The sudden and sad death of Labor Senator Kimberley Kitching has been the occasion for a pretty extraordinary display of politicking within the Labor Party, and the usual gormless amnesia in the mainstream media.
Kitching, 52, in a high-pressure job, taking medication for a thyroid problem, died of a heart attack between meetings in the interminable process of selecting Labor’s Victoria Senate list.
From the moment her death was announced, her allies in the subsection of the right were framing it as the product of “bullying” by other factions who had been trying to remove her from the Senate list and had earlier excluded her from the tactics committee.
What else did they have to add to these charges? That someone had made a nasty remark about her childlessness with regards to policy. That was about it. At which point one could only conclude that this wasn’t your grandma’s Labor Party any more. This was what Bill Shorten and others were alleging brought on premature death? Standard factional jockeying and a few nasty remarks?
Fighting for survival
Initially this struck your correspondent as ice-cold. The AWU/Shorten faction is fighting for its survival after former allies — the “cons” — allied with the National (i.e. Albanese) left. Kitching’s elevation to the Senate had only occurred through Shorten’s position as opposition leader, had been heavily criticised at the time, and had been tenuous at best once Shorten was gone (and his ally Adem Somyurek was expelled and his “mods” faction scattered).
Were they so desperate to hold on to internal power that they would give the Coalition the resources to portray Labor as violent, misogynistic etc over nothing but standard political procedure? Apparently so, and using a tragic and unusual death as a pretext.
Turns out it was a little more complex than that. Sources inside Labor say Kitching was genuinely emotionally distraught over her imminent dumping, and appeared to have been surprised and shocked by her targeting for removal. If true, this is bizarre.
With the federal party taking over the Victorian branch, and an open hunting season on Somyurek and Shorten-aligned state MPs, how could she not have seen what was coming? Had she started to believe her own PR spin — that the former low-level factional warrior, down in the dirty business of using a healthcare union as an operating base, was now a champion of human rights without a political past?
This was the image Kitching cultivated, assisted by those around her, and above all by those basically aligned with the Labor right in the press who were happy to wipe away any history of factional skulduggery.
Foreign policy push
Both Kitching and her supporters vastly overrated the impact this was having in the eyes of the electorate, who care little about foreign policy. This section of the Labor right does tend to see itself in some heroic light — defenders of the West, the US alliance and Israel. The pose made Kitching popular among a right-wing media clique, and little known anywhere else.
But in cultivating that image, and by being so willing to work with Coalition members on foreign policy (i.e. anti-China) questions, Kitching made herself a target for removal. She was working almost as an independent senator.
In particular, her very close political relationship with Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) Senator James Paterson — as part of the ridiculously named “Wolverines” group — raised eyebrows. It was certainly a factor in getting her excluded from the party’s tactics committee.
Although the Shorten/AWU group saw its politics as “moderate right” compared with the SDA crazies, Kitching seemed to be to the right of the SDA. She was de facto a DLP senator within the ALP, and the left was fairly convinced she was leaking anti-Labor-left titbits to the Coalition. Her crime was not honesty or independence, but hubris.
That her faction — ever more beleaguered with her death — would try on the “bullying” thing is interesting. It appears to mark the end of any notion of Labor as a party expressing toughness and resilience in a fight against capital on behalf of the working- and middle- classes.
Ready to be tough
The idea of Labor, back in the day, was that people going into politics to make a kinder, better world, had to take on a certain toughness — because the bastards on the other side were not encumbered by a generous feeling for anyone.
For a decade or so, Labor made great fun of the Greens’ internal discourse of fairness, anti-bullying etc. Now it’s the Greens who look tougher and more resolute, and Labor which looks like an emotional basket case.
The charge that vigorous political contestation in a party — a situation you signed on for, competing at that level — caused a fatal heart attack is bullshit, a deliberate category error. If we applied that standard, public life would be unperformable.
It’s snowflakism at its worst, yet none of the right-wing commentariat were willing to call it that.
Labor is obviously hurting itself by using this snowflake language for its internal warfare — but the only conclusion you can draw is that this section of the right doesn’t care. And it seems especially unconcerned that News Corp is running with it big time — with Michael Danby, former member for Tel Aviv, in the Oz today adding to the snowflake line, and a ludicrous beat-up by Sharri Markson as a follow-on.
