The SA Politics Thread

Anything goes here.. :) Now with Beer Garden for our smoking patrons.
Message
Author
cruel_world00
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:54 am
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#46 Post by cruel_world00 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:54 am

I don't quite understand what you're getting at SJ.... how else should the Labor Party select candidates?

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#47 Post by stumpjumper » Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:34 am

Well, democratically, you might think. By show of hands from the floor or by ballot or other vote of members.

As it is, ALP preselectees are usually appointed by one to two people who themselves are not subject to votes. Here's how it works: unions have a guaranteed 50% say within the ALP. Bear in mind that only 7% of the voting population are members of a union, and only a fraction of the membership are active within their union.

Of the 50% union say in the ALP, the dominant union is the SDA, which carries a voting proxy for each of its 23,000 SA members and 230,000 national members. The SDA is unique among unions in that its members do not actually vote. Only the executive, which appoints future executives, votes. That is why Joe de Bruyn has been national SDA boss for over 30 years and why Don Farrell was SA boss for over 20 years.

The SDA approves all preselections, Left and Right, otherwise they don't happen. The SDA also approves all Cabinet positions, and selects the Premier. It's true. Ask Peter Manilauskas, Don Farrell's replacement as SDA state secretary, who recently told Rann his time was up and to vacate his position. It's pathetic how South Australians put up with it.

So, the outgoing premier and the rank and file of right wing unions wanted Stephen Mullighan, Foley's former staffer, to be pre-selected for Mike Rann's old seat.

However, Bruce Hawker of Hawker Britten had negotiated directly with Don Farrell about allocation of funds to marginal seats in the 2010 election. It was a successful strategy, and Bruce suggested to Don that a suitable reward for Hawker Britten would be elevation to a parliamentary seat for Zoe Bettison, the Hawker Britten strategist most closely involved with the marginal seats strategy. A good way to ensure a few more years of business for Hawker Britten in SA, too. (HB had a bit to do with the disastrous NSW Labor Right fiascos of recent years and needs to cultivate new pastures like SA where the company has no reputation.)

Anyway, back to Zoe Bettison. No problem, said Don. I'll just get Stephen Mullighan moved aside for your Zoe. Tell her she'd better buy a house in Ramsey, pronto.

So it came to pass. Stephen Mullighan, biding his time at Deloittes accountants, received the phone call. 'Sorry, Steve, change of strategy. Maybe next time.'

The ability of any body or person to gain or promote a preselection depends not on any vote, but on how much clout within the Labor machine that body or person has. For example, Mike Rann tried to say when he would leave office. He didn't have the clout. He tried to name his successor in Ramsay (Mullighan). No dice. Don Farrell wanted Zoe Bettison.

I object to having the unelected, unrepresentative executive of one union decide who gets to sit in parliament. My complaint is not a naive one, either. We are a democracy, supposedly. What hope has an average person who is motivated towards public service (on the ALP side at least) of getting into parliament, unless he or she becomes intimately involved with the SDA?

The answer is - none. Even Susan Close, pre-selected for Foley's seat, has had to be approved by the SDA executive. The SDA executive remains static, year after year, elected only by their own previous executive - yet these two or three people decide who is preselected to stand for the ALP in SA.

That sucks.

As does the SDA's shopping hours policy, designed by the deeply Catholic executive to preserve Christmas and Easter holidays as much as to demonstrate the SDA's awesome power. The SDA refuses, in the face of opposition from the public, the government and retail traders and other business owners, to allow extended shopping ours in order that its members might have Christmas with their families. What about casual employees, or flexible shifts?

It's odd that the hospitality and entertainment sectors don't have the intractable 'Christmas and Easter at home' problem.

The reason they don't is that the SDA does not have a presence in the entertainment, hospitality and tourism sectors. The dominant union there is the 'Mizzees', the Liquor Trades and Miscellaneous Workers Union. Deadly enemies of the Shoppies and with hardly any devout Catholics in their properly elected administrations.

User avatar
metro
Legendary Member!
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:11 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 371 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#48 Post by metro » Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:34 pm

Labor have won Ramsay and Port Adelaide in today's twin by-elections.

more info:

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/sa/2012 ... result.htm

peas_and_corn
Legendary Member!
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:32 pm

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#49 Post by peas_and_corn » Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:10 pm

Didn't see that one coming.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#50 Post by stumpjumper » Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:53 am

It's funny that the Rann and Foley duo kept telling us how brilliant they'd been. The swings against Labor in their seats tell a different story. But all will be well. As traditional Labor hack Susan Close, now MP for Port Adelaide, tells us: 'We've been given the message, and we are listening. And from now on, we will keep listening.'

That sounds familiar.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#51 Post by stumpjumper » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:00 pm

The Rann Legacy

It will be interesting to see if anyone can find evidence of any sort of legacy left by Rann. After all, Rann was fond of telling us that Don Dunstan was his mentor and guide.

