With an election to be called in days, the civil war in the NSW Liberal Party continues to haunt Prime Minister Scott Morrison.
Yesterday, Matt Camenzuli, the hard-right factional warrior who launched a legal challenge against Morrison’s intervention in a protracted preselection process, was expelled from the party. At the same time, he’s trying to get that challenge (already dismissed by the NSW Court of Appeal) heard by the High Court.
Crikey understands the grounds for Camenzuli’s expulsion fall under a section of the party’s constitution allowing state director Chris Stone to dismiss a member during a campaign period for a range of transgressions, including damaging the party’s chances of electoral success. While the election hasn’t been called yet, the state director also has discretion to determine what a “campaign period” means.
But Camenzuli, who’s come this far and poured this much money into fighting the centre-right faction of Morrison and Immigration Minister Alex Hawke for control over the party’s future, isn’t going quietly. He’s expected to appeal the expulsion.
Then there’s the Hail Mary in the High Court. On Tuesday, the NSW Court of Appeal dismissed Camenzuli’s claim on the grounds that an internal dispute within the Liberal Party wasn’t justiciable, or capable of being settled by a court of law. And even if it was, the party had acted within its powers when Morrison and co had intervened to install Hawke, Environment Minister Sussan Ley and Trent Zimmerman as candidates.
After that decision, and before his expulsion, Camenzuli emailed party members, calling on them not to retreat and accusing the leadership of failing.
Tomorrow afternoon, the High Court will hold a hearing to consider whether to grant Camenzuli special leave to appeal the NSW decision. Guy Reynolds, the barrister representing Morrison and the party argued Camenzuli had no standing to bring his legal challenge because of his expulsion. Either way, none of this will be resolved before the election is called — most likely this Sunday.
Camenzuli, who made a motza by developing software for builders, has been steadily building a power base among party members in western and south-western Sydney over the past few years, and was elected to the state executive in 2019.
According to some party insiders, he’d harboured grand ambitions of becoming state director. They claim Camenzuli was frustrated with the Liberals perceived shift to the left and wanted to “Trumpify” the party.
The current legal challenges were framed by the hard right as a non-ideological attempt to democratise the party, and to push back against Morrison and Hawke’s attempts to filibuster preselections in order to get their own preferred candidates installed.
But just last year, Camenzuli spent $130,000 in legal fees intervening to stop a rank-and-file vote to pick candidates at a local election. And more recently, he voted to swiftly install Chris Rath to replace former NSW arts minister Don Harwin in the upper house, even though some in the party wanted an open preselection.
Those positions seem mutually exclusive with the right’s push to put preselections to the membership, until you remember this is about power.
Camenzuli’s expulsion, and the locking in of Morrison’s candidates, puts a temporary ceasefire on that power struggle, for the election period at least. But it’s already done irreparable damage to all involved.
The hard right suffers another blow, right after losing one of its leading figures when Concetta Fierravanti-Wells was relegated to an unwinnable spot on the Senate ticket. But Morrison is also damaged. The fallout has seen allegations resurface that the PM used racism to beat Lebanese-Australian Michael Towke for a controversial preselection in 2007. Morrison is struggling for breathing space, and all of this makes it even harder for him to win an election the polls show him losing.
Even if Morrison is able to stitch together another term, the bitterness within the NSW division won’t go away. An election win won’t change the fact that many across the party are pissed off at how he and Hawke intervened in the preselections. It won’t really boost the centre right’s limited power within the NSW party. Everyone will still be very mad. Expect a lot of ugliness.
Waleed Ali’s interview with Michael Towke on last night’s The Project shed more light on the dirty inhouse politics played within parties. Towke appeared 100% credible, the antithesis of his former opponent Morrison.
Yes, I thought the same. Good interview, Towke does appear to be highly credible.
The Murdochracy went after him like a rabid dog and apparently four different journalists published vile articles spouting unfounded claims, all of which News Corp had to admit were untrue and later retracted. Towke won his court case against News Corp for its smear campaign but his political career was totally derailed by the time his name was cleared.
According to some party insiders, [Camenzuli] harboured grand ambitions of becoming state director. They claim Camenzuli was frustrated with the Liberals perceived shift to the left and wanted to “Trumpify” the party.
