It’s been interesting to see the public debate come out in the past few days around who was responsible for the loss of the ALP.
I told a friend the other day that I believe there are not two narratives between right and left in the party about what went wrong. There are actually three narratives.
These are:
1. The Sussex Street Narrative – supported by the Head Office party machine.
2. The Macquarie Street Narrative – supported by the NSW parliamentary right faction, and other supporters of electricity privatisation.
3. The Rank and File Narrative – supported by the left faction, some unions, and other rank and file reformers.
The three narratives can be summarized by examining the following questions.
Why did Labor lose?
Who is responsible for it losing?
Should electricity have been privatized?
Where does the ALP go from here?
Lets examine the three arguments in detail.
The Sussex Street Narrative
Key Supporters: Sam Dastyari, Mark Arbib, Graham Richardson
Key articles/texts:
Sam Dastyari’s article in the SMH
Mark Arbib’s 7.30 report interview
Graham Richardson’s article in The Australian
Why did Labor lose?
Labor lost for two main reasons. Firstly, it was at the end of a natural political cycle of sixteen years. Secondly, Labor ran a bad government in the last four years, which made the loss much worse than it should have been. We went through an unnecessary public fight about privatization, which resulted in the downfall of a premier. We then went through two more premiers and a number of ministerial scandals, and took our eye off the ball on policy that helps working families.
Who is responsible for the ALP losing?
The parliamentary wing is primarily responsible. It pushed the privatization debate against the will of the party and the Unions. It attempted to defy the will of conference to get the policy voted up. It is also responsible for the poor behavior of MPs. Sussex Street is not to blame for any of this stuff happening.
Should electricity have been privatized?
Both the party members and the unions didn’t support it. The public were also strongly opposed. There was the risk the ALP would lose office over it. Therefore we were opposed.
The parliamentary wing persisted with the policy even when it was voted down at conference. This was technically against party rules and a breach of the McKell model. Eric Roozendal’s second attempt was also a bad idea. Both of these attempts resulted in a complete loss of confidence in us by the public.
Where does the ALP go from here?
Some reform is necessary to re-engage our base and grow our party at the grassroots, but not any reform that weakens Sussex Street’s hold over the party. People will come back to labor if we start talking about the issues that concern them.
The Macquarie Street Narrative
Key Supporters: Morris Iemma, Michael Costa, Paul Keating
Key texts:
Michael Costa’s Opinion piece in The Australian
Simon Bensen’s book, “Betrayal”
Paul Keating’s interview on the 7.30 report
Why did Labor lose?
Labor lost because our plans for privatization were blocked. This brought down Morris Iemma, Michael Costa and destroyed the government.
Who is to blame?
Sussex street, the unions and the ALP Left are all to blame. The unions and the left ganged up on the parliamentary wing to block the sale at conference. Sussex Street didn’t back the Premier, and instead undermined his position. They willfully and publicly supported the destruction of the government.
Sussex Street should never have intervened in the debate and stood against the Premier. Under the traditions of the McKell model, the party machine should have supported the government of the day in whatever policy it was putting forward, even if that meant it taking a stand against the Unions. Sussex Street are a soul-less policy free zone of hacks who just sit around listening to focus groups instead of helping the party tackle hard policy reform.
Should electricity have been privatized?
Yes. The sale would have allowed competition in the sector, driving prices down. Morris Iemma’s sale model also gave concessions to union members, but the Unions decided to say no. The sale would have delivered a windfall to government that could have been spent on Infrastructure. We were so convinced of the correctness of this policy that we pushed it even after conference voted it down.
Where does the ALP go from here?
Reforms need to be introduced to restrict the power of Unions and the Sussex Street machine to undermine the prerogatives of the Parliamentary Labor party. We need to get back to the McKell model where the party leadership stands with the parliamentary wing, not the industrial wing. Anyone involved in the destruction of the government from the Sussex Street/Unions side should not have any place in the party’s future. Mark Arbib, John Robertson, Bernie Riordan and others should not be in positions of influence.
The Rank and File Narrative
Key Supporters: Luke Foley, Andrew West, Paul Pearce, Rodney Cavalier, Darcy Byrne
Key texts:
Luke Foley’s Message to ALP members
Andrew West’s SMH article
Rodney Cavalier’s book “Power Crisis”
Paul Pearce statements
Darcy Byrne SMH article today
Why did Labor lose?
Labor’s loss can not be explained away as some end of a political cycle. The sheer scale of the loss can only be explained by deeper, more serious structural problems within the ALP.
The party stopped sticking up for workers and we failed to build the infrastructure and services that they need. We had no on the ground presence at the election and this made it worse. The ALP has completely lost touch with the concerns of the community, because we stopped being a party that has any presence or connection to the community.
The party should never have even started the debate about electricity privatization. It was never going to be supported by the community. Morris Iemma himself had said before the 2007 election that he wouldn’t do it.
Who is to Blame?
Sussex Street is primarily to blame. Macquarie Street was wrong to push privatization, but most of the MP’s in Macquarie street owe their careers to Sussex street anyway. For all intents and purposes they are the same machine called Centre Unity (the NSW Right), and they are just having an internal dispute.
Over the past few decades, Sussex Street has:
a) Wrecked the ALP’s grassroots base by taking power away from them over preselections and policy
b) run a corrupt patronage machine from head office via powerbrokers like Tripodi, Roozendal and Obeid
c) Promoted soul-less hacks, fundraisers and right wing ideologues to seats in state (and federal) parliament.
This machine created the debacle of the ALP in the last term.
Should electricity have been privatized?
No. Electricity assets are utilities and should be kept in public ownership, especially generators. Private ownership in electricity just pushes prices up with no guarantee of new assets. The policy did not have the support of unions, the party, or the electorate. Eric Roozendal’s second attempt was even worse than the previous model and led to the certain collapse of our base vote.
If the party wants to change policies on public ownership it must seek a mandate at conference. If this mandate is rejected by conference, further attempts are against the platform.
Where does the ALP go from here?
The ALP must grow as an organization if it is to survive and get back in touch with the community, and survive as a party of social democracy.
Reforms need to be introduced at the next State conference to take power away from Sussex Street and Macquarie Street and give it back to the rank and file. Party members must always have the say over rank and file pre-selections and the ALP platform, without Sussex Street intervention or defiance from Macquarie Street.
The party should implement the recommendations of the 2010 ALP National Review at the next NSW ALP conference in full. The party should also consider reforms that go even further than the ones contained in that document to promote the grassroots.
Conclusion
As can be seen, all three views share some common ground with each other. All parties agree that the fight over privatization, the way it occurred, was just plain dumb.
Sussex Street and the Rank and File were on the side of public opinion in opposing electricity privatization.
Macquarie Street and the Rank and File have no particular sympathy for Sussex Street’s Iron Grip on power in the ALP (but for different reasons).
Macquarie Street and Sussex Street may hate each other, but they aren’t particularly interested in grassroots democracy (apart from paying it lip service).
This is an argument about power in the ALP, and who controls it.
A solution to the issue will probably depend on debate and compromise, or else the rank and file getting more of the numbers to force change. John Robertson’s role in championing one view or the other will be key. Whether one argument wins the day will ultimately be up to the numbers at conference. Personally I'm a strong supporter of the Rank and File Argument.
If the party gets it right, it could be a real clause IV moment, and renewal and growth will come quicker. If not, Labor will spend a long time in the doghouse.