So far, the retiring head of the Adelaide Festival has bemoaned the decay of the arts in SA over the last ten years - the length of time Rann was Minister for the Arts.

That's one small bit of legacy. There must be more.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#52 Post by stumpjumper » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:03 pm

The Rann Legacy

It will be interesting to see if anyone can find evidence of any sort of legacy left by Rann. After all, Rann was fond of telling us that Don Dunstan was his mentor and guide.

So far, the retiring head of the Adelaide Festival has bemoaned the decay of the arts in SA over the last ten years - the length of time Rann was Minister for the Arts.

That's one small bit of legacy.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2922
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 111 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#53 Post by rhino » Tue Mar 20, 2012 8:47 am

stumpjumper wrote:It will be interesting to see if anyone can find evidence of any sort of legacy left by Rann.
Royal Adelaide Hospital
Port River Expressway
Northern Expressway
Sturt Highway duplication
Southern Expressway duplication
Gallipoli Underpass
Bakewell Underpass
South Road Superway
Electrification of the railways
Tram extension Vic Squ - Entertainment Centre
New modern trams
Adelaide Airport expansion
Superschools
TODs
Olympic Dam expansion
Desalination plant
Green energy promotion
PACE program
Adelaide Oval upgrade

They're all I can think of immediately.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
metro
Legendary Member!
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:11 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 371 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#54 Post by metro » Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:51 am

stumpjumper wrote:The Rann Legacy

It will be interesting to see if anyone can find evidence of any sort of legacy left by Rann. After all, Rann was fond of telling us that Don Dunstan was his mentor and guide.

So far, the retiring head of the Adelaide Festival has bemoaned the decay of the arts in SA over the last ten years - the length of time Rann was Minister for the Arts.

That's one small bit of legacy.
Stumpy this sort of thing belongs on AdelaideNow where Mike Rann is seen as an evil dictator who has turned SA from livable to wasteland.

I dont know what the retiring head of the festival is on about, the arts scene in SA has never been so good. and for Mike Rann's legacy, history is really on his side with the long list of things rhino posted, they are probably the most successful government this state has had for a very long time. I find it hard to think of any major negatives, the lockout of bars/clubs, Keith hospital, the 'troubled' desal plant are all I can think of. :roll:

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5527
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 575 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#55 Post by Will » Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:06 am

stumpjumper wrote:The Rann Legacy

It will be interesting to see if anyone can find evidence of any sort of legacy left by Rann. After all, Rann was fond of telling us that Don Dunstan was his mentor and guide.

So far, the retiring head of the Adelaide Festival has bemoaned the decay of the arts in SA over the last ten years - the length of time Rann was Minister for the Arts.

That's one small bit of legacy. There must be more.
Even on the arts scene there have been significant improvements.

The Fringe and soon the Festival will become annual events.

His tenure also saw the establishment of the Guitar Festival, the Film Festival, the Cabaret festival and the OzAsia festival.

The new SA Film hub at Glenside is also a bonus for the arts here in SA

dsriggs
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:18 am
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#56 Post by dsriggs » Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:06 pm

Either Rann wrecked everything & drove the state into the poor house with shady tactics, OR he did nothing & won't be remembered.

It can't be both, sj!

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#57 Post by stumpjumper » Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:16 pm

Fair comment all round. I was a bit surprised at the statement of the festival guy, but I don't know much about the arts business.

As for Rann's legacy, I suggest that it will rest on things his governments truly initiated rather than things which perhaps are part of the 'business as usual' for good governments - eg improvements in highway infrastructure etc. For example - the Gallipoli and Bakewell underpasses would have been built with barely a comment in Melbourne, but the extension to Darwin of the railway could qualify as 'legacy'. That's not because the rail project started or was finished by Liberal governments (I can't remember and haven't looked it up).

For a government to have a legacy, it first must achieve power, and the Liberals in SA at present are so inept that they can't even knock off a crumbling, unpopular government patently ruled by one union. SA's Libs need their heads knocked together - Chapman's and Evans' heads for a start.

To ramble on about the bloody Shoppies - theyu've got their holiday pay, and forced every other employer in the state to pay it too, whether or not their business income rises on those holidays.

I'm personally aware of the business arrangements of a small private hospital - medical and post-operative, 19 beds. It employs about 30 staff on shifts. The holiday pay will cost the hospital about $4,000 with no increase in income or productivity. The hospital presently returns its owners about 3% net on capital.

The result? The forward shifts, which are prepared several months in advance, are being trimmed by the management to save about 100 hours per year, in other words, to reduce the work available to recover the cost of the loading. In other words, the cost will be that the staff wil have to work harder for the same money.

