the Greens have failed to build their own vote in recent state elections - suggesting they are a protest vote not a genuine third force. Second, over-reliance on the Greens might be driving more conservative ALP voters towards the Coalition.
Fast forward to 2012. The ALP's primary vote in polls at the national level has hovered around 30% often less since Gillard announced the carbon tax was back on the Government's agenda. The primary vote in the Queensland election on Saturday was 26.6%, in the NSW election last year it was even lower at 25.5%.
These recent results suggest that an historic shift in the electorate's attitudes towards the ALP is occurring.
The ALP can't win without a sharp increase in its primary vote and that will force the ALP to revisit its policies, organisation structures and candidate selection processes.
Recent Comments