3 July 2024

Party before conscience could be a problem in a modern political world

| Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
36
Senator Fatima Payman

Suspending Senator Fatima Payman from the ALP caucus indefinitely is a headache the PM doesn’t need. Photo: Fatima Payman Instagram.

The decision to suspend Senator Fatima Payman indefinitely from the Labor Party caucus could turn out to be problematic for Anthony Albanese come election time – but right now, it exposes the draconian nature of ALP rules.

The first-term senator from Western Australia, who is a Muslim, crossed the floor late on Tuesday last week (25 June) to vote in favour of a Greens motion calling for Australia to recognise Palestinian statehood.

It was a political ploy by the Greens to drive a wedge through the government. It worked.

After the vote, Senator Payman said each step across the chamber to vote against her party “felt like a mile”.

It was a big deal and very much a matter of conscience for her.

But that’s where the Labor Party has a hard time because, for the ALP, it’s the party over conscience every time.

It put the Prime Minister in an awkward position.

He had sympathy for Payman’s move, as did Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, who talked down any suggestion of punishment for the maverick senator.

The PM found a compromise and suspended Payman for one sitting of caucus.

But that only served to incense the party’s factional hardball hotheads who came down on the PM with force, causing him to impose a tougher penalty on Senator Payman.

She made Albanese’s task easier by inflaming the issue further during a weekend media interview when she said she would cross the floor again.

READ ALSO What year is it and what territory are we living in again?

So on Tuesday (2 July), the federal Labor caucus unanimously endorsed the Prime Minister’s decision to suspend Senator Payman from caucus until she agrees to toe the party line.

It can be taken as a given that the discussions the PM had with the senator were conducted with respect and understanding, but Albanese’s hands were tied.

He had to be seen to be acting swiftly and harshly against the errant senator to appease his factional overlords – despite the bad look it gives the electorate for a middle-aged white guy to be kicking out a young, female, Muslim member of his party who stood by her principles.

There are those inside the ALP who sympathise with Senator Payman – some publicly – and who feel her pain. She has spoken of being isolated by other Labor MPs and senators. Factionalism in the ALP is as brutal as it is archaic.

The rules that demand a proportionately high level of reprimand for voting on conscience need ditching.

We live in an age and era of far greater sensitivity and consideration to diversity than has ever been the case.

There is more nuance and complexity in all decision-making these days.

Maybe it’s time the ALP rule book and the party apparatchiks caught up with that.

As it stands, the isolated Senator Payman is entertaining the idea of quitting the party to join the crossbench.

She already decided to absent herself from Senate Question Time yesterday (why wouldn’t she?). There are reports she will align with a grassroots movement representing the Muslim community.

Talk of the incident being a “line in the sand” is being bandied about.

It could all add up to some serious headaches for the Prime Minister, who not only needs Payman’s vote in the Senate now but also her endorsement during next year’s election campaign.

READ ALSO ‘$1bn delay’: Shorten angry at NDIS reform bill hold-up over human rights concerns

The Opposition is capitalising on Labor’s dilemma.

Asked in the House of Reps’ Question Time yesterday what he’s going to do about Payman feeling isolated in his party, Albanese was quick to answer that last week the Opposition was demanding to know what action he was going to take against her.

“The fact is that earlier today, the caucus unanimously adopted a motion that Senator Payman is more than welcome to come back to the team if she’s part of the team,” the PM said before explaining he had held “very civil” conversations with her.

The Coalition is enjoying this spectacle. This trainwreck.

Government Services Minister Bill Shorten, in a media interview later in the day, explains it this way.

“All of us as candidates, when we choose to get the privilege to run for the Labor Party, we actually sign a document which says we’ll stick together,” he said.

“She’s obviously finding that very difficult on the issue of Palestine.

“I don’t think anyone in the Labor Party is critical of her view about Palestine. I mean, it’s a traumatic time. People are dying.

“We all want to see the Israeli tanks out. We want the hostages returned. But we also need to make sure we have processes where the party is cohesive, so I think a bit of time and distance can work these issues through.”

Maybe a bit more distance from the outdated ALP rule book is more the remedy that’s needed here – and into the future.

Join the conversation

36
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

I support Fatima Payman’s decision to cross the floor. I think the conflict has gone on for too long. I respect the ALP but right now the Party seems out of touch. It’s been eight months and toeing the party line just doesn’t make sense anymore. There needs to be a two-state peace solution. Could the two party system be redundant?

Capital Retro8:42 am 04 Jul 24

Please do some research jacinta. Hamas will not accept a two state solution.

What do you think “from the river to the sea” means?

