Tuesday 11 November 2014

ALP reform stymied by branch stacking allegations

ALP reform stymied by branch stacking allegations



61


When Bill Shorten said he wanted to increase rank and
file Labor Party participation in the party, he probably didn’t mean
more branch stacking by factional powerbrokers like Laurie Ferguson,
says Peter Wicks from Wixxyleaks.






Opposition Leader Bill Shorten was the guest on ABC Insiders
last week and he spoke well on a number of issues, however something
important surfaced when he was queried on Labor Party reform.




Shorten told viewers that he was taking measures to bring the ALP
into touch with community expectations by increasing rank and file
participation within the Party. However the most important thing Bill
repeated ‒ several times ‒ was about having the best candidates
possible.




On that note, I’m sorry to say, Bill has a long way to go to achieve his goals.



The fact is, there are factional players who are seeking to ensure
the worst candidates are promoted, as they are the easiest people to
control.




Here in NSW we are going through the often entertaining and usually
ugly process of pre-selection, this time for the upcoming State
election.




Some of you may recall an article I wrote regarding the candidate for Seven Hills —
Susai Benjamin. The article went into some claims that have been made
about the finances of his Toongabbie Legal Centre and others regarding
his comments about domestic violence.




Many feel this is candidate that will see Labor lose the seat, which
it has held for over half a century. However given he is alleged to have
the branches stacked full of supporters who only appear at
pre-selection time, nobody had enough backers to stand against him.




This article saw me receive a bit of grief from Federal Labor member Laurie Ferguson,
who is the man backing Mr Benjamin for the Labor candidacy despite the
outcry from the public, the members, and many within the Party itself.
Mr Benjamin is such a questionable candidate, it took over four months
for him to get through the Candidate Review Committee — a committee
whose recent final decisions have themselves been highly suspect.






It may be that, after Mr Benjamin loses the Seven Hills seat, Laurie
Ferguson will put another puppet in place to have another crack, perhaps
even his long time close family friend Fiona Field, who Ferguson's branch members have claimed to have met at a Ferguson Christmas function.




Ferguson has also put the considerable weight of his ego and support behind Julia Finn
for the seat of Granville. Julia Finn is a councillor on Parramatta
Council, who so far has ‒ as far as I can see ‒ done an exceptional job
at doing nothing much.




Ferguson likes these candidates, because they are easy to control,
will always back his point of view and will vote in the way he suggests.




One problem with a party full of puppets is that it will end up without a decent leader.



Branch stacking is a problem in both sides of politics, but there is
no doubt it is acting as a cancer within the ALP and is a practice at
which Laurie Ferguson appears exceptionally capable.




I find it extremely ironic that Ferguson would claim that I am against democratic rank and file process, given that he was initially parachuted into his Federal seat without the member pre-selection he now apparently holds in such high-esteem.



I am not against rank and file democracy — I am simply against branch stacking.



Barbara Perry, BA LLB MP
Over the weekend it was reported in Fairfax that the long time and well-respected Member for Auburn Barbara Perry was
in trouble, with the allegation another of Laurie Ferguson's puppets
has been busily stacking the local branches against her.




Barbara Perry is a member whom would fit under Bill Shorten's “best possible candidates” category. She is well-respected, works hard for her community, is a former minister and is a current shadow minister.



She does not, however, have Laurie Ferguson’s strings attached to her and so her endorsement is vulnerable.



It is understood that complaints about branch stacking have been made to Labor’s Sussex Street state headquarters  over the former Auburn mayor Hicham Zraika’s sudden surge in supporters, which has rosin to around 300 in the Regents Park branch since 2012.



Many of these supporters live in Zraika’s modest two bedroom home
according to Labor Party records and many others live in houses that
must be overflowing with member’s families. Nine members are even
registered as living at a business address.




Just as he has done with the numerous complaints regarding Susai
Benjamin’s branch stacking that have gone to Sussex St, NSW Labor
Secretary Jamie Clements has dismissed all the complaints involving
Hicham Zraika.




Jamie Clements is reported to have said at the State Labor conference, he wanted to see



“… no more ethnic branch stacking."




Branch stacking is branch stacking — the word ethnic shouldn’t come into it.



Fortunately for Mr Ferguson's friends this new rule of Jamie Clements
does not seem to apply — in fact, given recent goings on, it would even
appear to be encouraged.




The number of questionable candidates with Clements’ blessing and
Ferguson’s strings have some members questioning the closeness of the
relationship between the two Party powerbrokers.




The branch-stacking behaviour of people like Susai Benjamin and
Hicham Zraika should see them kicked out of the Party, not chosen to
represent it.






For State Secretary Clements, it is about time Labor Party members
saw some action around this issue, not just more hollow words.




Why is this a debate that has to be pushed aside and done with
factional leaders behind closed doors, while Bill Shorten announces to
the rank and file they are going to have a bigger say?




