From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Monday, May 5th. Anthony Albanese has defied the so-called incumbency curse and made history with his astonishing landslide over the weekend. But as they say in politics, that's nice. What's next? Might he finally tackle big reform, perhaps try and solve our housing crisis, which has been generations in the making?
And what else might he have in his sights? Today, chief political correspondent David Crowe and senior economics correspondent Shane Wright on whether Anthony Albanese will avoid a common mistake made by previous prime ministers who, like him, enjoyed a gargantuan win that nobody saw coming, and what he plans to do not just in his second term as prime minister, but a third. So first of all, welcome David Crowe and Shane Wright. You've both had very, very big nights
and yet you're here with us. So we have to say thank you.
Thanks for having us, Sam. And I've got to say, it's just so good to be spending even more quality time with Shane here after all this election.
And we've had to come all the way from Canberra to be in the same room.
To finally be together.
Exactly. Well I'm appreciative. I'm going to launch right in because you guys haven't had much sleep. So, Shane, right before recording, you told me that what we saw on Saturday was a political first in Australian history, where, of course, we saw a first term government increase its vote share or seat count at the end of its first term. So were you surprised? Were you shocked.
If I saw a unicorn on, uh, on Saint George's Terrace in Perth? That would be about the similarity of my surprise as seeing this result. I thought, wow, the number of people trying to find people who said, ah, yeah, I think Anthony Albanese will increase his vote. He'll increase his margin into the high 80s, if maybe not 90 seats. He'll lift the Senate vote of the Labor Labour Party. Peter Dutton will lose his seat. There'll be more Nats in seats in Victoria than there are Liberal MPs at
this stage. I would have said what colour was the unicorn like? That's how that's how surprising this is.
And we've all been cautious since 2019 about projecting too much. And in a way, you've got to let the campaign play out and not spend too much of the campaign treating it like a race call. But our polling showed that the Labour primary was up, and that Labour had done really well during the campaign. And the Resolve Political Monitor that we published had Labour on a two party
preferred of 53.5. You'd have to say they exceeded expectations, including their own expectations, because some of their own people weren't expecting it to be this good.
Okay, so so we know this is absolutely astonishing. I just heard this morning that Albaneses two party preferred vote as of Sunday morning. You know, he's beaten the two party preferred vote of Kevin Rudd. Bob Hawke, Whitlam, Chifley like beat them all. So absolutely unbelievable.
We are back to John Curtin's astounding victory in 1943. So that was and that is still the the high water mark of the ALP. What happened in 1943? Yep. So yeah. Unicorn sighting again.
Unicorn sighting again. Okay. So briefly, I just want to ask each of you before we look to what this all means for the future of labor, the future of the country. Why? Why have we seen this unicorn yet again? Let's go to you first.
Well, I don't think we should overlook the fact that Australian households have been really suffering over the cost of living and living standards for three years. Labor saw this, knew they had to do something about it, and prepared what they called the forward offer, which is let's not campaign about the last three years, because that's what Peter Dutton did. Let's talk to Australians about what we're going to do next. And that began at the beginning of
this year. They ended last year knowing that this was going to be their plan. They invested in Medicare, in urgent care clinics. They had some school deals with the states, some hospital deals with the states. They did a tax cut in the budget. Um, step by step. They told households, this is what we're doing to help you. Energy bill relief, for example. And when you look at it now, you can see clearly they caught the coalition napping because the
coalition matched some of this. Then block the tax cuts, which was strategically a big mistake. But labor were moving ahead of the coalition on addressing the problems of families. They also offered big commitments on the quality of government
services and of course, a lot of external events. The cyclone, to a certain extent, but mainly Donald Trump, um, loomed over the campaign, raised this question of global uncertainty, and Albanese was presenting himself as a safe leader who could deliver services that households needed, was acting on the cost of living, and was the best answer in an incredibly volatile time.
I think, um, we've seen it that the reserve Bank cut in interest rates in February is a sign that's important, but I think I actually think the Liberal Party is one of their problems was made last year, and it's about Donald Trump. It's hard to avoid that aspect. And we knew as soon as this is a president saying I'm going to increase tariffs, he was absolutely clear about it. And you've tied yourself not economically, but you've tied yourself
culturally to Donald Trump. And that is as our polling has been showing for Yonks, Donald Trump does not rate very particularly well. It was an own goal that they should have been able to think through further out that this was going to be a problem.
And Kroie, I really want to turn to the Labour Party now. So our colleague James Massola, he revealed the other day that Anthony Albanese said he's already planning on how to win a third term, that he's already begun thinking about policies and strategies to secure that. So I'd love your opinion. What might this mean for what he plans for his second term? Like, does this mean that he's likely to play it safe again with small target achievements?
Or could it be the opposite that, you know this is Labor's time to to go bold?
I think it will be about playing it safe. Um, and I think there'll be some merit to that. I say this as I drink a coffee from Bar Italia, and a very strong coffee from the western inner west of Sydney, where Anthony Albanese appeared on Sunday morning.