Your comments show you know nothing about the history of the conflict. The Palestinians are a problem for other middle eastern countries. None have offered to help and say only enough to keep their own people satisfied. No Muslim countries are offering to take refugees, it’s the western countries that will. The Palestinians want Israel gone. Hamas has brought havoc on their own people and they are happy to sacrifice them knowing it diminishes what naive people like you think of Israel. I have no great love for Israel but out of the two countries it’s the one with democracy, a free press and personal freedoms to its peoples, think LGBT etc.

HiddenDragon8:24 pm 03 Jul 24

Thus far, Labor has been quite successful in wrapping itself in diversity while retaining most powers in the hands of what amounts to an Anglo-Celtic boys’ club (with carefully selected and approved honorary members, who have to play by the boys’ rules – and even talk like the boys).

This episode has highlighted the tensions and contradictions inherent in that reality, which poses serious threats to the support base of a party with a primary vote already in the low-30s danger zone.

Some loosening of the rules, without allowing waywardness on crucial issues such as supply, confidence and major policy commitments, might be wise if the veneer of diversity is to be maintained.

GrumpyGrandpa7:31 pm 03 Jul 24

Anyone who joins the ALP, does so knowing that they are required to vote along party lines or they face expulsion from the party.

The other option Senator Payman had would have been to abstain from voting.

Yes, the ALP’s rules might be seen as old fashion or draconian in nature, but potentially the other option could be disunity and instability with the party Left voting against the party Right etc.

The Libs don’t have an expulsion clause and where a member crosses the floor, they have to live with the political consequences that this sometimes causes.

It’ll be interesting to see whether Albo expels her or breaks his own party rules, because he needs Senator Payman’s vote.

@GrumpyGrandpa
“Yes, the ALP’s rules might be seen as old fashion or draconian in nature, but potentially the other option could be disunity and instability with the party Left voting against the party Right etc.”
Oh you mean, potentially, politicians might actually reflect the views of the people they were elected to represent rather than simply vote, lemming-like, according to the rote system? Surely, it’s possible to believe in, and uphold, the principles of a particular party without necessarily agreeing on every item of policy? Isn’t that one of the beauties a democracy?

“The Libs don’t have an expulsion clause and where a member crosses the floor, they have to live with the political consequences that this sometimes causes.”
… and what are those political consequences?

Given that Liberal MP Bridget Archer has ‘crossed the floor’ on around 30 occasions, she has not been expelled, disendorsed or in any other way sanctioned by her party. Furthermore, she recontested her Tasmania HoR seat, since her failure to vote on party lines, and was re-elected – in a seat which has for the last 20 years or so not re-elected the incumbent.

Isn’t this the senator who was in the news today for financially supporting a homophobic Islamic group which also hates the Barbie movie because of it is feminist propaganda?

Surely that should put her right in the hate sights of Labor and the Greens as that seems about as far from their beliefs as you can get.

Of course unless their shared antisemitism is more important.

LOL
You people have overused the ‘antisemitism’ card so much that people just don’t care any more. It’s hilarious.

@Spiral
Which “… homophobic Islamic group …” is Payman “… in the news today for financially supporting”?

Could you provide a link to the article please?

Oh OK. Payne makes a donation (disclosed on the Register of Senators’ Interests) to an Australian Islamic-themed production studio and media outlet and consequently she is responsible for the content of every video, article, news item, interview and short film they produce. Payman also donated to several other NFPs including World Vision, but I guess there’s no click bait in mentioning those.

And of course you would be just as forgiving about a Liberal senator financially supporting Right wing media and personalities

So presumably she has made a public statement condemning that organisation and cancelling her financial support.

And explaining how she “accidentally” managed to support such abhorrent people.

Of course she probably will now that she has been outed.

@Spiral
Yeah – Liberal senators probably do support Right wing media and personalities. They may even have subscriptions to news.com – so what?

And I think Payman has more important things to worry about, at the moment, than a couple of articles, amongst the thousands that the NFP has published. There has been no evidence whatsoever that she has shown support for the sentiments in the articles – or in fact that she was aware they existed. If you can provide such evidence then maybe there is something to see here – otherwise it’s just click bait.

I always believe in flipping the situation in circumstances like the Payman incident. Now flipping this incident would involve an ALP member supporting the Oct 7th HAMAS atrocities last year and NOT supporting Israels right to defend itself and its citizens. OH HANG ON, that’s exactly what she did wasn’t it? This from a muslim female senator that would NEVER hold a political position of any type either in HAMAS’s Gaza or her homeland of Afghanistan.

Hamas had a female representative in their party. Israel assassinated her at the start of the conflict. Her name was Jamila Al-Shantee. Your assertion is a lie.

Did she do those things “exactly” Rob?

The report says she voted in favour of a motion to recognise Palestinian statehood, a position supported by a swathe of governments around the world, including ours. The question is timing and circumstances.

Are you also of the view that no Australian citizen should be allowed to exercise their political rights if they were born in a country that lacks them? Bad news for anyone who has fled China, Russia, any dictatorial country to settle here, don’t you think?

