http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/labors-membership-crisis-theyre-not-the-only-ones/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:48:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/labors-membership-crisis-theyre-not-the-only-ones/#comment-25398 Peter Abcam Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25398 The question that always enters my mind when I read aritcles like Charles Richardson's is why the author seems to think it's the political parties that need to face up to the problem of declining membership. Surely it should be a concern for everyone. It doesn't matter if either major party's membership ratio reaches 1:1000 or worse, unless there's a third party that could truly knock them off as the government or opposition, they'll keep kicking. Our system demands and supports it. Regular internal party reviews aside (post-bad election loss or after years in opposition), there's no real impetus for either party to undertake any radical change that starts attracting members by the truckload. Sooner or later they'll gain government again (we voters will make sure of that) and then corporate donors will help heal any financial dire straits for a while. Remember the cries about a Federal Labor party facing doom and opposition for all eternity? Change the leader, win an election, and all is sweet. Not that there's been any change within the party though. Declining political engagement is resulting in an ever smaller number of influencers controlling political outcomes. If you're elitist, that's probably OK (although you might want to meet some of the dross first, it's not like they are all Philosopher Kings). If you're not, you might want to get worried. But then, hey, this is Australia after all and we don't get ansty until it's too late and staring us in the face (or more accurately, punched us in the eye). And if you're a Greens supporter and salivate at the opportunity to truly become a potential party of government, you'll need to face up to a change in name, leader, and find a rich backer or six that can fund a full suite of candidates and associated party workers for at least 3 federal and state election cycles by which time you'll know whether the experiment is going to be at all successful. For the rest of us, we'll sit back and wait for the black eye. The question that always enters my mind when I read aritcles like Charles Richardson’s is why the author seems to think it’s the political parties that need to face up to the problem of declining membership. Surely it should be a concern for everyone. It doesn’t matter if either major party’s membership ratio reaches 1:1000 or worse, unless there’s a third party that could truly knock them off as the government or opposition, they’ll keep kicking. Our system demands and supports it. Regular internal party reviews aside (post-bad election loss or after years in opposition), there’s no real impetus for either party to undertake any radical change that starts attracting members by the truckload. Sooner or later they’ll gain government again (we voters will make sure of that) and then corporate donors will help heal any financial dire straits for a while. Remember the cries about a Federal Labor party facing doom and opposition for all eternity? Change the leader, win an election, and all is sweet. Not that there’s been any change within the party though. Declining political engagement is resulting in an ever smaller number of influencers controlling political outcomes. If you’re elitist, that’s probably OK (although you might want to meet some of the dross first, it’s not like they are all Philosopher Kings). If you’re not, you might want to get worried. But then, hey, this is Australia after all and we don’t get ansty until it’s too late and staring us in the face (or more accurately, punched us in the eye). And if you’re a Greens supporter and salivate at the opportunity to truly become a potential party of government, you’ll need to face up to a change in name, leader, and find a rich backer or six that can fund a full suite of candidates and associated party workers for at least 3 federal and state election cycles by which time you’ll know whether the experiment is going to be at all successful. For the rest of us, we’ll sit back and wait for the black eye.

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/labors-membership-crisis-theyre-not-the-only-ones/#comment-25399 Gillian Sneddon Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25399 It is little wonder Labor membership has dropped off when you consider that the Labor Party no longer stands for anything of substance! Anyone who has ever attended a Labor Branch meeting would know that it is pure torture. The branch members who like the sound of their own voice do all the talking, about their own personal gripes. Teachers will talk length about education, even when most of the room are over 80. The waterfront resident will have a lot to say about big boats causing splashing over the breakwall. My flippant suggestion to 'just shoot' the offenders went over their heads. The meetings would last for a few hours as Local Government, State & Federal Members gave their reports, all the while stroking their own egos as they boasted about perceived achievements. God its good to be free of all that! It is little wonder Labor membership has dropped off when you consider that the Labor Party no longer stands for anything of substance! Anyone who has ever attended a Labor Branch meeting would know that it is pure torture. The branch members who like the sound of their own voice do all the talking, about their own personal gripes. Teachers will talk length about education, even when most of the room are over 80. The waterfront resident will have a lot to say about big boats causing splashing over the breakwall. My flippant suggestion to ‘just shoot’ the offenders went over their heads. The meetings would last for a few hours as Local Government, State & Federal Members gave their reports, all the while stroking their own egos as they boasted about perceived achievements. God its good to be free of all that!

]]>