The federal election campaign of 2025 was an interlude. Politicians, advocacy groups and the commentariat all had their lists of issues, but where were the big initiatives? The grand narratives?

The absence is understandable. Globally this is a period of maximum uncertainty. In the UK, the post neoliberal Labour alternative remains ideologically indeterminate; while in the US MAGA populism seems poised on a precipice. Post our own election we see Liberals finally seeking their exit from neo-conservatism; while Prime Minister Albanese — like a modern day Hawke and Keating — aims to lead the world with a new adaptation of the Fair Go for our times. The campaign interlude is over indeed. What will be the new reform consensus? The fundamental question in social policy faces each of us: what kind of society do we want?

Where to begin? Catholic Social Teaching is an important resource. Catholic social values have been a staple of the “Australian Way”. Notwithstanding the horrors of clerical child abuse or indeed the dramatic decline in church attendance, prime ministers and premiers regularly signal Catholic faith as formative in their political development. Indeed, Catholic Social Services Australia chief executive Stephen Nockles was only recently in conversation with former prime ministers Abbott and Turnbull about a project to develop a “Common Good Accord” for Australia. Turn-of-the-century social nihilism has passed. Now is the time for Catholics to make their pitch for a new era of nation building.

To this end, a group of us at the University of Divinity have begun a project on “The Common Good and Australian Social Policy”. It may sound jejune, but some (including myself) were surprised to find that the “common good” is not a concept exclusive to Catholics! It is pervasive in the history of philosophy, while variations on the theme are found in all the major religions, including those of Australian First Nations peoples. Given our demographic transformation this century — not to mention a papal OK to look for God’s work beyond Catholic Church boundaries! — we think a multi-faith dialogue ought to add immensely to the political relevance of the concept today.

This relevance magnifies the more we appreciate the impoverished language of “society” informing contemporary social policy. And this is not only a result of neoliberal critique of the “mirages” of “social justice” and “society”, but also the increasingly tangible collapse of the “Enlightenment Project” which had helped underpin so much of 20th century social policy. Indeed, how are we to bring society back in? If greed is no longer good and, yes, there is such a thing as a society, the challenge is to articulate and agree on our “Social Aspirations”. What are they? And what key policy priorities do they imply? And what rights and responsibilities will we assume as citizens to achieve them?

Starting with “society” in this way will be a challenge. Under neoliberalism we grew used to the idea that social policy was about the excluded few. “Social inclusion” framed a regime focused on solving “their” problems. No-one asked what kind of society they would be included in! By contrast, the “Common Good” is about society itself and producing a community in which all flourish together. From Rerum Novarum (1891) to Laudato Si (2015), CST offers an invaluable reference point for such reflection. Moreover the historical record of Catholic action to create a Common Good for Australia has much to tell us about what might, and might not, work in this country.

By way of illustration, consider the foundations of our national social policy regime. The first Australian cardinal, Patrick Moran, might reasonably be considered one of the “founding fathers”. Latter 19th century nation states faced a social question not unlike our own. In a globalised market economy with egregious inequality and social insecurity, could nations somehow fuse the economic benefits of capitalism with the imperative of social justice? It was perceived as a matter of reform or revolution everywhere.

Australia emerged as a global leader in this quest to “civilise capitalism”. The sentiment for a “Fair Go” saw a policy strategy framed around a Full Employment objective involving government support for business and farmers (“unlocking the land”; infant industry tariffs etc) and, in return, a family-based wage for workers. The latter policy drew directly from Rerum Novarum, having been effectively championed by Moran. So important was it for the common good over the next 70 years, that ours became known as a “wage earners’ welfare state”.

Two other major reforms found Catholics engaged in stabilising and extending Australia’s Fair Go. Quadragesimo Anno (1931) points us to the Catholic — fascist — communist struggles of the 1930s and 40s which ended in the Keynesian compromise of guaranteed work for all. The Second Vatican Council saw Catholics embracing the post-war aspiration for social equality to be based on the new social rights of citizenship administered through a welfare state.

Our historical cameo of the Common Good indicates the breadth of the terms of reference needed for any meaningful review of the concept today. One could follow its story through the crisis of stagflation, the reset in the Accord and so on. Most striking would be the re-emergence of the 19th century nemesis of globalisation which reshaped the state’s role more as handmaid of global markets than custodian of the national Common Good.

History could also show that we will never agree about everything. What philosophers call “thin” and “thick” accounts of our Common Good will always compete. Bringing our differences to consensus (“agreeing to disagree”) will mean a shift in political culture to what some call an “agonistic dialogue” in place of the “antagonistic” confrontations familiar from recent “cancel culture”. The current church concept of synodality is timely in this regard for Catholics will have our own antagonisms to negotiate. Conservatives (or “integralists”) promote the Common Good in terms of implementing hand-me-down revealed truth (“Making Christendom Great Again”), while progressives look more to the “Signs of the Times” where history continually adds new revelation as we respond to unprecedented “social questions”. But the interlude is over. Let the dialogue begin!