Poor policies, factional infighting, recent poor candidate selections and having an image as a marketing gimmick has cost Country Labor and its parent Australian Labor Party (ALP) dearly in regional Australia, contends a Charles Sturt University (CSU) expert in rural and regional politics.

 

Dr Troy Whitford, a political scientist with the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at CSU in Wagga Wagga, believes the establishment of Country Labor in the late 1990s was part of the general political response to the ‘rural revolt’ and reflected the opinion backlash against John Howard’s Liberal - National government by regional voters across Australia.

“Country Labor, as a concept, was to re-establish the ALP’s position on the regional political landscape. Labor has the credentials and the history to realistically contest rural and regional seats. But it needed to develop a set of policy and ideological platforms that would capture the interest of regional voters without succumbing to ALP domination,” Dr Whitford says. 

 

“During the Howard years of 1996 to 2007, the National Party came under intense criticism from its natural constituent – regional Australia - for its inability to stand up to its Coalition partner on issues such as wheat marketing deregulation,gun law reforms, the sale of state assets and foreign ownership laws.

 

“The belief that the Nationals could no longer protect rural and regional interests was fed by disaffected National Party members turned independents, such as Tony Windsor and Bob Katter, as well as independent Pauline Hanson. Country Labor was another force established to question the National Party’s rural and regional credibility.”

 

Dr Whitford asserts that in the beginning, Country Labor wanted to return to traditional ALP values against free trade, globalisation and neo-liberalism, policy positions that in time would have appealed to regional voters, particularly if it was seen as a maverick group within the federal Labor party.

 

Adopting the name ‘Country Labor’ seemed palatable to rural and regional constituents. “However, ALP infatuation with discipline or control during this period, along with disputes between Labor’s Left and Right factions, meant the federal party had little latitude to explore its policy and ideological position.

 

“Country Labor failed to maintain a policy platform that could have distinguished itself from its city cousins in the ALP, nor could it sustain its maverick role. And the Labor Party infighting of the time only fed regional voter disillusionment toward the major political parties.”

 

Dr Whitford believes these problems were compounded by the inability to find the right Country Labor candidates, which led to further criticism that Country Labor was nothing more than a marketing gimmick.

 

“In the most recent state and federal elections, Country Labor has failed to develop a clear strategy to win regional seats. They have been unable to secure candidates willing to recontest seats and develop local profiles, which are vital to gaining acceptance in regional electorates.

 

“Using university students from capital cities as candidates does not build an electoral brand, and indicates that Country Labor is not, in fact, committed to the country.”