In an “exclusive” splashed across the front page of today’s Australian, Canberra-based Sid Maher and Matthew Franklin reported “internal ALP polling” that seemed to say Jennifer Kanis was doomed in her quest to hold off the rising Greens tide in the looming Melbourne byelection.
While a poll in one small state district 800 kilometres from The Oz‘s principal newsroom doesn’t usually make it above the fold, in this case special circumstances applied — this appeared to be a straight up destabilisation drop to white-ant Julia Gillard.
As Crikey noted on Monday, the most intriguing element to come out of the NSW Right’s Greens smackdown is the leadership dynamic, as Kevin Rudd readies himself to be rescued from backbench purgatory by right-aligned unions and MPs.
While Maher and Franklin’s yarn was thin on detail, the (presumably federal, presumably Right) source made certain one telling metric was included: “three times as many people cited the performance of the federal government rather than the performance of the state government as the reason they would not vote for Labor”.
This amounted to a sanctioned attack on Gillard by the faction that backed her in February — now the Rudd-backing Left and elements of Right are starting to agree.
But on policy, the factions remain at war. Behind the scenes, and despite the apparent support of federal Left conveners like Stephen Jones, Labor’s inner-city left — those actually running Kanis’ campaign — has been troubled by the broader Greens attack launched by luminaries north of the Murray.
In the state seat of Melbourne, the ALP vote has nearly halved over the last 10 years. And it’s the prospect of one day losing their grip on the federal fiefdoms of Sydney and Grayndler (and continuing to be shut out in Melbourne) that has driven the dismay — even if the Liberals mimic NSW Labor’s bid to put the Greens last.
The Left’s Melissa Parke — who could conceivably come under pressure in Fremantle — provided some pushback yesterday, saying the move amounted to “mutually assured destruction”.
One senior Victorian Left source concurred, but said the NSW Right’s motivation went beyond the impact on the primary vote and stemmed from a deep-seated desire to see the destruction of the Left’s grassroots infrastructure.
“The real winners here are the Right of the party,” they said. “They’ll be happy as Larry that the rest of us are tied up in ethical knots while they get to continue to de-legitimise progressives both inside the party and out. The [Sam] Dastyaris, [David] Feeneys and [Michael] Danbys will be dancing a jig. Their logic is perfectly self-perpetuating: paint the Greens as extremists and ipso facto, anyone who holds their pinko-lefty beliefs is similarly invalid.”
On this view, the votes lost to the Greens are the same types of people that have for decades been the kind of professional or academic types that provide what’s left of Labor with its intellectual rigour and political legitimacy.
“Thinking people in those seats automatically know that the Greens’ policy on asylum seekers isn’t ‘loopy’ or radical … every time the federal party launches that line they have a gut reaction that makes them switch sides,” the source said.
“The federal parliamentary Left are letting their well-founded concerns about the safety of asylum seekers blind them to the true intentions of Dastyari and co … they might shore-up some Western Sydney electorates, but in doing so they’ll create Greens fortresses in what were traditional Labor heartlands.”
Sam Dastyari slammed that view as “farcical” this morning: “Inner city branches are crucial to Labor’s success and there’s been a great amount of support from parliamentary Left leaders including Stephen Jones and Doug Cameron,” he said.
“The Labor Party needs to be united and work together to achieve its social and political outcomes.”
But beneath the vitriol, there remains one possible point of convergence — a swelling of support for Rudd to retake the Lodge. Watch this space.
45 thoughts on “Labor Right white-ants Gillard as Rudd rises”
Mike Smith
July 11, 2012 at 3:13 pmYou mean voting 1 2 2 2 to stop distribution of preferences? As you say, I don’t think that style of voting counts now.
Owen Gary
July 11, 2012 at 3:14 pmThis right wing infiltration of Labor is destroying the party, they are just business people out for their cut, otherwise known as Liberals.
People have pointed this out for years yet their numbers have increased in the party. They will eventually implode unless they are expelled.
Frank Campell you are wrong after 1 term of the “Fibs” the Greens primary would rocket. You call it climate extemism whilst the ice is fast disappearing in Antartica, It’s happening mate time to wake up.
