Where to now for the ALP?

Or Shorten can continue to play the cynical political games so loved by the spivs and half-smart careerists who regard policy as just a source of ways to wedge the opponent, to generate electoral bribes for voters, or of tokenistic 'announcements' to play in the media.

Apparently the polling shows the electorate is heartily sick of this sort of thing, and Turnbull has wisely abandoned Abbott's total dedication to this path. But it's the only game most of the ALP players really understand so they will be very reluctant to learn the art of serious policy formulation and advocacy.

If the ALP decides to get serious there is a lot to work on. Shadow Ministers could outline specific policies to defend public health, broadcasting and education, rather than just trying to appease everyone. They could more seriously advocate the reintroduction of fairness into retiree tax arrangements, start a real debate on Defence policy, and argue for a much reduced immigration policy.

They could also list many wasteful expenditures they would abolish. These could include ethanol subsidies, the chaplaincy program and many of the small handout programs both sides of politics have initiated over the last two decades.

They could also advocate popular policies such as euthanasia, (which is much more popular with, and important to, millions of ordinary Australians than gay marriage), and the republic. Then there is the very difficult area of real drug law reform, where again millions of people have a direct interest.

They could even champion higher wages, given that wages growth has been stagnant for some years, except among CEOs. The two arguments used against wage rises are that they create inflation and reduce global competitiveness. The first is not a problem and indeed would be welcome up to a point. The second is valid but wages are not a huge factor in the exporting industries and under existing flexible arrangements can be controlled to an extent.

Then there is the option of real transition policies for the environment and energy.

None of this is easy. Such an active policy program would involve internal wars with key union officials and some members. Then it would lead to heavy conflict with powerful community interests. But it would also bring in support and make the party relevant to the national future.

As a political strategy it would force PM Turnbull into territory he would rather avoid, with conservative social forces expecting him to lead the opposition to change when he wanted to stick to his own program.

Such an active agenda is the only way the ALP will get attention as the Turnbull train rolls on. The Party has tried the easy path for nearly twenty years and the only success came from beating Howard when he had run out of puff and Abbott who should never have been there in the first place. Even electoral victory did not provide unity and did not stop the electoral base from continuing to fade away. If the ALP continues down that path against a serious government it will guarantee disaster. Leadership change should be considered in this broader context.