Obeid Obye

Today Eddie Obeid's retirement from the Legislative Council was finally confirmed.


To be perfectly frank about it, he has been hanging round like a bad smell for some time now.

I think he can smell it too.  From SMH

In the year leading up to the 2011 election Kristina Keneally begged the "old guard" to retire and let some "flesh blood" into NSW Labor's ranks.  We saw, as a result, a mass exodus of Labor members of the Legislative Assembly and Council in what would have otherwise been described as rats deserting a sinking ship.


Obeid quite neatly summed up everything that was wrong with NSW Labor, and I have little doubt that Robertson is breathing a sigh of relief that he is to leave.


His record includes the following:


- In 2002 he was investigated and later cleared of corruption in relation to the Oasis redevelopment 
- He repeatedly failed to disclose business interests on Parliament's pecuniary interests register
- In 2004 he was censured due to his undue influence in the elections of Matrite Council
- In 2009 he made representations to NSW Minister for Roads, Michael Daley, on behalf of Mid-Western Regional Council without disclosing his business interest in the area
- In 2009 he was alleged to have links to Ron Medich and the murder of Michael McGurk


Most importantly, when Nathan Rees was dumped and replaced by Kristina Keneally, Rees famously announced that the new premier would be "a puppet of Joe Tripodi and Eddie Obeid."


Perhaps nothing better characterised the shambolic of Labor's governing by that stage.  In my view, it all but guaranteed Labor's loss at the next election (insofar as it was not already a sure thing).


As a final note, Obeid was the leader of the "Terrigals", a disproportionately powerful ALP subfaction. 


Of course Obeid's departure is only part of the story.  He will now have to be replaced.


As Obeid is a member of the Legislative Council, his replacement can be directly nominated by the ALP without the fuss of a by-election.


As well as Obeid, John Hatzistergos (former Attorney General) announced not long after the election that he would be retiring.


In one sense, it is surprising that so few are quitting.  Labor have been in power for a long time, and once a long reign ends there is normally a purge of the ranks as former ministers contemplate 4 years on the backbench in opposition.


That said, Keneally's plea for renewal in the year leading up to the election may have adequately depleted of the ranks of those who weren't in it for the long haul.


The word around the traps is that Obeid is to be replaced by Walter Secord, former chief of staff to Keneally, and Hatzistergos is to be replaced by former Blue Mountains Mayor Adam Searle


Unsurprisingly, some have let their displeasure be known about Sussex Street appointing the replacements, even calling for a rank and file ballot of members.


Others have suggested that those that missed out on election to the Legislative Council in 2011 (Andrew Ferguson and Natalie Bradbury) should be the replacements.  


That does make sense to some extent, but in fairness it's not as if Obeid and Hatzistergos ran intending to retire if Labor lost - both were not up for reelection round as they were continuing members elected in 2007.


It would certainly be unfortunate for Labor if the issue of Obeid and Hatzistergos' successors became the circus that Labor avoided by electing John Robertson unopposed on 31 March.


At least insofar as it avoids a drama, a quick and quiet appointment of suitable candidates would make sense.


Having said that, backroom deals are one of the prime causes of Labor's present seat-count - people tired of seeing power-brokers (like Obeid) calling the shots and disenfranchising "rank and file" members.


The point was neatly summed up on twitter by @rickeyre who tweeted today: "If Secord gets parachuted into the NSW upper house ahead of candidates who stood for election, it shows the ALP has learnt nothing."


The problem is that Labor cannot resort to a rank and file vote every time something contentious comes up - their is a time to cnsult everyone and a time to just get things done and LEAD.


This may well be one of those times.

A Higher Office

There has been a predictable flurry of chatter in the last few days about candidates not staying on after the election.

I wrote previously about the conspiracy theories regarding a Eric Roozendaal departure once he qualifies for his pension (here: http://bit.ly/f5c1lF). Many people are (predictably enough) are wondering how many Labor politicians will be moving on post election.

Presumably there will be less than one would normally expect when a party loses after 16 years in office, for two reasons.  First of all, the loss is inevitable, and it been that way for a long time.  No one from Labor could (plausibly) claim to be heading into this election still expecting to be in government - so there is little reason to expect the kind of exodus we say after Howard was punted in 2007 (Downer, Costello, McGauren and Vaile all jumped ship, Howard having famously lost his own seat).

Additionally, Keneally has been calling very publicly for what she has called "generational change" for some time.  Whether this is about renewing the party and trying to make sure they have a shot in 4 years, or rather just about trying to make the party look new and invigorated for this election is anyone's guess. 

This all means that most people who don't intend sticking out the 4 years have probably already jumped (or been pushed).  

During the Channel 10 debate last week, both leaders were asked questions about whether they will remain as leader after the election, which struck me as a particularly silly question. I've scoured the internet for a transcript but have been unable to find one, which seems typical of what seems to me to be the media's apathy to this election as a whole.

O'Farrell gave a rather cryptic answer that I didn't really follow about it being up to the party room and a vote having to be taken, when surely a simple "Yes" would have sufficed.

The question was difficult for Keneally because she knows that when Labor lose there will be people suggesting that she should no longer be leader of the party, despite the fact that no one really has much bad stuff to say about her leadership.  It may well not be up to her if she stays or not.

What she did guarantee is that she would be serving out her 4 year term as member for Heffron, she being one of the few Labor members all but guaranteed to retain her seat.

Today she is apparently refusing to comment on whether she will stay as leader if Labor are not returned (http://bit.ly/hi72Uq SMH online).  She was then asked whether she was considering a Federal career, to which she replied that she was not.

If she did go chasing Federal glory, she wouldn't be the first.  The most obvious example would be Rob Oakeshott, who quit NSW politics to run successfully for Mark Vaile's old seat in September 2008.  A number of current House of Representative members also cut their teeth in State politics.

There's also the question of whether the Labor leader who was at the helm of what may very well be the biggest shellacking ever handed out by a state in living memory would ever have a political pulse afterwards.

I recall discussion some years ago, back when the Liberals were at their lowest in NSW and Howard still seemed unassailable, that the party was going to struggle to get out of the doldrums in NSW because all the "talent" in NSW as heading for the Federal arena where there were opportunities to govern.

How times change.

That aside, it still seems that many people see Federal politics as the pinnacle for politicians.  I don't ever plan to run for anything, but if I did, and I was given the option of a job that would keep me in Sydney (for the most part) or job that would require me to spend much of my year in Canberra, I reckon it would take me at least 2 seconds to decide to stay in NSW.

I've also heard it said that it is State Governments that really get things done, and provide the services that people need - police, hospitals, roads, public transport, which surely must hold some appeal.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it seems a shame that people often regard state politics as a "stepping stone" or an audition for greater things.  It remains to be seen how many of the Coalition's members take the same approach in the years to come.