Labor’s factions are a secretive, anti-democratic duopoly that turns away talented young people and disempowers party faithful who have no interest in factional conflict, says Labor’s Andrew Leigh, speaking today in a rare public discussion of Labor’s formal power structuring.
The prolific author, non-aligned MP and former academic economist, who is assistant minister for competition, charities, treasury and employment, has broken Labor’s omerta–like code of silence on factions, noting that Labor now dominates the mainland and has vastly improved levels of female, ethnic and Indigenous representation in its ranks under its current factional system.
“At a national and state level, Labor’s factions have helped meet the party’s affirmative action targets, and been tasked with bringing greater ethnic and racial diversity to the ranks of the party’s elected officials,” Leigh wrote in a speech to be delivered on Wednesday afternoon at a lunch hosted by public policy think tank Per Capita in Melbourne.
But Leigh argues what were once three federal factions have collapsed into the left and the right, creating a duopoly that works to stifle debate at party conferences rather than allow a contest of ideas: “Today’s factions are less likely to broker ideological debates than to try and find a way of avoiding the debate altogether. When both factions see it as desirable to find a ‘fix’, debate can be viewed as unhealthy. Calling a truce in the battle of ideas is not the Labor way. If we stifle internal debate, we miss the chance to test our policies among ourselves, and to train new generations of thinkers.”
Political hardheads would insist “stifling internal debate” is more about not allowing the media and political opponents to portray Labor as riven with ideological divides and avoiding elevating issues that play badly for the party, such as asylum seekers, in public profile.
And it’s no longer the 1970s, when right-wing leaders like Paul Keating fought a fierce internal ideological battle to negate the influence of communists within the party’s ranks, or the ’80s, when unions fought hard to retain protectionism. Labor’s divisions these days tend to be about social issues, rather than nuanced debates around managerialism within a broadly agreed market economics framework, which is what the party has become ideologically.
Leigh reserves his extended criticism for the “profoundly undemocratic” nature of the factions, particularly around the use of “show and tell” in internal elections, in which faction members have to reveal how they voted, or let factions vote for them.
The irony of show-and-tell is that historically Labor was among the strongest advocates for the secret ballot. The secret ballot — known in other countries as the Australian ballot — was revolutionary because it prevented bosses from demanding that their workers reveal how they had voted.
That system also ensures party branches have limited — or in some states no — effective role in preselections. The result is a party that deters potential members by demanding they choose a faction, alienates its supporter base by disempowering members, and potentially leads to poor match-ups of candidates and electorates.
He doesn’t want to end factions, rather end the penalty attached to not being one. Leigh is God’s lonely man, with only one other non-aligned MP (Canberra MP Alicia Payne) to caucus with — up from just himself in the 2016 Parliament. He’d like more company (and, presumably, a promotion, which is hard to get when you’re factionally independent and there’s no factional boss to lobby for you). It’s hard to see that happening due to, well, exactly the problem Leigh talks about — the power of the factions to control party positions.
Merely by talking about factions, Leigh will have made himself less popular with his colleagues. Both major parties prefer it when their factional business is kept out of public gaze, something they struggle to avoid when factional warriors lapse into branch stacking and abuse of public funds, which both Labor and the Liberals have been guilty of in recent years — especially in the factional jungle that is Victoria.
But however effective factions can be as a management tool, Leigh’s point about their anti-democratic nature is unanswerable: “No Labor government would tolerate an organisation that set up a table in the corner of the polling station, asking people to volunteer to have their ballot papers filled in for them.”
But Labor’s perfectly happy to subject its own members to such an organisation.
Andrew Leigh is a brilliant man and would be transformative as treasurer. And it is criminal that is not being used appropriately.
We can complain about factions all we like, but the only way to change the system is to get involved. So if you care – join up. Join labour to tackle the factions, join the greens to bring them to a party of government not protest, or if you can bear it, join the liberal party or Nats, and try to bring them back to the sensible centre.
The liberal certainly have factions as well, at least here in Western Australia.
Australia has one of the lowest rates of political party participation in the world. Don’t be a bystander.
He is also a great local member. Until the ACT gained a third HoR seat Andrew Leigh I lived in his electorate and always found him very responsive to matters I contacted him about.
Not really surprising that ACT voters are happy with an unaligned rep. We also chose David Pocock as our second senator.
I agree. When he was my local MP, he always personally answered my emails, which is more than Kristy McBain (Federal) and Michael Holland (Labor State) ever do. Even though he is no longer my MP, he still responds personally to my less frequent emails.
