Irfan Yusuf has
an interesting article on Liberal factionalism
. Which raises the question, does party organisation at a state and national level, induce factionalism within the party? Might be one for
Scrymarch's government design patterns
. It also appears that Liberal and Labor now have identical political organizations that are dependant upon either the power of government, or a Presidential leader to keep the factions in line.
From the article;
The New Right's major source of strength is the NSW Young Liberal Movement. This was also the main power base of the Group during its days in power. Many of those same young Groupers are current factional warriors in the New Right, holding positions on the NSW Young Liberal executive and the State Executive of the Party.Irf argues that the Young Liberals have been a major source of on the ground campaigning and warm bodies at election time, and have used that ability to mobilise supporters to punish candidates who were not from their faction.
The extreme factionalism within the Young Liberals has infected the Party and has made it near-impossible for the Party to maintain a hold on many of its own seats, let alone win seats from the ALP and independents. With the retirement of Bob Carr and with the mistakes of his government costing more than a block of flats in Lane Cove, the Liberals should have been able to capitalise on ALP mistakes. The ALP has been able to organise its factions and manage its internal bickering. Unless the NSW Liberals can do the same, they can look forward to many more terms in opposition and losing many more of its safe seats to independents.In a previous article, The Cost Of Opposition , I largely blamed the media for ensuring there was the constant perception of inner turmoil in parties, and that only a party in government could fend it off through their control of the executive, and hence control of government, taxpayer money and to an extent by dictating the public agenda and policy. Irf has a different view. He is arguing that factions in a party out of power are the source of inferior electoral results. But both of us seem to support Judith Brett's thesis from "Australian Liberals and the Moral Middle Class" that a strong leader quells the factions, but only if they can prove they can win elections. The leaders legitimacy amongst factions only comes with the strength and power of control of the Executive Cabinet. This appears to be true for Labor, despite their caucus structure, as much as the Liberals who have traditionally relied on this style of organization. The problem for Australian democracy is, that while this self-organisation is great for keeping government once elected, it is an inferior form of organization when in opposition. This leads to "drover's dog" elections and "small target" election campaigns where the opposition cannot win government, but only hope that the incumbent will lose it. cam
Comments