Why is Labor’s snowflake brigade doing this? Partly it thinks victory is assured enough to take the risk of factional warfare anyway … but also partly because it really doesn’t care about the election. If Labor was to lose, well — everyone else in the party would be so demoralised that the faction could start to rebuild its strength.
You find that too awful to believe? Then don’t join the Labor Party, cos it’ll kill ya.
Rundle’s description of Kitching as a de facto DLP senator goes neatly with Morrison’s statement after her death which included this, “Senator Kitching was a practising Catholic and we witnessed her authentic faith in the life of the parliament. She followed her conscience and was fearless and I admired that.”
Kitching giving an interview to The Australian in February which attacked her colleagues strongly corroborates suspicions that she lacked the basic party loyalty and values required. Shorten was genuinely distraught about her sudden death and that is fair enough, but his judgement in promoting her looks very questionable and so does his willingness now to attack some of his own party for having doubts about her.
It was questionable back then, so it’s more than looking questionable now. Jobs for the mates, a classic case.
FWIW, KK and Chloe were besties from school days- hence the personal grief from Shorten.
Sorry Old Rat, I don’t think we should be discussing the dead in such a fashion.
The dead are owed nothing but the truth.
It is in poor taste and the dead are neither here to defend themselves and it causes more grief for the family and friends.
Defense from truth?
Defense from “alleged truth”.
It is a tragedy to die so young and suddenly but she was a politician hence this is the only reason media talks about her. Her politics will not be missed by many on the left. She was a child of the ugly side of Labor politics. I was connected a long time ago with our Health Unions and they were as bad as people say. A so called champion of Human rights but ignored the plight of Palestinians. More interested in fighting for Washington’s and Israel’s geo political interests rather than core Labor values. As well as a key player in fracturing our relationship with China and persistent sabre rattler. She had more in common with Dutton, Hastie, Patterson and Morrison and I wondered which side of politics she was actually representing. Not surprising there were moves to oust her from the senate.
She was no Madeleine Albright’.
You mean the lady that said the death of half a million Iraqi children was worth it for getting rid of Saddam Hussein.
Who also dropped with a stroke.
87 and still alive I believe.
My apologies it was Pamela Harriman US Ambassador to France who dropped dead from a stroke, her body was received back in the US by Madelaine Albright.
A very interesting comment on the role of the health unions. Guy is absolutely right to wonder why the ABC and Murdoch Media are being fed factional warfare material in the lead to an election. As Guy asks, why would you want to make it more likely that there will be a hung parliament when many in the electorate consign Morrison to the dust bin of failed PM’s.
As to Kimberley Kitching, it seems she was very personable but, as Guy says, a de facto DLP politician in the ALP. To suggest that she died from stress or being involved in politics is nonsense. The autopsy, which must follow any sudden death, will not conclude that. It will conclude that some heart condition was the cause of death. Such heart conditions can bring on heart attacks when life is going swimmingly or when you are stressed. Whether it will be immediately fatal will most likely depend on whether the main branch of the left coronary artery is blocked as a result of coronary artery plaques, if coronary artery disease is determined to be the cause of death. If it had some other cause, such as a ruptured Aorta, due to a process of heart failure, the autopsy will find that to be the cause of death rather than the stresses of political life.
Why then, as Guy asks, would figures in the Labor Party, feed the media, including the ABC, with ammunition to reduce the likelihood that Morrison will suffer the decisive defeat deserved by his failed Prime Ministership and willingness to lie, documented by Bernard Kean and recently instanced by his claim that he wasn’t talking about Western Australians when he called them “cave dwellers”?
Two things that I overlooked: (I) prolonged stress can increase high blood pressure and this can cause left ventricle thickening and thereby increase risk of heart failure or heart attack; (ii) high stress can narrow coronary arteries and increase likelihood of heart attack from thickening of coronary arteries. So, yes. Senator Kitching’s stress from factional disputes could have contributed to her death at an early age. It also might not have made much difference to the outcome. Perfectly happy people with high levels of low density cholesterol, high levels of triglycerides and low levels of high density cholesterol are likely to suffer from a heart attack as they past their mid fourties’. It is also true that a heart attack is made more likely if they have an under active thyroid and are suffering from continuous stress. It is highly unlikely that the main cause of the heart attack was momentary stress surrounding doubt about preselection.
