Continuing influence of the SDA union on SA politics.

[stumpjumper]

Just in case anyone thinks that the SDA isn't running the government in SA...

From the Australian, 2/9/11:

ke Rann, while acknowledging it has been "very influential" within sections of the ALP's Right faction.

Senator Don Farrell, one of the "faceless men" behind last year's downfall of Mr Rudd, is a former South Australian secretary of the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, while his successor, Peter Malinauskas, played a critical role in the move against the South Australian Premier.

Joe De Bruyn, the national secretary of the 250,000-member shop assistants' union, said his organisation did exercise a "degree of influence within the Labor Party" given the size of its membership and the affiliation of its branches to the ALP.

"The SDA is very influential within the Right in South Australia and Western Australia," he told The Australian yesterday.

"There's no doubt about that. I wouldn't go so far as to say it controls things but it certainly is very influential in both states and that's by virtue of its size.

"I think you will find that influence is exercised very carefully to make sure that, on issues that are discussed, there is consensus."

and:

Asked to explain why the union was involved in the bid to remove Mr Rann as leader, Mr Malinauskas said it was for the benefit of South Australians.

"I'm sincerely of the view that working people in this state are better off under a Labor government," Mr Malinauskas said.

"I think it's important, to the extent that anyone could provide some assistance, to making sure Labor stays in government and that is a good thing for working people."

From the Australian, 13/9/11:

The socially conservative SDA has been extraordinary in the degree to which it has dominated the party, colouring its policies, determining its leadership and personnel, and funding its political campaigns.

This activism does not come from any groundswell of particularly political or class-conscious retail workers.

Au contraire, it derives from the precise opposite. Ignorance. Indeed it is possible that some of the SDA's disaggregated and docile members do not even know they are members. Few would have any real idea of what their money helps fund.

The Australian, 10/9/11:

A Labor Party leader is formally elected by the caucus, the parliamentary membership. In theory then, the caucus has the authority to decide when a leader has reached a "use-by" date.

But a majority of the caucus are members of the Right faction, Labor Unity, which is controlled by the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA).

When the time came to advise Mr Rann his time was up, the message was delivered by the SDA, not by the caucus.

[stumpjumper]

The SDA continues its colonisation of the SA government, with SA MP Chloe Fox signing up with the union in return for previous favours, a ministry and a package of lucrative committee memberships.

Ms Fox won the seat of Bright in 2006. The SDA's SA Attorney-General Michael Atkinson managed her campaign and the SDA shipped in several full time 'electoral assistants' to help out, and Atkinson accompanied the new MP on her first, celebratory trip - to Europe - following her win. No doubt Atkinson was able to set out for Ms Fox a glowing SDA future as they relaxed in the comfort of business class travel and swank hotels.

Ms Fox could hardly say no to becoming another 'SDA MP'. The methodology is classic: create a debt - in this case, crucial help from the SDA to win a seat, followed by SDA support for the virtual sinecure of Deputy Speaker, then a ministry with its high pay, chauffeured car, staff and perks, and finally the request for payback - 'We'd like you to join us and support the SDA line from now on'.

Thus Ms Fox becomes another brick in the SDA wall around political power in SA.

[Will]

Just in case anyone thinks that the SDA isn't running the government in SA...

From the Australian, 2/9/11:

ke Rann, while acknowledging it has been "very influential" within sections of the ALP's Right faction.

Senator Don Farrell, one of the "faceless men" behind last year's downfall of Mr Rudd, is a former South Australian secretary of the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, while his successor, Peter Malinauskas, played a critical role in the move against the South Australian Premier.

Joe De Bruyn, the national secretary of the 250,000-member shop assistants' union, said his organisation did exercise a "degree of influence within the Labor Party" given the size of its membership and the affiliation of its branches to the ALP.

"The SDA is very influential within the Right in South Australia and Western Australia," he told The Australian yesterday.

"There's no doubt about that. I wouldn't go so far as to say it controls things but it certainly is very influential in both states and that's by virtue of its size.

"I think you will find that influence is exercised very carefully to make sure that, on issues that are discussed, there is consensus."

and:

Asked to explain why the union was involved in the bid to remove Mr Rann as leader, Mr Malinauskas said it was for the benefit of South Australians.

"I'm sincerely of the view that working people in this state are better off under a Labor government," Mr Malinauskas said.

"I think it's important, to the extent that anyone could provide some assistance, to making sure Labor stays in government and that is a good thing for working people."

From the Australian, 13/9/11:

The socially conservative SDA has been extraordinary in the degree to which it has dominated the party, colouring its policies, determining its leadership and personnel, and funding its political campaigns.