I rang the office of the Minister for Small Business, Tom Koutsantonis, suggesting that a business like a privsate hospital was unfairly caught by the legislation and that 100 hours of employment was being lost as a result. The Minister's response, through his media adviser: Sorry, there will be minor casualties. Nothing can be done. Koutsantonis is a former industrial officer with the SDA.

I rang Tom Kenyon, Minister for Employment,with the same complaint. The response: Noithing can be done, sorry. Kenyon is a former organiser with the SDA.

I rang the Premier's office, and repeated the complaint, adding that the SDA, who appointed Weatherill as the compromise Left faction candidate after the union had dismissed Rann, had too much say in government in SA.

The response: on the hospital hours - sorry, nothing can be done. On the influence of the SDA: the Premier's adviser was not aware that the SDA had any more influence in SA politics than any other organisation.

The guy hung up while I was laughing.

With time to waste, I rang the seat of power - the SDA citadel itself. SDA supremo Msanilauskas had been on the TV news, explaining how his new shopping laws would work.

I spoke to a flunkey, who said that they only respond to written quries where thhe writer gives a name and addres. I told him he could have my name and address immediately - no use. Apply in writing. I told him anyway that the SDA is costing jobs through its holiday pay legislation.

I must have hit some nerve because the flunkey's parting words were that the SDA has nothing to do with making legislation in SA.

What a joke. The only bigger joke is that most people in SA don't care, which is fine because the Shoppies don't give a rat's arse about anyone except themselves.

The real problem, of course, is that people don't believe it. This union, they say, these 'Shoppies' you talk about - how can they run the place? We have an elercted Parliament!

I say, look a little closer. Who dismissed Rann? Peter Manilauskas of the Shoppies. Who appoiunted Weatherill? Peter Manilauskas of the Shoppies. Who pushed through parliament his shopping hours legislation? Peter Manilauskas. Whose relatives and friends are filling cushy publicly funded jobs across the public service? Peter Manilauskas's. (It's ok, Howie - it's true, pm me).

Who elects Peter Manilauskas? No-one - not even his rank and file Shoppies. The rank and file don't even vote on policy, either. The SDA is violently anti-abortion and against gay marrisage, for example, but has never sought the views of its members on these and other issues. However, the SDA is beyond reproach, at least by Labor. Nationally, the Shoppies were the largest cash contributor to the 'Your Rights at Work' campaign which is credited with defeating the Howard government.

Thou shalt not speak against ye Shoppyes if ye be a Labor MP, voter or beneficiary. Neither shall ye care or criticise if you are an SDA member - after all, these guys deliver public holidays.

ps - Stephen Mullighan, a Shoppie-aligned political staffer whom Manilauskas moved aside to install Zoe Bettison in Rann's old seat of Ramsay has now been given pre-selection for the seat of Lee - Wright's old Western suburbs seat which had been promised to Shoppie-aligned Atkinson acolyte Paul Sykes. Sykes' political chances were screwed in the upset of the Shoppies-controlled Charles Sturt Council when it was revealed that most of the councillors were political robots controlled by Shoppies MP Michael Atkinson, and the drone councillors were thrown out. Sykes was whisked off to the Coimmonwealth Department of Veterans Affairs to get him out of any limelight, but it's unlikely he'll be able to recover his political fortunes.

Note how the process of pre-selection in 'their' seats is controlled by the Shoppies? If you aren't one of them, you haven't got a chance.

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5527
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 575 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#58 Post by Will » Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:56 pm

stumpjumper wrote:Fair comment all round. I was a bit surprised at the statement of the festival guy, but I don't know much about the arts business.

As for Rann's legacy, I suggest that it will rest on things his governments truly initiated rather than things which perhaps are part of the 'business as usual' for good governments - eg improvements in highway infrastructure etc. For example - the Gallipoli and Bakewell underpasses would have been built with barely a comment in Melbourne, but the extension to Darwin of the railway could qualify as 'legacy'. That's not because the rail project started or was finished by Liberal governments (I can't remember and haven't looked it up).

For a government to have a legacy, it first must achieve power, and the Liberals in SA at present are so inept that they can't even knock off a crumbling, unpopular government patently ruled by one union. SA's Libs need their heads knocked together - Chapman's and Evans' heads for a start.

To ramble on about the bloody Shoppies - theyu've got their holiday pay, and forced every other employer in the state to pay it too, whether or not their business income rises on those holidays.

I'm personally aware of the business arrangements of a small private hospital - medical and post-operative, 19 beds. It employs about 30 staff on shifts. The holiday pay will cost the hospital about $4,000 with no increase in income or productivity. The hospital presently returns its owners about 3% net on capital.

The result? The forward shifts, which are prepared several months in advance, are being trimmed by the management to save about 100 hours per year, in other words, to reduce the work available to recover the cost of the loading. In other words, the cost will be that the staff wil have to work harder for the same money.

