This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/28/labor-must-be-more-than-bob-and-pauls-dumb-arse-step-kids

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Labor must be more than ‘Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse step-kids’ Labor must be more than ‘Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse stepkids’
(35 minutes later)
Federal Labor must shake off the temptation to be “Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse stepkids” and embolden its new generation to seek fresh policy ground, according to the executive director of the ALP’s official thinktank, the Chifley Research Centre.Federal Labor must shake off the temptation to be “Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse stepkids” and embolden its new generation to seek fresh policy ground, according to the executive director of the ALP’s official thinktank, the Chifley Research Centre.
In a speech in delivered at Westminster over the weekend, Michael Cooney – a former adviser to Mark Latham, Kim Beazley and Julia Gillard, and now an influential player as Chifley director – says Labor must push past the orthodoxies of the Hawke and Keating years, and the Blairite period in the UK, in an effort to find new centrist ground in the lead up to the next election and beyond.In a speech in delivered at Westminster over the weekend, Michael Cooney – a former adviser to Mark Latham, Kim Beazley and Julia Gillard, and now an influential player as Chifley director – says Labor must push past the orthodoxies of the Hawke and Keating years, and the Blairite period in the UK, in an effort to find new centrist ground in the lead up to the next election and beyond.
Cooney urged progressive Labor colleagues to throw off what he terms the “nostalgia for the new” in order to ensure the future does not constitute lurching back 30 years.Cooney urged progressive Labor colleagues to throw off what he terms the “nostalgia for the new” in order to ensure the future does not constitute lurching back 30 years.
“It is obvious to all, and long has been I believe, that we can’t build a genuine policy platform for the future, or a winning political campaign in our countries, on an appeal to “the spirit of ‘45”, or the enthusiasms of 1972,” Cooney said. “In modern Labor politics, any serious, functioning nostalgia for the old is essentially, and rightly, gone. But there is another nostalgia and it is proving much harder to shake. This is the nostalgia for the new.”“It is obvious to all, and long has been I believe, that we can’t build a genuine policy platform for the future, or a winning political campaign in our countries, on an appeal to “the spirit of ‘45”, or the enthusiasms of 1972,” Cooney said. “In modern Labor politics, any serious, functioning nostalgia for the old is essentially, and rightly, gone. But there is another nostalgia and it is proving much harder to shake. This is the nostalgia for the new.”
“A surprising number of activists inside and around Labor parties and progressive politics genuinely seem convinced that the way forward for our parties is to go back seventeen years, to recapture the “new day” which dawned in London in 1997; or even more implausibly, to go back thirty one years, to restore the so-called “reform era” which began in Canberra in 1983,” he said.“A surprising number of activists inside and around Labor parties and progressive politics genuinely seem convinced that the way forward for our parties is to go back seventeen years, to recapture the “new day” which dawned in London in 1997; or even more implausibly, to go back thirty one years, to restore the so-called “reform era” which began in Canberra in 1983,” he said.
Getting past this thinking is “urgent business for Labor thinkers,” he said.Getting past this thinking is “urgent business for Labor thinkers,” he said.
Cooney cites a couple of examples where Labor could push the policy envelope – indicating there are “defensible arguments” behind the Coalition’s current inclination to buy submarines from Japan rather than building them in Australia.Cooney cites a couple of examples where Labor could push the policy envelope – indicating there are “defensible arguments” behind the Coalition’s current inclination to buy submarines from Japan rather than building them in Australia.
He also argues Labor should accept the merit of free trade agreements, such as the pact with South Korea, not as an article of faith left over from the Hawke/Keating economic policy orthodoxy, which favoured trade liberalisation – but for contemporary reasons.He also argues Labor should accept the merit of free trade agreements, such as the pact with South Korea, not as an article of faith left over from the Hawke/Keating economic policy orthodoxy, which favoured trade liberalisation – but for contemporary reasons.
“Frankly, if we really believe we are just Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse stepkids, we should pack up and go home and give the next generation a go – or actually hand the conch back to the generation before us,” Cooney said.“Frankly, if we really believe we are just Bob and Paul’s dumb-arse stepkids, we should pack up and go home and give the next generation a go – or actually hand the conch back to the generation before us,” Cooney said.
But while calling for a bold new direction, he argued new thinking for Labor should not involve “a lurch to the left.”But while calling for a bold new direction, he argued new thinking for Labor should not involve “a lurch to the left.”
“The future of our politics lies in the centre – but in a new centre, grounded in the social and political realities of this time,” he said.“The future of our politics lies in the centre – but in a new centre, grounded in the social and political realities of this time,” he said.
“It won’t be Kennedy’s vital centre and it won’t be Blair’s radical centre. It’ll be new ground.”“It won’t be Kennedy’s vital centre and it won’t be Blair’s radical centre. It’ll be new ground.”
Cooney did not articulate policy specifics but he said Labor would need to look past the clean energy package of the Gillard era to consider a new policy to address climate change; come up with new thinking on Asia; and position for the end of the mining boom.Cooney did not articulate policy specifics but he said Labor would need to look past the clean energy package of the Gillard era to consider a new policy to address climate change; come up with new thinking on Asia; and position for the end of the mining boom.
“Friends, we have to recognise that the politics of progressive change isn’t like using shampoo – you don’t close your eyes, “rinse and repeat” – no, you open your eyes and confront genuinely new challenges,” he said.“Friends, we have to recognise that the politics of progressive change isn’t like using shampoo – you don’t close your eyes, “rinse and repeat” – no, you open your eyes and confront genuinely new challenges,” he said.
“The clean energy revolution. An Asian century. Two retired generations. An end to Australia’s mining boom any day, and we pray a global recovery in the making as well. And then you implement actual new solutions.”“The clean energy revolution. An Asian century. Two retired generations. An end to Australia’s mining boom any day, and we pray a global recovery in the making as well. And then you implement actual new solutions.”