Albanese may have a clear vision for Australia, but it's not clear to the rest of us

The Age

5 hours ago

In Victoria last week, the prime minister was able to talk about one of his favourite topics: infrastructure. The North East Link Project would 'allow commuters to skip 18 sets of traffic lights and take 15,000 trucks off local roads.' Cutting through abstract economic debates, he declared, 'This is what productivity benefits look like, right here and now.' In Western Australia, he visited an Urgent Care Clinic: 'we promised 50, but delivered 87'.
This is politics as Albanese often practises it: concrete, both literally and figuratively. It is concerned, above all, with tangible and demonstrable benefits. On both visits, he was asked about the defection of Senator Dorinda Cox from the Greens to Labor. Twice, with only slightly different wording, he explained that Cox had decided the Greens were 'not capable of achieving the change that she wants to see… if you're serious about social change in Australia, the Labor Party is where you should be.'
Last week, the overwrought political debate continued around the government's proposed superannuation tax changes. Those changes are minor. The original impulse behind Australia's modern superannuation system was the opposite. One of that system's originators, former union leader Bill Kelty, three years ago described to journalist Jennifer Hewett how it all began, early in the Hawke government. 'Paul [Keating] said we gotta make up our mind what we are, and what we want to do with super.' They rejected various pathways – most notably, 'we don't want to be tinkerers or reformers'.
Instead, they decided: 'We want to start a new system… We will be revolutionaries. We will change the system. But we will not tear down the existing system. We will build a new system.'
Interestingly, Kelty's phrasing is almost directly the opposite of a phrase Albanese has come to like, and which he deployed two days before the election. Kelty said he and Keating decided to be revolutionaries, not reformers. Albanese said: 'I don't pretend to be a revolutionary. I'm a reformist'.
Loading
Which fits with Labor's proposed tax hike on the earnings of superannuation balances over $3 million. Remember we are talking about a rarefied set of Australians: in 2023, the Australian Financial Review, one of the loudest critics of the change, reported that earnings from such a balance would get you 'two luxury holidays a year, home renovations every five to 10 years and comprehensive health insurance'. This is definitely not revolution.
So why all the fuss? Treasurer Jim Chalmers answered that last week. He did so, probably smartly, in fairly indirect language, as though trying to walk a line: clear enough to reach journalists listening, not so sharp as to draw more attention to the issue. In essence, he said three things. First, because the rich want to hang onto what they have. Second, because a couple of newspapers are obsessed – most people don't care.