The major loss at the election and subsequent resigning of Bill Shorten as leader, the Australian Labor party is licking its wounds right now, attempting to restore some sense of normalcy to itself. The first step is choosing a new leader, and while Tanya Plibersik has pulled out, Anthony Albanese, Chris Bowen, Jim Chalmers and possibly Joel Fitzgibbon are all looking at running to be leader. As such, these four’s past actions and their political standings will be analysed to try and see where the Labor party may end up.
The frontrunner to be Labor leader, especially with Plibersik pulling out, is Anthony Albanese. A staunch member of Labor’s leftwing faction, he ran for Labor leadership in 2013, but lost out to Bill Shorten. Speaking on his potential to be a leader, and when asked how he would lead Labor, he stated that party needs a ‘policy reset‘ though stood firm on both franking credits and negative gearing. One major sidenote for Albanese is his apparent lack of care or even disrespect for the Greens. Seen as a significant ally for the Labor cause, especially in the Senate where a Labor and Greens ‘alliance’ could give Labor some control over legislation, Albanese seems to be having none of it. Stating that ‘We’ll support the policies we’re putting forward, not the opportunism of the Greens‘ as well as slamming the party for being ‘extremely dangerous… to Australian politics.‘ This may be a major stalling point for Labor in the future, as many of their preference votes come from the Green Party. Should Albanese become leader, Labor will continue down its leftwards path, but may further cut off ties with the Greens.
On the other hand, two members for the right-wing faction, Chris Bowen and Jim Chalmers, are putting their hat in the ring for Labor Leadership. Chris Bowen, a senior member for the Labor Party and a previous acting leader for the party itself, knows his way around the Political ropes, and may be the parties best course to take for a stable and sensible run. This, as well as his knowledge on the economy (seemingly a major negative for the Labor party in the election) would be invaluable for a recovering Labor party, though his apparent willingness to allow for ‘takeovers of australian land by foreign investors’ may put off some potential voters. On the other hand, Chalmers, a Labor member for Queensland may be a significant asset to the Labor Party in a different way. His membership for Queensland means he would corral more voters from the state, a significant issue the party faced this election, while also understanding what issues affect them most, and as such being able to appeal to them better. While both do hav for the Labor party, in both their experience or their location, the fact they are more right-wing may alienate the growing left-wing of the Labor Party.
Finally, the tentative Joel Fitzgibbon is the last of the Labor possibilities. Having worked as minister of defense as well minister of agriculture, and as a member of the ALP’s centre unity faction, he represents the rural and centrist part of the Party. His experience in many parts of government and possible ability to draw in voters from both sides as well as from rural areas are his big selling points, though his stance against Labor’s coal message may alienate the more environmentally conscientious of the party, though could do well in Queensland. While he hasn’t thrown his hat fully in the ring, he may be Labor’s best chance to play a stable run while gaining as many possible voters.
While all four do have their ups and downs, many believe that Albanese has the best chance of winning due to Labor’s large left-wing faction. Whatever the case, whoever wins faces the arduous challenge of picking the Labor party back up from this defeat and forging a new path forward.
PoliticsBuff 