Mark Riley: Not a pretty picture as referendum defeat shatters Labor’s once strong self-belief

Government strategists often talk of establishing “political frames”. It is an important part of what they do. It is a way of setting the parameters within which a particular announcement, a broader issue or, indeed, the government itself is viewed. The term is borrowed from the art world, describing an effect not unlike the framing of a painting. It directs the voters’ focus to ensure the elements within the frame are seen in the intended perspective and context — invariably a positive one. It is about painting a pretty picture. At least, that’s the theory. But frames change. They often do that in ways that are outside the strategists’ control. The frame surrounding the Albanese Government at present is not a good one. It contains a pane of glass emblazoned with a single word — “No”. And the image of everything the Government is now doing is being refracted through the light of that word. It is the emphatic answer Australians delivered to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Voice referendum and it has changed the entire psychology of the Government. In short, it is playing with its collective head. The referendum defeat was not just a blow to Albanese’s political confidence but to that of his entire Government. As this column has already observed, it exploded the myth of Labor’s inexorable ascendancy, its perceived ability to carry its own base on matters of the mind and the heart. And now it is changing the complexion of everything it does. The reflexive assuredness of the Government is no longer so apparent. Ministers who would stride forward with absolute confidence in what’s ahead of them are now glancing over their shoulders to see what’s coming at them from behind. The innate belief that announcements will be accepted at face value has given way to an uncomfortable assumption that everything the Government now does will be treated with suspicion. Its actions in response to the High Court’s decision on indefinite detention is a perfect case in point. Labor allowed itself to be caught in Peter Dutton’s brutal and rather unsophisticated wedge, agreeing to amendments enforcing harsh restrictions that would at another time deeply offend the party’s essential integrity. It was an extension of an approach perfected by Albanese in opposition but viewed then through an entirely different frame. In opposition, Albanese would often speak against issues in principle but then decide to vote for them anyway. He would reason that although a particular measure was imperfect it was better than nothing and, therefore, worth supporting to improve the greater good — however incrementally. In the prevailing frame of the time this was seen as constructively pragmatic, as positive acts of Hawke-like consensus and political realism. In the post-Voice frame, Albanese’s decision not to fight Dutton on the detail of the detention reforms was viewed not as pragmatism but acquiescence. In the negative construction of the current climate, the Government didn’t “agree”, it “buckled”. Changing the frame isn’t easy. But it can be done. There are two methods. The Government would be wise to employ both. The first can be a grind. It demands the Government return to calm, methodical, considered decision-making that honours its party’s principles and objectives. It is not about picking fights. But it is about standing up for those issues that mean something to the base, which has been left scratching its head over recent decisions. The second is more forceful and obvious. It is what strategists call a “reset”. The best form would be a big, scene-setting speech by the Prime Minister after the Christmas holidays to remind voters of the Government’s core objectives and paint in the landscape for the coming year leading up to the next election. That would allow the Government to not only seize back the agenda but effectively set it. In the meantime, the summer break will likely be kind to the Government. The history of polling shows us that voters tend to like governments over Christmas because they don’t see much of them and tend to stay out of their way and their lives. It is a confronting reality, but sometimes the best political frame is one with nothing in it.