By the way, as an Australian, not a dual citizen, her homeland is here.

@Rob
No, Rob you believe in distorting the situation.

Like many of us, who deplore the loss of innocent lives in this conflict, Payman has never declared support for Hamas attrocities. For you to suggest this is an out and out lie – obviously fuelled by your blind support for one side.

As for your cheap shot at women’s rights in Gaza and Afghanistan. Well, it’s because she is an Australian politician that she has been able to call out the abuses being perpetrated by the Taliban in her birthland. Perhaps you should check that out!

What good news Ken M. Although HAMAS is NOT a political party mate as you well know. It’s a prescribed terrorist organisation. I hope her death was well planned by Israel, just like Oct 7th then? Well that’s one HAMAS female terrorist you can name and one less mankind has to worry about. Can’t say I’m sorry and really who else aside from you and a few other fringe mis-informed individuals support a prescribed terrorist organisation anyway?

Simply saying she is attempting to bring a foreign ideology and a foreign fight into the middle of Australia. I support a two state solution but not a two state solution where HAMAS has any involvement in those two states You cannot negotiate with an entity for any meaningful peace when one side has as a precondition that the other side has no right to exist.

Just like your comments elsewhere mate and we both know where we are talking about. You talk about the loss of innocent lives but continue and conveniently gloss over Oct 7th. If there was NO Oct 7th there would be no destruction of Gaza, no widespread loss of civilian lives in Israel and Gaza and HAMAS would still be happily teaching school children through their UNRWHA schools to kill jews, dig tunnels in those same schools and carry arms for terrorists. Gaza, what a wonderful, democratic and free thinking place …..NOT!

Rob, it seems difficult for you to argue that she is importing a foreign ideology and fight when the policy for which she voted is literally ALP policy; just not yet, as things are now.

I have no truck with terrorism, nor with a fundamental belief that another party has no right to exist — a position held by both parties in that fight. Hence, I have no ‘side’.

@Rob
I rarely know what you are talking about Rob and certainly not what you mean on this occasion. Nevertheless, perhaps you can point me to any comment I have made which can in anyway construed as support for Hamas or glossing over October 7th. I have always held that their is fault on both sides (Hamas and IDF) and have consistently condemned the killing of innocent civilian victims. I look forward to you showing me where I have done other than that.

How is what the Labor party is doing not considered bullying and attempts at coercive control? Time the Labor party woke up to the new world it operates in and stopped living in a bygone era. I’d be a Labor voter if it wasn’t for tactics such as this. Well done, Fatima, you’re not alone.

I am finding it an exciting prospect that Ms Payman is entertaining the idea of quitting the frontbench to join an Independent movement representing the Muslim community. Another teal like grouping of smart independents who will actually represent the diversity of voters and the draconian ALP rules of putting the party over conscience.

I have never heard any current Labor politicians’, including those from the ACT, speaking out at the audacity of the NSW Labor government’s decision to illuminate the sails of the Sydney Opera House with the colours of the Israeli flag despite criticism from the multicultural communities at the time, and the countless atrocities we have been witnessing on the news from Gaza each night!

Stephen Saunders11:34 am 03 Jul 24

When you are the world’s “most successful multicultural society”, it follows logically, you’ll be well occupied, appeasing Muslim, Indian, and Chinese voters.

You propose a monocultural society?

Describe the specific criteria on which you would base it.

Who among the people who have come to this bit of land over the last fifty thousand or so years do you propose we expel, and how, specifically, will you define those groups?

What he proposes of course is a Marxist society. That monocultural society is absolutely classic Marxist doctrine.

You have identified people from 2 countries and one religion. Everyone who has come to this country from other nations have become Australians but people who identify themselves by their religion first

Indians from India, Chinese from China. Muslims from where. Herein lies the difference between all the people who make up this country. When you identify by your religion rather than your birth country you will struggle to assimilate like everyone else who has blended into this country.

The Labor party run a dictatorship.

Imagine exiling somebody for being against genocide.

Capital Retro11:45 am 03 Jul 24

It’s not about genocide, it’s about Islam.

Don’t be absurd. Recognising the state of Palestine has nothing to do with Islam. Refusing to recognise it and return its borders back to the original 1948 ones is all aboht zionism though.

Recognise a Palestinian state……HOW does Israel do that when the opposing side has a precondition that the other doesn’t have the right to exist? ANSWER: You cannot and definitely should not.

Original 1948 borders? I think if you go back in history the Israelites may have been before them by several thousand years.

Incorrect. Canaan existed there several thousand years ago. Well before any mention of judah or the kingdom of israel. The Philistines, or in modern vernacular, Palestinians, were also resident in southern Canaan well before the israelites showed up.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.