This activism does not come from any groundswell of particularly political or class-conscious retail workers.

Au contraire, it derives from the precise opposite. Ignorance. Indeed it is possible that some of the SDA's disaggregated and docile members do not even know they are members. Few would have any real idea of what their money helps fund.

The Australian, 10/9/11:

A Labor Party leader is formally elected by the caucus, the parliamentary membership. In theory then, the caucus has the authority to decide when a leader has reached a "use-by" date.

But a majority of the caucus are members of the Right faction, Labor Unity, which is controlled by the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA).

When the time came to advise Mr Rann his time was up, the message was delivered by the SDA, not by the caucus.

Do you have a time machine SJ?

It's amazing you are quoting articles from the future.

[Wayno]

Is the SDAs power simply a result of them having 1000s of (retail shop worker) members? and how can the SDAs power be adversely affected if retail hours are further deregulated? won't deregulation mean *more* part-time retail workers, and hence more union members?

I realize further deregulation could be interpreted as labor 'selling out' their support base, but i bet most union members don't even realize they are also pseudo-labor party members.

[peas_and_corn]

Is the SDAs power simply a result of them having 1000s of (retail shop worker) members? and how can the SDAs power be adversely affected if retail hours are further deregulated? won't deregulation mean *more* part-time retail workers, and hence more union members?

No. Rem will remain the same, it will just be spread over more time.

[rev]

Hey SJ, have you given us a rant about the Liberals yet?

I wonder, when they manage to get back into government, if we will see a thread, and essay length posts, dedicated to trashing the Liberal party.

[metro]

Welcome to the SA Liberal party:

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/libs ... 6118813035

so if Isobel Redmond fails to beat Jay in the polls before the 2014 election, she could be "shipped out"??

[stumpjumper]

Do you have a time machine SJ?

Whoops. I've always confused the 'month number' of August and September.

Hey SJ, have you given us a rant about the Liberals yet?

I criticise Labor because they are the government, and have been since I've been posting on Sensational Adelaide. The Libs' shortcomings don't deprive us of good government as the faults of Labor do, and if I seem to run the Libs' party line in having a go at Labor, it's because it doesn't take much to see what's wrong with them. I'm certainly not a member of the Liberal Party, or of any other political party or organisation.

Just for your interest, rev, here are a few whinges about the Libs:

- Too often they seem like footballers standing in the goal square with the ball in their hands. Then they distract each other, forget about scoring and there's a turnover.
- Their factions, based on family ties and outrageous senses of entitlement are in the same rank as the ALP factions in their effect on everything from preselection to policy. The names Chapman and Evans spring to mind.
- The Libs, federally and locally, seem prone to shooting from the hip (and hitting themselves in the foot). Perhaps political power within the Liberal Party is too concentrated to allow enough reflection before acting, or maybe the culture is such that no-one dares question the boss. Whatever the reasons, Howard's enthusiastic charging and detention of Dr Haneef on terrorism charges was unsupportable and damaged himself and his party, and Martin Hamilton-Smith made an idiot of himself and also damaged himself and his party by failing to corroborate supposedly damning emails.
- The SA Liberals' naivety in overlooking completely Bruce Hawker's strategy of concentrating on marginal electorates in the 2010 election, leading to Rann governing with only 48.8% of the vote, was politically unprofessional.
- Currently, the local Libs' appointing of former federal senator Grant Chapman (nothing to do with the Chapman/Evans thing), to run an internal key performance indicator program for Liberal MPs is a joke, not just because Chapman was hardly the hardest-working senator ever to hold down a place on a senate ticket. The whole concept of a formal kpi program for MPs in addition to pre-selection and the ballot box is questionable anyway, IMHO.

The Libs have skeletons in their cupboard that even I know about and I could go on, but as I said, they're not in government.

The guiding principle for all parties and independents should be good quality candidates administering fair, considered policies with a minimum of self-interest and minimum waste of taxpayers' money. No rorts, jobs for mates, favouritism etc. They stink whichever party indulges in them.

My other, related, area of interest is planning and its processes, but don't get me going on that.

[Prince George]

What I don't follow about this analysis is: if the SDA is running the show, why does Mike Rann get to thumb his nose at them and set his own timetable to leave office? Other than Mike Rann, who could possibly benefit from making Jay Weatherill look like a sidelined minor player, or like a younger brother waiting for the hand-me-down jumper? If the reason for switching leaders now is to get rid of the guy who was on the nose and give the new leader time to steady the ship before another election, the current bizzare situation would appear to be poisoning the well.

