Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has acknowledged that one of the biggest changes in his three decades in federal politics has been his approach to border protection, admitting experience has led him to embrace policies he once strongly opposed.

Speaking candidly during ABC’s Kitchen Cabinet with Annabel Crabb, Albanese reflected on how governing had altered some of his long-held political views, arguing that effective leadership sometimes requires reassessing earlier convictions rather than remaining tied to positions formed decades earlier.

“You learn, and you can change your position,” the Prime Minister said when discussing border protection, pointing to immigration policy as one of the clearest examples of where his thinking has evolved over time.

The remarks represent a significant departure from Albanese’s earlier political career, when he was one of Labor’s most outspoken critics of hardline asylum seeker policies.

As a senior figure within Labor’s left faction, Albanese spent years arguing against measures such as turning back boats carrying asylum seekers. In 2015, he led a frontbench rebellion after then Opposition Leader Bill Shorten accepted the Coalition’s policy of boat turnbacks, describing the proposal at the time as “a red line we cannot cross” and expressing deep reservations about the approach.

More than a decade later, Albanese now says maintaining strong border controls is essential for preserving public confidence in Australia’s migration system.

“If you want to run a migration system that’s respectful of the contribution that migrants make, it has to be orderly,” he said during the interview.

He argued Labor had retained—and in some cases expanded—the mechanisms used to secure Australia’s borders because Australians expect governments to maintain control over immigration while continuing to support legal migration and humanitarian programs.

Albanese suggested similar political lessons were now confronting centre-left governments elsewhere.

He said Britain’s Labour government was facing the same challenge and argued the United States Democratic Party had failed to appreciate the political importance of maintaining confidence in border security.

“That’s the lesson that the British Labor government is dealing with at the moment. It’s a lesson that the US Democrats should have learnt but didn’t. And it’s something that we have,” he said.

When asked whether his younger self would view today’s Prime Minister as having compromised his principles, Albanese acknowledged the two versions of himself would almost certainly disagree.

“We would have been having a disagreement. No question about that,” he admitted.

However, he insisted that although Labor’s policies had become firmer, the government’s language and treatment of migrants had remained respectful.

Albanese contrasted the government’s approach with the highly charged political debates of the early 2000s, including the Children Overboard affair, arguing Labor had avoided using migrants and asylum seekers as political weapons.

“We haven’t used people … as an attempt to divide people by saying things that were not true,” he said, adding that Australia could maintain both orderly migration and a strong refugee program without creating divisions between Australians and migrants.

The interview offered a broader reflection on Albanese’s political journey after 30 years in Parliament.

He spoke about moving beyond some of the activism that characterised his early years in politics and described governing as requiring practical solutions rather than ideological purity.

Although he acknowledged changing positions on some issues, Albanese argued that his underlying values—including bringing Australians together and maintaining respectful public debate—had remained consistent throughout his career.

The discussion comes as migration continues to dominate Australia’s political landscape.

Recent Australian Bureau of Statistics data show net overseas migration has exceeded 1.4 million people since Labor came to office, fuelling debate over housing supply, infrastructure and population growth.

New South Wales has experienced the largest increase in arrivals, while residential construction has struggled to keep pace with growing demand.

Housing affordability and rental availability have therefore become increasingly intertwined with immigration policy.

Although Sydney’s rental vacancy rate edged higher during May, it remains historically tight, while rents continue to sit well above levels recorded a year earlier.

Economists note that population growth is only one of several factors affecting housing affordability. Construction costs, labour shortages, planning restrictions, interest rates and land availability have also constrained the pace of new housing development across Australia.

Nevertheless, immigration has become one of the most politically sensitive issues facing both major parties.

The Coalition has repeatedly argued that migration should be reduced until housing supply improves, while Labor maintains Australia requires a well-managed migration program to support economic growth, address workforce shortages and sustain long-term productivity.

The Prime Minister has consistently argued that skilled migrants make an important contribution to Australia’s economy but says public support for migration depends upon confidence that the system is operating fairly and securely.

Political analysts say Albanese’s comments reflect a broader repositioning of Labor over the past decade.

Rather than presenting border protection and humanitarian obligations as competing priorities, the party now argues both objectives can coexist through firm enforcement, legal migration pathways and an organised refugee intake.

That approach has helped Labor reduce one of the Coalition’s traditional political advantages while attempting to reassure voters concerned about uncontrolled migration.

The Prime Minister’s willingness to publicly acknowledge changing his mind also offers a glimpse into how he views political leadership.

Rather than portraying consistency as an end in itself, Albanese suggested experience, changing circumstances and evidence can legitimately alter a leader’s judgement.

Whether voters see that evolution as pragmatism or political compromise is likely to remain part of Australia’s broader debate over immigration, national identity and economic management.

With migration expected to remain a defining issue ahead of future elections, Albanese’s reflections highlight how significantly Labor’s approach to border protection has shifted since the internal party battles of the past decade—and how central orderly migration has become to the government’s political and economic message.