Kitching didn’t deserve to be treated so poorly

Kimberley Kitching.

Did factional bastardry and petty party politics contribute to Labor senator Kimberley Kitching’s death? While Kitching was a political warrior and not backward in coming forward, and had underlying health issues, she was under enormous pressure within her party, felt isolated and excluded, and was fighting for her career.

Kitching’s death last week, at age 52, cut short a career that had made a notable contribution to public life. News of her untimely death was met with shock followed by dismay. But some of her friends and colleagues remain angry and believe she was treated appallingly by her own party.

I always found Kitching to be highly intelligent, deeply engaged in public policy issues and with an acute understanding of political strategy. We occasionally talked about these things and our shared love of books and reading. Her favourite place to peruse and buy books was Avenue Bookstore at Albert Park in Melbourne.

Just two months before the federal election, her preselection for Labor’s Victorian Senate ticket was not confirmed and, indeed, was in doubt. The day before her death last Thursday, an online meeting of five Victorian Right faction bosses refused to endorse her preselection. Three of them said it was a matter for the national executive.

Labor’s national executive is composed of 20 members elected by the party’s national conference plus the federal leader, Anthony Albanese, who each have a vote. There are several non-voting positions. Every member is a parliamentarian or party or union official with factional backing. This body, controlled by the Left faction, would determine Kitching’s political fate.

Because of a branch-stacking scandal in Victoria, the entire membership of that state has been suspended until next year. Faction bosses run Labor’s second-largest branch. It is undemocratic and unaccountable. Labor sources say Kitching was likely to be preselected and it was linked with Kim Carr’s uncertain future. If so, this factional game-playing is a poor rationalisation for not confirming her preselection.

The preselection was not the only thing on Kitching’s mind. The truth is that she and her staff were poorly treated by some of her colleagues. Kitching had been excluded from tactics committee meetings and shut out from strategy sessions even though she was deputy manager of opposition business in the Senate. She was denied talking points and key lines routinely circulated to MPs.

Labor’s Senate leadership group denied Kitching opportunities to ask questions in Senate question time. Since June last year, Kitching had asked only two questions – fewer than any member of the shadow ministry. Many senators who were not in the shadow ministry asked more questions than she did.

This behaviour by her Senate colleagues – they know who they are – is tantamount to bullying and intimidation that would not be tolerated in other workplaces. It underscores how politics operates in a bubble, divorced from the real world. Yet the same senators argue standards of behaviour in politics must change.

Kitching came to the Senate in 2016 with baggage. She had been involved in party and union faction wars through the years. She was no saint and never claimed to be. Nor is she the only politician who has suffered because of internal political cruelty. This does not excuse how she was treated.

Respected across the political divide, Kitching helped secure bipartisan support for Magnitsky laws that have been used by the Morrison government to sanction Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. When Kitching received the Magnitsky Human Rights Award in London last year, she had to pay her own airfare after being denied funding from the opposition travel budget. The award is fitting recognition of her achievement.

She was an outspoken critic of China’s interference in Australian politics and its assertiveness and aggressiveness in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. Kitching was effective in Senate estimates, grilling ministers and public servants on a range of issues and gaining media attention for numerous revelations.

Kitching upset some of her Labor colleagues with her outspoken views. She never hid what she thought and often could be too frank. But she also was charming and had a cheeky sense of humour. Parties are stronger if they allow a diversity of views to be expressed and debated, and they should give MPs more freedom to speak their minds.

Politicians work long hours, are away from their families and friends, and are under enormous pressure because of social media. The fear of looming political defeat can add significantly to an already stressful working environment. The trauma of politics has been chronicled in academic journals. Some politicians never get over being rejected by their colleagues or voters.

Bill Shorten, a friend and political ally of Kitching, acknowledged her toughness but also the pressure she was under. “I have no doubt that the stress of politics in the machinations in the back rooms had its toll,” he said last week. “Stress is like invisible coats of paint. It’s got to be having an impact. And she was greatly stressed.”

There is an old story – wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill – of a seasoned politician showing a new member of parliament the House of Commons. “The opposition occupies the benches in front of you,” they say, “but the enemy sits behind you.” Those in politics know it all too well.

Kitching’s death is a tragedy. It is already difficult to attract the best and brightest into politics. Her experience should serve as a cautionary tale, unfortunately, that they may be better off pursuing other careers. It also should serve as a wake-up call to the political class to think about how they treat others and the potential consequences of their actions.