[Nathan]

What I don't follow about this analysis is: if the SDA is running the show, why does Mike Rann get to thumb his nose at them and set his own timetable to leave office? Other than Mike Rann, who could possibly benefit from making Jay Weatherill look like a sidelined minor player, or like a younger brother waiting for the hand-me-down jumper? If the reason for switching leaders now is to get rid of the guy who was on the nose and give the new leader time to steady the ship before another election, the current bizzare situation would appear to be poisoning the well.

Perhaps Rann has a small amount of leverage against the SDA? They probably realise he could become quite problematic if he were to be sufficiently pissed off enough.

[Mark Aldridge]

Hmmmm seems we have a lot in common, with our research on Labor in SA, in particular the safe seat about to supposedly be handed to Zoe, when Rann resigns vacates the seat in February, I find my blogs have attracted many a legal challenge lol

Mind you I have a higher profile, having been a candidate at a variety of levels over the years, love to have a chat on day, as I may just take on one of these up and coming seats

Mark 82847482

[dsriggs]

There you go, sj! You got MARK ALDRIDGE on your side!

[stumpjumper]

An army of two!

On the SDA - it's one of the few unions without rank and file voting. Only union officials vote at union meetings, yet the SDA vote in the ALP is rated on the total number of members - the most of any union in Australia, about 230,000. That's why Joe de Bruyn has led the union for around 30 years, and why Don Farrell was SA boss for about 20. Only a handful of people are needed to keep them in power, yet the SDA was the largest contributor to the Your Rights At Work campaign which did for Howard and his Work Choices laws. Remember that in SA, 50% of the votes at ALP conferences are allocated to unions (who represent 11% of the population), with the SDA having more of those votes than any other union. Not very fair.

[peas_and_corn]

An army of two!

On the SDA - it's one of the few unions without rank and file voting. Only union officials vote at union meetings, yet the SDA vote in the ALP is rated on the total number of members - the most of any union in Australia, about 230,000. That's why Joe de Bruyn has led the union for around 30 years, and why Don Farrell was SA boss for about 20. Only a handful of people are needed to keep them in power, yet the SDA was the largest contributor to the Your Rights At Work campaign which did for Howard and his Work Choices laws. Remember that in SA, 50% of the votes at ALP conferences are allocated to unions (who represent 11% of the population), with the SDA having more of those votes than any other union. Not very fair.

...I voted on the last election for SDA president, and I'm just rank and file.

[stumpjumper]

That's very interesting, p & c. I've spoken to Joan Atkinson of the SDA (ex-wife of SDA-faction leader Michael Atkinson) who wasn't sure what election that could have been. The position of Secretary, held by Peter Manilauskas, is not elected by the rank and file. Let me know more.

The SDA works in wondrous ways. Always hungry for more influence, it routinely courts unaligned members of parliament.

New MP Chloe Fox holds her seat by a hair's breadth, so the SDA tried to recruit Chloe by offering her advantages which could help her hold her seat. For a start, SDA heavy Michael Atkinson took Chloe on a slap-up, business class trip around the world soon after Chloe had taken her seat in parliament. Then the SDA backed her for the important and well-paid position of deputy speaker of the house. Now the SDA has offered her a ministry. It all helps - there must have been voters in Mayo who didn't really like Alexander Downer but who liked the idea of having the foreign minister as their local member.

As to Mike Rann thumbing his nose - remember that the SDA decided his time was up - Rann claimed that he loved the job, which he clearly did, and would go on forever. He finally agreed to going next March, but the SDA said no - go this October. Rann quietly agreed - that's hardly thumbing his nose. You're right though, Rann had to be given enough goodies to keep him sweet. Hence Rann's non-appearance in parliament this week - he is still overseas involved in 'meetings'. But because, as the Libs pointed out, there are few 'meetings' that could benefit the state if attended by an outgoing member, Rann has assured us that the extension of his trip is paid for by him. Even though the 'meetings' that make the extension necessary are legitimate political meetings. Who knows or cares.

Weatherill is made to look foolish - fine by the SDA. Weatherill is the Left faction candidate tolerated by the SDA/Right faction. If he looks and feels like a puppet, all the better. The real power is with the SDA-led Right cabal.

As to the SDA benefitting from more part-timers: a full time worker pays $400 pa to the SDA. A part timer might pay only $150. The SDA wants more full timers and actively tries to ban part-timers. Look at the SDA's position on school kids working under three hours at Maccas - the SDA banned them. What's more, banning trade on holidays satisfies the SDA's deeply Catholic ideals, and because of the high public and business resistance to the SDA's policy, it demonstrates the SDA's power as well. No other union in Australia can so effectively defy the wishes of the majority as the SDA.

Make no mistake - the SDA sees itself as the force behind the government of SA, and it tries to govern from Kent Town through its proxies on North Tce.