Glad there are people like yourself, Guy, who keep an eye out on the history of things political.
Yes indeed. Thanks to GR for some plain speaking, sorely needed amongst the nonsense appearing on other news sites.
I was blithely unaware she was working closely with Paterson and the IPA, that is a huge black mark for Labor supporters who live outside the cut and thrust of factional brawling.
Yes- it is beyond the pale!
It is always shocking to hear of any person dying under the circumstances that claimed Senator Kitching. But to paint a distorted picture of who she was and what she did on some occasions does need calling out. It’s ironic to hear Michael Danby complaining that the late Senator was the victim of bullying. I wonder what Ms Holgate (ex Aust Post) would think of Mr Danby’s view? Let’s remember Senator Kitching was a ‘captain’s pick’ and so had never faced the voting public. The Senator used and abused (once too often) her positions on Senate Committees for her own gains at the expense of the people who were compelled to attend and answer questions. Talk about a ‘power imbalance’. The only person I know of who has refused to answer (in public) one of her questions was Mike Burgess (ASIO). Her ‘hit job’ on Christine Holgate is seared into the memory bank of every woman I know who works at any executive level in this country.To give a consequential ‘free kick’ to Scott Morrison was a disgrace.Senator Kitching was no ‘Madeleine Albright’.” There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women”.
Senator Kitchings was not the person who bullied Christine Holgate.
She asked valid questions during a senate estimates session, based upon the information fed to her from who benefited from the Cartier watches brouhahaha?
No, it was Scott Morrison who took it to the level of “I have asked her (Christine Holgate) to stand aside and if she won’t stand aside “She can go, She can go Mr Speaker”.
The Prime Minimal bestirred himself to publicly victimize and humiliate the head of a statutory authority from the floor of Parliament under parliamentary privilege. Contrast this with the defence of Christian Porter…….
I expect we will agree to disagree on this point. Although someone else (?) fed the information (provided the weapon) to Senator K, it was the Senator who asked the questions to (ie fired the ‘weapon’ at) Holgate in the Senate Committee environment. The fact that Senator K did not recognise the danger she put herself in says something about her political skills. Too many people focus on the small amount paid for those watches. Compare the price paid for those tokens of appreciation to the benefit Holgate and her team achieved with that amazing deal that saved so many LPOs all over the country. If you have every lived in a rural area you will appreciate that the two most important businesses in the ‘village’ are a) the pub and b) the Post Office.
It is not an exaggeration that Holgate’s deal saved the only general store/PO in twovillages within 100kms of my location.
Thankyou.
Not so. Scomo only did what he did to Ms Holgate in Parliament to appease Labor, attack a woman which is what he and Libs do best and present a sacrificial lamb for corporate excess – something he could only do to a public corporation like Australia Post and could never do to a public listed company, private equity group, consortium or private company. The question KK asked were of a pitiful, peripheral nature – Cartier watches, and could have been brought up in another forum, not used in a parliamentary forum for one woman to attack another. I notice KK has never grilled or shrieked at heads of Home Affairs which have wasted far more money on various schemes and practices. KK did bully Christine Holgate in a nasty ambush reminscent of an attack dog barrister cross-examining a rape victim or defendent.
The Holgate imbroglio showed ‘Labor’ at its shallowest, grifting gutter level – they were gamed by a disgruntled AP functionary who passed on the tale of the Cartier watches.
As when Talcum was gulled by Bookshelves & Goblin Wretch over Utegate, both sides showed how lacking in probity & integrity, not to mention common sense and/or decency, they really are.
So drooling puppy eager to embarrass each other, principle be damned.
More incomprehensible gibberish. Try using actual names for once.
Scotty has never tried to appease Labor any more than Labor has tried to appease China. Like everything it was Scotty trying to gain some personal advantage. Perhaps a dictionary might help?
Uhhhh you mean by accepting Sam Dastyari’s resignation for 15,000$ he returned from a chinese donor for travel expenses? I mean Stuart Robert had that much for “work internet” and some claiming his govs failed NBN rollout prevented him from working from home? Or what about the 1 MILLION dollars from an unknown donor to a blind trust for our ex AG? Get off the web with the hypocrisy.
The Age today also had a nauseating encomium to the late senator; an indication, if one were needed, of their value in the eyes of the oligarchy.