Why is it that whenever I have a conversation with someone in a
position of power regarding party reform it always starts with the
immortal words:




“This is off the record.”




It’s about time we had something other than spin and lies put on the record; the membership expects and deserves better.



Jamie Clements, I hope you are up to the task.



Maybe you’d better check with Laurie.









Peter Wicks is an ALP member and a Labor candidate at the last NSW State election.



Creative Commons Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License



Friday 7 November 2014

Dear Bill Shorten: you're the opposition leader, not me. It's time to drop your soft bipartisanship

Dear Bill Shorten: you're the opposition leader, not me. It's time to drop your soft bipartisanship



Dear Bill Shorten: you're the opposition leader, not me. It's time to drop your soft bipartisanship




I
can’t oppose the government alone. Shorten needs to realise that
legislator’s remorse doesn’t make up for Labor’s weak opposition to
national security creep



bill shorten

‘Labor once had a fine tradition of defending civil liberties. What happened to that?’
Photograph: Mike Bowers








Dear Bill Shorten, I’d like a word.


Leading the opposition, in case you haven’t noticed, is your job. So
could you do it, please? I’m not the opposition leader, despite the fact
that the media keep pretending I am.



Don’t get me wrong, I admired the way you faced down the Australian Christian Lobby on marriage equality,
but in your position, once is not enough. If you don’t stand up for
civil liberties, we will soon have no liberties left to defend.



At the moment I’m the only consistent defender of civil liberties in the current parliament. On 35P and journalists going to jail,
18C and people choosing to be offended, or super-secret search warrants
that cannot be mentioned, I am the only one to have raised objections
each time.



Of course, there are people in all parties who agree with me, but
they’re either unwilling to speak up, or are selective about their
concerns. I’ve also had minimal support from the Coalition media
commentariat, who don’t seem to understand that their “team” will not
always be in power. I’m left to do it, and I’m sick of it.



Your desire to avoid being seen as “soft” on terror has led to a
situation where you’re competing with Tony Abbott to see who has the
hairiest chest, and since we’ve all seen Tony in his budgie smugglers,
this is a competition you are destined to lose.



It’s time to drop the bipartisanship, particularly on the data
retention proposals. These have nothing to do with national security and
everything to do with allowing every busy-body who works for the
government to snoop on ordinary citizens.



I’d like you to tell the Australian people that until the European
court of justice struck down the EU’s 2006 data retention directive
earlier this year, the equivalent legislation in the UK to Australia’s
data retention bill was used to chase people for things like minor
welfare fraud, littering, and dog fouling. Yes, I know that standing in
dog shit isn’t fun, but spying on perpetrators isn’t going to help
defeat Islamists either.



Data retention will not bother the technically competent and those
who hide in the recesses of the “DarkNet”. It will catch the journalist
who finds the odd leak and the parliamentarian who wanders into a
brothel with his iPhone switched on. Thanks to the wonders of GPS, the
Chinese will know every Australian politician’s geographic foibles for
the previous two years.



And I’m sure the ATO and the ACCC will love data retention as much as
their counterparts did in the UK. In fact, I’m fairly sure it will be
used to spy on petrol stations in the ongoing “bowser wars”.



Your bipartisanship on national security is also galling because it
is stopping the Senate from functioning as Australia’s house of review.
During my first week as a senator, in early July, you may recall
inviting me to meet with you and Penny Wong, where you stressed the
importance of allowing the Senate to do its job and not curtailing
debate.



This bipartisanship meant that last Wednesday, a number of useful
amendments to the risible, illiberal foreign fighters bill were voted
down without a single word of debate. This happened because on Tuesday,
Labor agreed to the government’s guillotine motion.



Only now, after passage of that bill into law, have you written to
Abbott, asking him to “please reconsider” both tranches of the national
security legislation. Only in the hurly-burly of the chamber in the
midst of a sitting week did you let your shadow attorney general produce
some decent quality amendments.



I doubt that any amount of legislator’s remorse will be of much help to the people who discover they have been criminalised.


I urge you to lead the alternative government, the
government-in-waiting. Labor once had a fine tradition of defending
civil liberties. What happened to that? Just because the Coalition is
struggling in the polls at the moment doesn’t mean victory in the next
election will drop into your lap like a ripe plum off a branch.



I know the scene at the end of Stanley Kubrick’s Spartacus – where
lots of people stand up and claim to be Spartacus – is one of the great
cinematic moments, but that’s not how Australian politics works. You are
the leader of the opposition. You need to stand up and be counted.



Thursday 6 November 2014

IT'S TIME
IT'S TIME TO DITCH BILL SHORTEN AND HAVE ANTHONY ALBANESE AS THE LEADER OF THE LABOR PARTY


it's time for Bill Shorten to resign and give way to Anthony Albanese to lead the Labor Party.