A successful prime minister must juggle three demanding responsibilities: surviving the political contest, delivering effective policy and providing credible leadership when the nation needs it most.
Anthony Albanese has proved highly capable at one of those tasks. The difficulty is that his political instincts have helped him retain office far more effectively than they have helped his government achieve meaningful results.
Albanese defeated Scott Morrison in 2022 before winning an emphatic majority at the 2025 election. With the conservative side of politics still divided, his position has become even more secure. Despite the difficulties confronting him midway through the term, he may well win again in about 18 months.
The strength of his opponents can certainly be debated, but election victories remain victories. Albanese has established himself in Labor’s electoral history and mastered the mechanics of political survival. He is also closing in on Bob Hawke’s record as the party’s longest-serving prime minister.
The more serious question is how he has used that political success. So far, the answer appears to be: not particularly well.
On policy, the Albanese government increasingly looks like a house renovated without anyone first consulting the building plans. The latest Budget illustrates the problem, from abandoned promises on negative gearing and capital gains tax to the confusion over Australian Taxation Office charges and credit-card surcharges.
Winning an election after reassuring voters that certain changes would not be made, only to pursue those same changes later, is hardly a record worth celebrating.
The Voice referendum remains an even clearer example of the gap between political ambition and effective governing. Albanese presented the proposal as the defining moral undertaking of his first term, yet failed at the most basic leadership task: bringing the wider public with him.
The government proceeded without bipartisan support and never convincingly answered widespread questions about how the Voice would operate. The result was a decisive referendum defeat, with more than 60 per cent of Australians voting No and the proposal losing in every state.
Leadership, however, may be Albanese’s greatest weakness. The limitations often hidden by electoral success have been laid bare during two moments of national trauma.
Following the Bondi terror attack, Australians were looking for compassion, moral certainty and a leader prepared to accept responsibility. NSW Premier Chris Minns provided those qualities in abundance. Albanese did not.
Helen Haines had criticised Albanese over his government’s $6 million grant to Marrickville Golf Club. In the image above, the Prime Minister appears at Lewis the cavoodle’s birthday celebration, with Lewis on the right and Albanese’s dog Toto on the left.
Minns acknowledged that more should have been done by his government. He faced a grieving community, accepted responsibility for the failure to protect it and backed a royal commission. Albanese resisted calls for a national inquiry before ultimately being forced to agree.
The contrast was particularly damaging because both leaders represented the Labor Party.
Minns recognised that an open admission of failure could help rebuild the trust required to lead. Albanese, by comparison, appeared more concerned about the consequences of acknowledging how much responsibility he might have to accept.
Dirt file ridiculousness
The latest controversy involves the disturbing attack on Helen Haines, the widely respected independent MP.
FIND OUT MORE: Alligator mating season set to kick off in Florida. It could prove deadly – NewsFinale
The Prime Minister was right to praise Haines’ character and record of public service. But that response has been undermined by his unwillingness to directly address the dossier about her that, according to our reporting, was circulated by his own office only weeks earlier.
The document highlighted Haines’ funding applications and personal associations, using them to suggest impropriety without presenting evidence. It surfaced after she questioned the $6 million grant awarded to the Prime Minister’s local golf club.
When asked whether he knew about the document or had authorised its circulation, Albanese instead spoke about Haines as a strong local representative who vigorously supported her community.
Exactly. So why was his office briefing against her for doing it? He won’t explain that contradiction.
Perhaps because the PM, or someone very senior within his camp, directed the dirt unit to dig in the first place.
Then, Albo told the ABC that his office was simply sharing ‘a list of funding from Helen Haines, just showing that people of integrity stand up for their electorate.’
‘No personal criticism of Helen. Helen is a strong advocate for her electorate. She’s advocated for funding for projects in her electorate,’ he said.
The dirt file does contain a list of projects Haines was barracking for. But it’s also a dirt sheet laden with innuendo.
It questions her integrity, disclosures and motives when lobbying for funding.
It also just so happened to be released immediately after Haines criticised the Albanese government’s $6million grant to Marrickville Golf Club, which the PM is an honorary member of.
Not exactly the time for Albanese’s office to put out a document highlighting Haines’s integrity! (You can read the full file yourself at the bottom of this story.)
At issue here is Albanese’s credibility when he calls for higher standards while declining to account for the conduct of his own office. Potentially at his direction.
The culture of a prime ministerial office is ultimately the Prime Minister’s responsibility.
Instead, we get another demonstration of his instinct to find a (non)answer that gets him through an interview rather than confronts the problem in order to address it.
Albo has mastered the politics of becoming Prime Minister and remaining Prime Minister.
He’s an electoral success, there is no doubt about that.
But is that really enough?