It is truly almost beyond comprehension. … the Liberals perceived shift to the left… ??
If that’s a shift to the left, I shudder to think where Camenzuli thinks the centre is, let alone the right.
how about “shift not quite as far right” ?
Absolutely! Amazing to think there is a more “right-wing faction” than the right-wing trumpist mob we are currently suffering with in government! Do we know WHO these far-right-wingers are in NSW that Camenzuli wants to have installed as his candidated?
Let’s hope the damage is truly irreparable.
The hard right suffers another blow, right after losing one of its leading figures when Concetta Fierravanti-Wells was relegated to an unwinnable spot on the Senate ticket.
It surprises me that her relegation to a lower place on the NSW Lib Senate ticket, in order to rank Molan above her, has not attracted more attention. I do not live in NSW, would never vote LNP anyway but I did respect Senator F-W for speaking out against the government on aged care and a federal ICAC. What has Molan ever said?
Didn’t Molan campaign against the Liberal how to vote ticket in 2019?
Yes. He received one of the largest personal #1s in Senate history.
Not enough for a seat but the trogs. clamoured for him to fill the vacancy created when SeeNoDonors was made ambassador to the USA, for services rendered.
In Tasmanian House of Assembly elections there are (presently) 5 members elected per electorate. The order the candidates appear for the party is random. It may be that the order of the parties on the form is also random (I can’t recall).
This should be adopted for Senate elections, and the above the line voting abandoned.
The iniquitous Line was been, if effect, abolished in 2016 – one need only fill a minimum of 12 boxes for a Senate vote to be valid.
The Fat Miner at the NPC this arvo. claimed that it was only 6 during questioning by journos.
Not one of whom had the wit to correct him.
Probably because they didn’t have a clue – after all, it’s only been 6yrs since it was legislated so the poor petals probably haven’t yet caught up.
“The iniquitous Line was
been, if effect, abolished…”It is 6 above the line or 12 below the line.
If voting above the line, the candidates are preferenced in the order set by the party/group, with their #1 candidate at the top.
In the 2016 election the proportion of the Above-The-Line voting was greater than 90% for all states and territories, bar Tasmania (71.9%) and the ACT (84.8%).
You are either very confused or trying to confuse others, or both.
I didn’t mention above the line (ATL) because it is a mug move, unless
voting for no-hoper parties in the hope of their garnering over 5% and
thus the AEC $2.82 per vote.
Why mention the ATL figure for 2016 when few except tragics (such as I) were aware of the new rule?
The proportion of BTL in 2019 was higher and can be expected to rise again this year.
The new system abolished the tickets and allowed ATL voters to give second and further preferences, ballot paper instructions suggesting at least six preferences. Above the line votes continued to give parties and groups control over preferences between their own candidates, but ended party control over preferences to other parties and candidates.
Previously a BTL vote required a voter to mark preferences for all candidates on the ballot paper. (That’s why elections tended to be held in the warmer months when voters are wearing thongs or can take off their shoes.)
Under the new system, ballot paper instructions stated that BTL voters should mark at least 12 preferences. (As I stated above.)
“Why mention the ATL figure for 2016 when few except tragics (such as I) were aware of the new rule?
The proportion of BTL in 2019 was higher and can be expected to rise again this year.”
I mentioned 2016 because it was the first data I cam across.
For 2019 it didn’t change that much, all except Tasmania and the ACT remained above 90% ATL voting
“The new system abolished the tickets and allowed ATL voters to give second and further preferences, ballot paper instructions suggesting at least six preferences. Above the line votes continued to give parties and groups control over preferences between their own candidates, but ended party control over preferences to other parties and candidates.”
Of this I am aware.
My point is that much of the BS about getting candidates into winnable position on their party’s ballot would be eliminated entirely by eliminating ATL voting and randomising the party’s candidates (so no candidate benefits from voters just voting 1-6 down the ticket).
Senate candidates may have to more than just getting on the top half of their party’s ticket.
Agree with your last two paragraphs.
The same thing he always says, from the safety of the Senate – “We must confront China!”.
It’s his Tourette’s syndrome du jour, previously it had been the need to depose Assad.
Who was it who once said “disunity is death”?
Murder or suicide?
Does it matter?
True Labor would/should have died of shame after being pimped out during the HawKeating regime.