Labor's future depends on Gillard reforming factions

WHO said this? "Before you can persuade Australians of your credentials to run the country, you have to show that you can run your political party. And to do that, we must unshackle our party from factions. It's time to stop mincing words and acknowledge that factionalism in the Labor Party is out of control and destructive. Power comes first, permeated by a winner-take-all culture. It's become about who wins, not what for. It's now time to do something about it."

No, it's not Mark Latham, though the former Labor leader has said much the same thing. No, it's not Morris Iemma, though last month the former NSW Labor Premier suggested that Karl Bitar, the faceless man who formerly led the NSW Right, should be flipping hamburgers for his role in Labor's election campaign. No, it's not Frank Sartor, though the senior NSW Labor minister sent the following text message to Bitar when he became ALP national secretary in October 2008: "Congratulations on the new job. Now that you've f. . ked up NSW, you can go and f. . k up the country."

No, it's not Paul Keating, though the former Labor prime minister described his old faction as lacking "an ideology other than the sheer pursuit of power".

Julia Gillard made those remarks in a headline-splashing speech to the Sydney Institute in March 2006. She directed her remarks at Kim Beazley after the then Labor leader failed to support the preselection of Simon Crean during bitter factional fights in the seat of Hotham.

That's the thing about factions. When you're on the losing team, you hate factions. When you're on the rise, you just love them. Or at least that's what you tell the most powerful faction.

Kevin Rudd imagined that by sidelining factions, they would become irrelevant. In June, when he was quickly and quietly executed by Labor's right factions, he learned he was wrong. Then, carrying on the loser tradition, he dumped on the factions for taking away his power.

Alas, until someone in power decides to do something more than just ignore the factions, Labor will continue on the same path, imposing its power for power's sake mindset on to grander vistas.

Rudd's problem is now Gillard's. When she gave her maiden address in November 1998, she said that Australians were looking for leaders with passion and conviction. She said they want to know what politicians stood for. Now, as Prime Minister, Gillard has her chance to show her 2006 convictions. At the first post-election caucus meeting, the new PM announced a serious review of Labor's disastrous campaign to help define the party's future path.

Serious reviews deliver serious criticisms, point the finger at those responsible, call for changes to address the deficiencies.

Conviction would mean picking up the troublesome factions by the scruff of their necks, telling them to end the "power for power sake games, the whatever-it-takes" tactics, the poll-driven policy and get back to what factions are meant to do in any successful political party.

During that 2006 address Gillard made some suggestions. Give the Labor leader the power to appoint the ministry. Tick. Ensure that members of the leadership group - the prime minister, the deputy leader, the Senate leader and deputy Senate leader - "cease to participate in their factional activities".

Say that again? Does this mean Gillard will, for example, ask deputy Senate leader and factional heavyweight Stephen Conroy to cease and desist from factional activities?

Recall that Conroy was instrumental in the unsuccessful push to oust Crean in 2006. In return, Crean attacked Conroy as someone "who masquerades as one of four parliamentary leaders but who can't help himself and seems only ever to involve himself full time as a factional wheeler and dealer".

In all likelihood, Gillard's review will be Ruddesque. Labor will look busy enough, convening committees, appointing a milquetoast chairman, producing papers, making bland recommendations. Then nothing of note will happen. Gillard does not have the raw political power to upset the status quo. Her leadership hinges on keeping everyone happy. And that includes the factions.

Gillard's other problem is that, like every other Labor leader, her entire career has been one long factional play.

Witness her decision to promote the men who helped her into the top job. All of these factional heavies from NSW, Victoria and South Australia have been rewarded with promotions.

Certainly merit played a role. But let's face it. So did Gillard's overarching need to keep the factional powerbrokers happy.

The NSW Right has shown a propensity to strike whenever a leader drops in the polls: Bob Carr was replaced by Iemma, who was replaced by Nathan Rees, who was replaced by Kristina Keneally. Federally, the Right replaced Rudd with Gillard.

Their promotions have only boosted their power. In other words, there won't be a serious review that mentions dark factional influence emanating from the headquarters of the NSW Right in Sussex Street, or anywhere else. Bitar is safe.

If Rudd had too much power after his 2007 win, Gillard's problem is she doesn't have enough. Leading a minority government that mixes Labor with Greens with independents from conservative seats means her power to pass legislation is wafer thin. An illness, death or grumpy member within her rainbow alliance is enough to her curb her tenuous control of parliament.

Reforming her own party is equally problematic. Forget courage, convictions and the community. How do you say "upset no one" in Latin? This is Gillard's new crowning crest.

Yet, at some point, Labor's future depends on a leader courageous enough to confront the party's factions. Certainly factions can play a useful role in modern day politics. They can have robust policy debates, unify an unruly caucus behind policies, disendorse deadwood members and replace dud leaders. Perhaps if factions started articulating and defending their role more, they might remember their core role.

Instead, Labor's most powerful factions have a sole obsession with power. Just ask Iemma or Latham or Keating. Or Gillard. Clearly, something needs to change if, to coin a phrase, Labor is to "get back on track".