I need to place some historical context around Labor’s “Stability Pact” rort.
If Stephen Conroy’s departure from the Senate results in his withdrawal from involvement in future factional deals in Victoria, it would a welcome and positive change. Especially for those who still believe in democracy in the Victorian branch.
People should remember the so-called “Stability Pact” we hear about from time to time was created by Stephen Conroy, Bill Shorten, David Feeney, Richard Marles and Kim Carr after a massive factional bloodbath (that they themselves initiated) that resulted in several non-aligned sitting MPs dumped from preselection and a major assault on former Labor leader Simon Crean’s preselection during the run-up to the 2007 federal election.
This so called Stability Pact superseded all other cross-factional arrangements (i.e. grubby deals) that were in place before the 1998 federal election.
In what can only be described as breathtaking hypocrisy, the bloodbath resulted (as intended) with Shorten and Marles gaining safe seats at the expense of non-aligned senior and well-performing sitting members, including Bob Sercombe and Gavin O’Connor.
[Stability? Shorten throws an uneasy Labor pact into chaos]
Shorten was preselected for Sercombe’s safe seat of Maribyrnong; Marles was preselected for O’Connor’s safe seat of Corio (there were allegations of branch stacking in both).
Feeney gained a winnable spot on the Senate ticket before replacing Martin Ferguson in Batman. Senator Kim “Mal” Carr apparently sat by and watched — as none of this impacted on his position, why should he care?
So the movers and shakers in Labor factional politics in Victoria during those days were more than happy to create total havoc and chaos in the Victorian branch in order to secure absolute power, as in Carr and Conroy’s case, or to secure preselection for safe seats, always after somebody else’s hard work over many years, as in Shorten and Marles’ case.
The fact that this brawl was extremely damaging to both federal and state Labor was completely ignored by the perpetrators during this arrogant and blatant grab for power.
In another unprecedented display of arrogance, seats Labor already retains are allocated to the Left and Right factions, i.e. the Left would support Right candidates in seats allocated to the Right, and the Right would support Left candidates in seats allocated to the Left.
This results in Stability Pact control of around 80% of the central numbers on the Public Office Selection Committee (POSC) and effectively locks out any meaningful input from local rank-and-file members in those electorates manipulated by the organisers of the Stability Pact.
[Victoria’s new senator could be a ticking time bomb for Labor]
Of course the Shorten, Conroy and Carr faction have held and continue to hold veto over all candidates’ preselections in those seats, at the exclusion of local rank-and-file party members.
In yet another display of absolute arrogance, several safe or winnable electorates have been allocated to various trade unions in return for numbers for either faction on the floor of the Victorian state conferences.
This means any seat allocated to a union usually results in local rank-and-file party members being totally excluded from any worthwhile input or influence as to who gets to be their candidate and, therefore, their parliamentary representative should the seat be won.
However, these rank-and-file local branch members are always required to provide organisational support, including financial support, for the imposed candidates during election campaigns.
[What will Conroy’s departure mean for Shorten’s leadership?]
The main problem with this type of rort (apart from the obvious principle) suggests that while there are plenty of good and dedicated union officials (and rank-and-file members) that would make outstanding contributions to the nation, they are almost certainly overlooked.
The factional warlords prefer mostly uninspiring and unemployable union and factional hacks, promoted by (usually self-appointed) factional leaders in return for a pledge of total loyalty to the individual factional warlord rather than the party.
The question remains: will Conroy still remain active in Victorian branch affairs? Or will his departure from the Senate mean the end of the Stability Pact and a return to some form of basic fairness in future party activities and preselections?
I doubt it.
“Feeney gained a winnable spot on the Senate ticket before replacing Martin Ferguson in Batman.”
Lord hep us, that’s like replacing a boil with a canker! No wonder politics is bereft in this country.
Sounds like sour grapes to me Steve. And you expect us to believe that the people you name are a bigger threat to Labor than you are???? Just knock off the Labor-bashing, Crikey. Try something new…talk about the Libs or the Greens machinations for a change.
If anyone wants to read a more rational article/s on this topic…especially on Kimberly Kitching…try Peter Wicks on Independent Australia.
There is more than one side to every story!!
There is a problem in both of the main political parties concerning lack of membership involvement in policy development, selection of representatives and senators. Both parties are out of touch with the troubles, aspirations, inspiring solutions their constituents/members could share with them.
It is disappointing to see and hear dirty laundry being aired in all parties, including the Greens. If the airing would lead to constructive deliberations and solutions that could be healthy. However, this airing and ‘backgrounding’ behaviour is indicative of a dysfunctional ‘family’ and is happening because of a sense of powerlessness against a ‘machine’.
The powerless try to leverage support externally, to force change in the family but often fail. e.g. Rudd vs the Machine
As any therapist will tell you the one who goes outside the family get closed out, victimised, demeaned, even by those who want them to succeed.
These sorts of families are so powerful that even ‘domestic violence’ is better than ‘neglect’ for the members who want to ‘belong’.
Unless the parties open their membership to those who are encouraged to participate in the shaping of their Party there will be further drift toward protest voting and a further decrease in membership.
It is not a surprise to me that Labor’s primary vote had dropped more than the LNP vote did. The progressive side of politics seems to have more values based supporters who try to see the whole picture and are then more disappointed when they see, over the years, a Party that is supposed the represent them dive down into simplistic, inaccurate, inadequate popularist policy positions that have not benefited from systematic thinking, wide consultation, testing, balance and fairness. That is not to say there are no people trying to improve this from within but if it has to be a battle between the reformer and the operators of the ‘machine’, the machine wins.
Labor can chose to draw a ‘line in the sand’ right now and starting in Victoria make the changes that shifts the power from ‘the faceless wo/men’ to the ‘rank and file’ membership. Labor will need to ‘open up’ if it ever to become a sustainable, growing, vital progressive party that this country needs.
Who knew that cataloguing & curating navel fluff was a thing.
A mob who swear to toe the party line demonstrate the old saw of such a group being less than the sum of its parts – viz CML.
You obviously didn’t do as I suggested and read Peter Wicks!
Can’t have the truth getting in the way of a ‘dirty laundry’ story, can we???
Of course the Labor party needs to be opened up to include voting rights for members…it is inevitable that this will happen in the not to distant future.