That's right. So you were with him while he was doling out ice cream, I believe.
Yeah, because he did a he did a, a moment on the Sunday morning after the election where he, the cameras were there. He was having a coffee with mates, served some ice cream at the counter. Um, didn't give a lot away. He didn't hold a doorstop where he waxed eloquently about his agenda for the term ahead.
But did you think he would?
Uh. I think he's going to take it slowly. I think there'll be some moments in Canberra in the week ahead where he kind of talks about what he wants to do. But I know from talking to the people around him that it's not about taking any Australian voters by surprise. They have got drilled into them that they are not going to do things that they didn't take to the election. So when we talk about bold reform, it can't mean a tax. White paper next month with
a tax reform investigation that leads to recommendations. I think there's a possibility where some of that happens and is kind of canvassed during the term. But I think that in the same way that some of the decisions in the first term were contingent on the election, um, the scenario for reform is to flesh out some ideas during the term that's just about to start, and then seek
a mandate at the subsequent election. But they would be extremely cautious about what they're going to do because it's taking on iconic importance for Anthony Albanese that he doesn't break faith.
We've seen what happens when a party comes out with policy at the very last moment, and the work from home policy, for example, from the Liberal Party, which came from nowhere. For most people, the absolute dangers of trying to foist something on right at the last minute.
For instance, just quickly, if the Productivity Commission or somebody else says, oh, and let's change negative gearing, that's something that needs to happen. Or capital gains tax on the family home or whatever. Well, that's a non-starter, right? So it's just not going to fly. His position on that is quite clear. He's made clear commitments in the election campaign. So there are there's a reform agenda. But there are some things that are clearly not on.
Which we saw with the personal income tax cuts, which says we're not going to change them, but then they've come up with a way to keep them in spirit. Everyone got a tax cut.
So do you think this is what.
Australians want now? Is this what they've signalled to the Labor Party? You know, we don't want big social progress from you. We don't want that anymore. We want what you've offered us now. We want you in the middle. You know, they've cemented the middle. This is what we think Albanese will do in the next term, and maybe even in the third.
And they want stability because this is the the huge outcome here. We've had a series of one term prime ministers. Scott Morrison came in and then served one term. These one term prime ministers haven't been able to cement reform. Julia Gillard talked about a price on carbon. She was gone. And then the reform was swept away. And Anthony Albanese
has often said you've got to cement the reform. That's the agenda here, not just to make announcements and take people by surprise, but to cement reform in a steady way. So Australians voted for stability after the, you know, chopping and changing of the last 20 years. And that's what they're I think, going to get. Um, Anthony Albanese gains
great confidence out of this election result. He doesn't have a mandate for a specific thing that he took to the election in a dramatic way, like a GST in 1998. But he's got this confidence. I think it'll help on the international front with Donald Trump. Donald Trump likes winners. Anthony Albanese is now a certified winner. And so he goes into international relations and the domestic agenda with that sense of confidence.
I'm thinking the danger, of course, is hubris and of because what he has done back to the unicorns. He's got a paddock full of them. He's in terms of what he's achieved and it's weather like. I think this actually played into the the problem with the first term and his speech on election night, which is the voice. Ah.
And he made that grand promise.
He made the grand.
Promise.
On which and the voters said, oh, Nick, off.
They did.
They. Absolutely. And so that is always I keep thinking of 93, the 93 election which Keating won. And no one thought that was going to happen. And that within within 3 or 4 weeks, the true believers were having a special dance in the Great Hall that went down like a bucket of cold sick. And because the papers at the time were saying, oh, this election result, it gives Keating another, it gives him two terms. That's the
absolute danger for every politician. John Howard would always talk about the dangers of being hubristic.
But I wanted to pick up something that you just mentioned a bit earlier, which is you said that, you know, the lesson Albanese would have learnt here is you are not going to spring anything new on the voters. But what about the long standing problems that we know that aliens far and wide have been concerned about for Yonks, which of course, is, you know, the housing crisis, which is decades in the making, not to mention this outstanding
issue of indigenous representation. Might those be picked up at some point, or are they just going to be left in the dust and just, you know, continue for that frustration to be building?
I guess they have to act on housing and they've got to deliver. They actually put forward some really interesting ideas on housing supply. A $10 billion. Loan and grants program, mainly for the states, but also for private developers to add housing for first home buyers. Now, when I talk to some housing experts, these are non-aligned academics. They said that on balance, the labor programs on housing supply were better.
I'm not saying that's the magic solution on every front, but they've actually got some agendas here where it's all about delivery. Now. It's about proving that they can add 1.2 million homes to housing supply, as they've promised, doing everything they possibly can to do that, which also means reducing the cost of building materials and increasing the supply of building workers. So it's about execution. We don't need
a whole bunch of committees reviewing things. They just have to act on what they've said they're going to do.
Right.