The two parties can’t play the collusion game for much longer, something has to give & once it does the the public will wise up real quick, I hope!!!
Hugh (Charlie) McColl
July 11, 2012 at 3:16 pmGeomac62, so many people talk about voting “below the line” as if this choice is available on the House of Reps ballot paper. It is not – above/below the line voting is only available on the Senate ballot paper. I sometimes wonder how many people just have no idea what they are doing when they vote. Plenty seem to believe that they are compelled to follow the ‘instruction’ given on the how-to-vote card handed to them at the school gate. Ho hum.
A small bonus in voting 1 Green (before distributing preferences in whatever fashion takes your fancy) is that the Greens Party gets the $2 electoral funding that only goes to the party winning the first preference vote.
CML
July 11, 2012 at 3:27 pmI agree with SM – Rudd has said many times he had nothing to do with the leaks during the last federal election. What the hell is going on? Not everyone in the Labor Party is a liar, even if the MSM (especially Ltd News) would like you to believe that.
Have any of you had a look at the polls over the past 12 months? Rudd is preferred PM by a country mile, and that includes doing Abbott over. There is also some evidence (in a couple of polls) I have seen that under Rudd the Labor Party vote is around 38-40%. No one in their right mind can ignore that kind of evidence.
In this article, Andrew hints at some internal ALP polling. IMHO it must be showing much the same thing, so the right wing have woken up to what the electorate is saying. If Rudd is reinstalled, alters some of the disasters that are currently causing so much angst, and then calls an early election, at the very least Labor will not be left with the proverbial cricket team. Who knows – the way Mr rAbbott is going totally over the top, it might just be possible for Rudd to win. Perhaps all the people need is a decent alternative.
Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)
July 11, 2012 at 3:30 pmEven in Higgins (one the wealthier and more educated electorates) many people have no understanding of how our preferential voting works.
As Hugh says, voting 1 for a party (which gets enough votes to qualify) gives them some money.
And in a seat like Higgins which at the moment is Liberal or Labor, voting Green sends a strong message to the major party you put next that you are not happy with them. In Higgins about 20% of the Greens voters choose Liberal over Labor. These voters are not lost votes to Labor, they are votes which the Liberals have lost.
In Higgins it also makes no difference whether the Greens have an open ticket or preference Labor – either way about 20% of Green voters next choose Liberal.
geomac62
July 11, 2012 at 3:38 pmI think the last senate ballot paper had some 50 odd squares , maybe more . Basically its who you want first and who you want at the end which in my case was Fielding . A lot of the others apart from second pick can be hard to determine because lack of knowledge about what they stand for except maybe a party with a name that shows you such as the shooters party . I get a postal vote so time isn,t that much of a concern compared to the polling booth .
Mike Smith
July 11, 2012 at 4:23 pm@Geomac: It’s getting so hard to decide who I want to put last. The Coalition or the nutters? (but I repeat myself)
Russell
July 11, 2012 at 4:53 pmI wonder what the Greens 12% is worth… Why should Labor bother trying to keep its inner city Left “infrastructure” if it loses the rest of the country? When Labor is as “progressive” as the Greens (i.e. has identical policies, because the Greens are not giving an inch away on any of then) then the 12% of Australians who like those policies can split their vote.
So how will that look? 6% each? Or a 8/4 split? (favouring the Greens, of course). 88% Coalition. Hmmm… At least Albo and Tanya will still have a “fiefdom” though. And the “professional or academic types” who supply the party with so much “intellectual rigour” will them have plenty to theorise about.
But thats all they’ll be doing.
CarlitosM
July 11, 2012 at 4:54 pmAnd again the main objective or the ALP right wingers is achieved: just before their National Conference in Sydney this weekend, NOBODY is talking about the motions on equal marriage (among many others!), let alone the actual likely votes…
What else are not talking about now by bringing up KRudd? The Victorian By-Election? Indigenous Intervention?
Phaser Norton
July 11, 2012 at 4:59 pmWondering if Mr Crook realises how obvious is his own bias?