Former Labor transport minister and union boss John Robertson. Photo: Jonathan Carroll
As soon as the Independent Commission Against Corruption outlined the timetable for its hearings into allegations against the former Labor ministers Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald last year, John Robertson got on the front foot.
NSW Labor was facing months of appalling media coverage as the commission unfurled its narrative of alleged greed and corruption over the awarding of mining licences worth tens of millions of dollars.
The Opposition Leader set about distancing the parliamentary party from the bad old days of Obeid and Macdonald under the former Labor government with a program of integrity initiatives.
First up was a new vetting process for potential state Labor candidates that involved mandatory declaration of past indiscretions.
Then late last year, Robertson called for consideration of whether spouses and other family members should have to declare their interests in property and business to eradicate the potential for hidden conflicts of interest.
As a means of cleaning up the party's image, it went at least some way to countering the impression of state Labor as a party of dishonest spivs that was - and continues to be - sprayed around at ICAC.
But on Tuesday, the strategy went off the rails, courtesy of a proposal that MPs should not hold jobs outside Parliament.
The push blew up in his shadow cabinet, which refused to endorse it. The embarrassing rebuff was immediately leaked to the media.
In the space of a morning's work, the push to rehabilitate Labor's brand in NSW was undermined and there is renewed chatter about satisfaction with Robertson's leadership.
Like the issue of MPs becoming lobbyists as soon as they leave Parliament, the question of whether they should be allowed to hold down external jobs while they are still there is a vexed one.
The case for says that if you want to attract quality MPs into Parliament, you should allow them to keep up with their profession once elected, given they might only be there for a short period.
The case against - which Robertson articulated - is that MPs, particularly those on the shadow front bench, should be entirely focused on the job at hand.
But, rightly or wrongly, the message sent to the public from MPs rejecting the move is they feel the basic salary of $143,000 they are paid by taxpayers is inadequate. This is uncomfortably close to the narrative of greed being presented at ICAC that Labor is so desperate to combat.
Just as worrying for Robertson is the leak. Those responsible would have been in no doubt about the damage it would do to his leadership.
All of this is a stark reminder of the excruciating position NSW Labor finds itself in.
There is a lot of unhappiness about Robertson's leadership style and performance (including charges that he fails to adequately consult). The discontent has been exacerbated by this latest episode.
But there is a corresponding lack of will from any of Robertson's knockers to take on the thankless job themselves. For most of them, the road ahead before an election victory comes into sight is far too long.
It's the textbook definition of dysfunction.
Robertson may yet get his way on the issue of external employment. He is consulting further with his colleagues and there is a chance it will be resolved in time for the announcement of a broader package of reforms at a western Sydney forum this weekend.
But even if he pulls it off, there is no denying the damage has already been done.
No comments:
Post a Comment