And I reckon you'll see, because we know there's about 28,000 of their social homes that are under construction or in planning. I think I'll put money on it now. Kroie that anyone covering the Prime Minister over the next three years is going to spend a lot of time at new housing sites when they're opened to reinforce that point, saying, right, here are the homes they are being built.
We're going to see you in a high vis vest, is what I'm seeing.
We're going to see this. And a hard hat. Yeah, I can see that coming.
Okay. And oh sorry.
Mate. You know, he made a point in his election night speech of doing a couple of really simple things that I think are important and effective. He thanked voters. You know, he just said a simple thank you. He said, I won't take this for granted. Um, I'll, uh, you know, you've put your trust in, in us. And I give you this solemn pledge to to act on that. So it's about the execution. At this point, I think they've got an issue with spending because they've promised a lot
in the campaign. And as we've all reported on in the budget on March 25th, they didn't really, you know, allow any major savings. There was some redirection of funding, but they didn't they didn't do enough work, in my view, to really save money and produce a better budget. Bottom line. They've announced a lot in the campaign that puts money out the door. That then does mean that the agenda in this term has got to be about being really
careful with that. They might get lucky on the commodities side and on the revenue side and the budget bottom line, and the outlook may improve over time, but there's going to have to be, I think, a hard look at the spending side of the budget. Um, now that they've got so much on the table which hasn't been rolled out yet, you know, it's yet yet to be rolled out, for instance, on Medicare. Um, and then, um, find some savings to help improve things over the next three years.
So do you reckon this is going to be a very brief honeymoon period before reality hits them in the face?
Yes.
Yeah, it could be because Anthony Albanese actually had quite a long honeymoon in the polls after the 2022 election. Then the Voice started, then the tough living standards really started to bite and then it evaporated.
I know we've spoken a little bit about that. You know, they've got to be very careful. Albanese has to be very careful not to exhibit hubris in this moment, like we've seen with previous winners. And I wanted to ask you, I guess, whether we actually might be finding that we're in a period of greater kindness or an emphasis on that in our political sphere, because we heard, I think, a lot of humility over the last couple of days. You know, we heard it from Jim Chalmers on election night.
It was looking like they were going to win and he was very cautious about that. And then, of course, in Anthony Albanese's acceptance speech, he made a marked point of shushing his own supporters when they were booing Peter Dutton.
And the interesting moment, those personal moments are really interesting, aren't they?
And then on Sunday morning, we've seen Albanese come out and I think he said, I feel for Peter. So I'm just wondering, do you think that we might see greater kindness? You know.
I think it's part of his brand or something that they want to continue to be part of his message. I talked to one of the cabinet ministers who made a point about Anthony Albanese, in her view, actually being a kind person. Now, I know that one of the quotes in the nine debate that stood out because three women mentioned it to me, unprompted, mentioned this quote, kindness is not weakness. That was Anthony Albanese's quote in the channel nine debate against Peter Dutton. And that sank in,
I think, with voters. And so I think that's going to be part of who he is as prime minister. Now, whether that is maintained is another question. Can he be the person who turns the boats around, while also being the prime minister, who says kindness is not weakness? Lots of contradictions because it's not an easy job. However, um, that is something that I think we'll see more of.
I'm not expecting anyone getting out a guitar, sitting around a fire and singing Kumbaya anytime. That is not the story of Australian politics. Menzies was hard. Holt was hard. Whitlam was hard. Hawke played hard. Keating, Howard like he he gave across that air. But he was tough. Tough as nails.
And Albanese settled scores inside the labor movement because the labor movement is a tough, tough place.
It is so.
And when he was asked what to name a song and have a song played on radio. Sorry, Shane, I'm talking over the top of you. But when he was asked this in the recent days, he nominated the angels. Am I ever going to see your face again? Which has a famous refrain with a chant from the crowd with a couple of F-bombs, and it was pretty clear he was aiming that at Peter Dutton. So there's a, you know, a mix of a bit of sympathy, but a real hard line as well.
More sympathy for the devil. To quote the Rolling Stones. Yeah. But yeah, that's why no, I, I love that you you you believe in this, Sam. And I was just wondering a bit of kindness in the air, you know? But once he get like, he. As he said on Saturday night, you know, we're back to work. That's back to work. Like he is going to continue to fight what he believes in. And yeah, he he may dress it up as kindly, but it's not.
Mind you, if he fights and he reverts to sort of fighting only on labor terms, to labor people, to the labor base. He'll be making the same mistake that Peter Dutton made. And I think given the election outcome, he doesn't seem inclined to make Peter Dutton's mistakes.
Yes.
Well, gentlemen, an absolutely fascinating election. And so lucky to have both of your viewpoints on this. So thank you so much, Shane and David, for your time.
Thank you Samantha.
Thank you. Great to talk again.
Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by myself, Josh towers and Tammy Mills. Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To listen to our episodes as soon as they drop, follow the Morning Edition on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Our newsrooms are powered by subscriptions, so to support independent journalism, visit The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe and to stay up to date, sign up to our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a summary of the
day's most important news in your inbox every morning. Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. Thanks for listening.