ACCORDING to Anthony Albanese, he went for a substantial reshuffle to his frontbench to “get the most out of Labor”.

True, Albanese shuffled more individuals than Scott Morrison did but in the current dire circumstances where Labor is staring down the barrel of a significant defeat, these latest changes are nowhere near enough.

Several Labor members expressed disappointment to me. They see no regeneration or renewal. No new talented backbenchers elevated. No new exciting policies or signals that the party will move to the electable middle ground.
There were subtle demotions of those who posed a threat to Albanese.

Tanya Plibersek was relieved of vocational training and skills, Clare O’Neill shifted from an economic portfolio to assisting Mark Butler on aged care, and Bill Shorten, one of the opposition’s top performers, was left at the bottom of the shadow ministerial list.

All this was done under the camouflage of removing Butler from his energy portfolio. But instead of giving Chris Bowen an opportunity to carve out a climate policy that will not alienate Labor’s traditional base, Albanese forcefully insisted: “There is no way a Labor government I lead won’t take action on climate change. Zero possibility.”

Bowen will struggle to propose moderate climate targets or support new gas power stations and gas development as proposed by the coalition. He is wedged between his leader’s comments and pressure to deliver a middle course by his own Right faction.

One can’t help but think he was given a poisoned chalice to make sure he is not a leadership threat.

Complicating matters is that Bowen has gone on the record saying Labor has lost its connection with the suburbs. It’s in the suburbs where Labor’s traditional workers in manufacturing, trades and the service industries reside.

And this is precisely where the biggest pain is felt in high energy prices arising from constrained gas development and over-subsidisation of renewables.

Ramping up renewables subsidies may be a popular thing to do in the inner city but the rising cost of these subsidies on ordinary Australians must be considered.

The well-off, who can afford to access subsidised rooftop systems, benefit while those who can’t afford them or are renting simply pay higher bills. These should be genuine Labor concerns.

Bowen cannot allow himself to be the battering ram of Labor’s inner city Left on climate change. Quite apart from leadership issues, prominent members of Labor’s Right must be prepared to step up on policy including proposing new thinking.

Some Labor members, for example, get that one way of achieving net zero emissions by 2050 is via nuclear energy.
The prohibition on nuclear was introduced by the Howard government. Starting a Labor discussion on whether it should be retained would be a game-changing political move.

The change in the responsibilities of Richard Marles is positive as it signals a jobs focus that may be attractive to Labor’s traditional base.

One Labor source told me elevating Marles was done in order to diminish the public role of Jim Chalmers — another Albanese leadership threat.

True or not, it does provide an opportunity for Marles to assert himself against forces from the Left who continue to push for jobs only in the renewables sector.

Marles, Bowen, Shorten and other Right leaders need to do the job the faction exists for — by insisting Labor move to the electable middle ground. They must articulate the policy narrative for sensible climate change goals and protect jobs in industries where Labor’s traditional base resides, even if their leader has other views.

These leading Right figures must also be prepared to fight for the elevation of talented new members who Albanese ignored in his reshuffle.

Let me mention three from Victoria: Daniel Mulino, who has a PhD in economics from Yale, Kimberley Kitching, who is a great performer on Senate committees, and Peter Khalil, who has a background in international relations and advised Joe Biden on national security.
To accommodate such new blood, the Right must support moving on some of the old guard who remain silent, waiting in vain for another shot at being a minister if Labor wins.
The question many Labor members now ask is: “How many election losses will it take before these and other competent members are promoted?”
It is always difficult to criticise your own party, as Joel Fitzgibbon has done. We should judge such actions based on the motives of those who do. Fitzgibbon’s resignation was to get a shift in policy towards protecting the jobs of workers in Labor’s traditional base.

Removing Butler from his portfolio is seen by Fitzgibbon as a victory. But if Albanese really wanted to signal a shift towards the electable middle ground, he could have offered Fitzgibbon a role assisting Bowen and Marles.

Strategic thinkers in Labor know a 3 to 4 per cent increase in Labor’s base vote is needed to win — Newspoll shows no improvement.

Labor’s Right must step up because without significant policy shifts and new blood, the reshuffle is not likely to deliver government to Labor. Nor will it stop anti-Albanese leadership rumblings.

*Theo Theophanous is a commentator and former Victorian Energy and Resources Minister.