Can only agree with these comments. He is a brilliant and yet modest person who is genuine and hard working. We are really fortunate to have him as a MHR in the ACT- his talents will need to given greater scope sooner rather than later. Mindless factionalism must give way to common sense! Here’s hoping!
David Pocock has shown himself to be an outstanding representative in the Senate; again, we are lucky to have him. Overall, the ACT’s Federal representation in Parliament is of a high standard; probably better than most other areas with similar population!
I would prefer to see his brilliance used to sort out defence policy and regional integration, Marles has proved to be dud patsy for US interests, as has Wong. And it now looks as though Rudd has drunk the Koolaid as well.
It is dereliction of duty by Albanese not to have Andrew Leigh in Cabinet. All the blah blah about meritocracy is just eyewash when it comes to power which, as always, corrupts best practice in favour of self-interest. In this, Labor shows it is no better than what Prof Lyon has said about KPMG in evidence given to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Inquiry into Consultancies.
I suspect nobody wants him in Cabinet because they all know he would be the smartest man in the room, and thus they would all feel threatened and afraid of being shown up.
LilyLulu perhaps its all in your name. I have heard this argument out of ALP rusted ons for decades about “you have to be inside the tent” in order to change things. It’s rubbish, there are in fact three tent scenarios in regards to politics generally and specifically the ALP. 1. Inside the tent p*ssing out, 2. Outside the tent p*ssing in and 3. The ALP way: ordinary non aligned members inside the tent getting p*ssed all over by the faction brokers, crooks and other assorted self appointed Warlords and Bovver Boys. The ALP has burnt off more members than any other party I would suggest. The very suggestion that people should join to “change things” is a myth.
Leigh, one of the best of what politicians and Politics can provide. Astute, a masterly intelligence, and possessed with an independent, articulate and forthright social conscience. I love the way he advocates consistently for those traditionally marginalised – women, non-European migrants and the poor. His heart and head are in the right place. Were Albo to reward his skill and capacity with a senior portfolio we’d get a better Labour Government.
O and by the way he identifies as Atheist. Though he had hard-working Methodist parents. His mother, for instance, kept a room in the family home which was used for a series of refugees, one after another, as they fled repressive regimes such as Pol Pot’s Cambodian dictatorship.
You forgot, he is also amongst the hardest working MPs in Parliament – upper or lower house.
Ahh, missed the sarcasm (above) and missed Leigh’s hard work. Ha ha.
Leigh’s work rebuilding the charities sector and the ACNC has been heroic after the former minister appointed Gary Johns as Commissioner and wanted to fine charities for advocating for better policy. It’s a shame Leigh’s not the Assistant Treasurer as he would run rings around the previous one.
However Leigh does have a blind spot when it comes to the consequences of mass immigration. That’s the one problem with economists. They sometimes live too much in theory and not enough in the real world.
Cheers President. Good info.
I’d love to hear Guy Rundle’s perspective on this.
Indeed. And I’m going to ask again (sorry, Keane; I know this is twice), when is Rundle coming out of the sin bin?
I’m wondering if Crikey still has him in the sin-bin or whether he has told Crikey to get stuffed.
Maybe the children who call themselves “editors” deserve the sack, not the person who perhaps needed editing?
Is that just a long winded way of saying Labor is now Liberal Lite?
Australian politics is very clubby these days, as is the media. Just watch Insiders to see what I mean.
eg Marles and Dutton are best mates. If that doesn’t make you nauseous, I don’t know what would.
And the combined IQ still doesn’t reach the level required to no longer qualify for intellectual disability services.
I thought it was Marles and Christopher Pyne.
Well, suspicions confirmed. This explains a lot about how one of the best, if not the best, credentialed individual in Canberra is left loitering in the lower echelons while grafters, grifters and shysters advance themselves. Fortunately it’s not like this in the Liberal and National Parties.
Poor use of sarcasm, many people will misunderstand you…
Well, I remember that nice Mr Turnbull assuring the nation in parliament, that the Liberal party didn’t have factions (accompanied by raucous laughter from both sides of the chamber). So it must be true because Mr Turnbull had such a nice smile…
From memory, it was worse than that. It was not Parliament, it was at a conference of the NSW Division of the Liberal Party.
And how that audience fell about guffawing!
All Talcum could do was open & close his mouth whilst mewling ineffectually “It’s true…!” – trooly dooly!
I’d be surprised if any politically aware reader of Crikey would misunderstand. And I doubt there are many readers who are not politically aware.
Your kidding right?
Yes, of course he is.