I rang the office of the Minister for Small Business, Tom Koutsantonis, suggesting that a business like a privsate hospital was unfairly caught by the legislation and that 100 hours of employment was being lost as a result. The Minister's response, through his media adviser: Sorry, there will be minor casualties. Nothing can be done. Koutsantonis is a former industrial officer with the SDA.

I rang Tom Kenyon, Minister for Employment,with the same complaint. The response: Noithing can be done, sorry. Kenyon is a former organiser with the SDA.

I rang the Premier's office, and repeated the complaint, adding that the SDA, who appointed Weatherill as the compromise Left faction candidate after the union had dismissed Rann, had too much say in government in SA.

The response: on the hospital hours - sorry, nothing can be done. On the influence of the SDA: the Premier's adviser was not aware that the SDA had any more influence in SA politics than any other organisation.

The guy hung up while I was laughing.

With time to waste, I rang the seat of power - the SDA citadel itself. SDA supremo Msanilauskas had been on the TV news, explaining how his new shopping laws would work.

I spoke to a flunkey, who said that they only respond to written quries where thhe writer gives a name and addres. I told him he could have my name and address immediately - no use. Apply in writing. I told him anyway that the SDA is costing jobs through its holiday pay legislation.

I must have hit some nerve because the flunkey's parting words were that the SDA has nothing to do with making legislation in SA.

What a joke. The only bigger joke is that most people in SA don't care, which is fine because the Shoppies don't give a rat's arse about anyone except themselves.

The real problem, of course, is that people don't believe it. This union, they say, these 'Shoppies' you talk about - how can they run the place? We have an elercted Parliament!

I say, look a little closer. Who dismissed Rann? Peter Manilauskas of the Shoppies. Who appoiunted Weatherill? Peter Manilauskas of the Shoppies. Who pushed through parliament his shopping hours legislation? Peter Manilauskas. Whose relatives and friends are filling cushy publicly funded jobs across the public service? Peter Manilauskas's. (It's ok, Howie - it's true, pm me).

Who elects Peter Manilauskas? No-one - not even his rank and file Shoppies. The rank and file don't even vote on policy, either. The SDA is violently anti-abortion and against gay marrisage, for example, but has never sought the views of its members on these and other issues. However, the SDA is beyond reproach, at least by Labor. Nationally, the Shoppies were the largest cash contributor to the 'Your Rights at Work' campaign which is credited with defeating the Howard government.

Thou shalt not speak against ye Shoppyes if ye be a Labor MP, voter or beneficiary. Neither shall ye care or criticise if you are an SDA member - after all, these guys deliver public holidays.

ps - Stephen Mullighan, a Shoppie-aligned political staffer whom Manilauskas moved aside to install Zoe Bettison in Rann's old seat of Ramsay has now been given pre-selection for the seat of Lee - Wright's old Western suburbs seat which had been promised to Shoppie-aligned Atkinson acolyte Paul Sykes. Sykes' political chances were screwed in the upset of the Shoppies-controlled Charles Sturt Council when it was revealed that most of the councillors were political robots controlled by Shoppies MP Michael Atkinson, and the drone councillors were thrown out. Sykes was whisked off to the Coimmonwealth Department of Veterans Affairs to get him out of any limelight, but it's unlikely he'll be able to recover his political fortunes.

Note how the process of pre-selection in 'their' seats is controlled by the Shoppies? If you aren't one of them, you haven't got a chance.

Well it's no surprise that the unions run labor. Everyone knows this, it's no surprise.

Likewise it's no surprise that big business and the billionaires brigade run the liberal party.

I guess it just comes down to who you think has your best interests at heart. The unions or the billionaires.

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#59 Post by stumpjumper » Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:39 am

Likewise it's no surprise that big business and the billionaires brigade run the liberal party.

I guess it just comes down to who you think has your best interests at heart. The unions or the billionaires.
Will, that's as simplistic and out of date as saying that unions represent the honest working man in the flat cap with no assets and the Liberals represent corrupt, greedy capitalists who are slum landlords.

Anyway, my complaint is not who represents whom, but how in a democratic system, the officials of one union are in a position to sideline repreesentative democracy - to hire and fire premiers, approve preselections and effectively appoint Cabinet - when the ALP is in government.

It has become so blatant that Peter Manilauskas accompanied his man Weatherill to Government House to advise the Governor of his new government, following Manilauskas' dismissal of Rann.

If you're happy with that, then when Labor wins, why don't we simply hand over the government of South Australia to Mr Peter Manilauskas of the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association?

And if you don't like it, why not at least face up to the ugly reality?

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 1007 times
Been thanked: 258 times

Re: The SA Politics Thread

#60 Post by [Shuz] » Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:48 am

:applause:

Why aren't you educating more people about this, Stumpy? (Outside the realms of this forum)
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests