Some time in the early 2000s an odd parcel arrived in the post at my electoral office.The accompanying letter alleged that the contents of the envelope included some Labor branch lists that highlighted ethnic branch stacking in Victoria. It went on to get stuck into a Victorian female Labor member with the unattractive assertion that she had "got there on her back".
Apparently this was a gift for which I should have been grateful. I didn't see it that way. It seemed to be some disgruntled Labor sleaze who couldn't handle losing to a woman just trying to get me to do their dirty work. The parcel just went on the shelf in case one day we had the time to make ethnic branch stacking an issue. In a later office move it went to the dump. Every now and then I reflect on whether I was an idiot and passed up a golden opportunity. I'll never really know.
Bill Shorten has written to every crossbencher to garner support for Labor's campaign against penalty rate cuts. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen
Ethnic branch stacking is an old Labor game. It's very unattractive. Under the guise of actually caring about newcomers you get an organiser to sign a whole bunch of people up to a branch. The new members may not realise they've been signed up, someone else pays the membership. Or they may well come from a country where keeping sweet with the authorities is a lifeline so they assume the same system operates here.
Some clearly are given the idea that being in the branch will make the local member work harder to get a family reunion visa through. That's cheap, nasty politics at its ugliest.
Without great English (not a requirement under humanitarian visas nor for secondary applicants) these people are unlikely to head along to branch meetings and cause any bother by actually demanding a say. They get nothing, but the branch stacker gets bigger numbers to in turn increase their power and control.
It's not limited to Victoria by any means. NSW Labor has made an art form out of it. It's worth highlighting for two reasons. First, there's something worse than moral bankruptcy in signing up swaths of new migrants who either don't know they're being used in this way or worse are misled into thinking that it gives them a better chance of bringing the rest of their family here.
Second, it is likely to be at the very least a big part of Labor's current split over its policy about Israel and Netanyahu's visit. When you sign up thousands of people with an anti-Israel stance it's bound to have an effect.
Chris Pyne called this out ages ago, in November 2002 to be precise. That might be giving him too much credit because in a speech in Parliament he cited former NSW Labor premier Barry Unsworth, in a report in 2000, concluding that 90 per cent of members in the then federal seat of Fowler had been signed up by branch stackers. It was clear to Unsworth then, and probably before, that exploiting ethnic hostilities, exploiting new migrants, was the key to branch stacking by some in the Labor Party.
In the speech, Pyne refers to media coverage of this rort by David Penberthy and by the-then Sunday program. Apparently there was an inordinately large rush of Lebanese Muslims into some NSW branches. A prominent Lebanese leader is quoted as pointing to the promise of council seats in exchange for support for the local member.
This all has an effect because after a while both the willing organiser and the unwitting members cotton on and come back to bite you. Eventually the piper has to be paid. Add in the fact that Labor holds a whack of marginal seats with high concentrations of ethnic minorities and you can see there's a powder keg for policy making.
It's not a Muslim, non-Muslim issue. But concentrations of people from the Middle East, both Christian and Muslim, in marginal seats are bound to bring Labor's position on Israel into sharp focus.
Trying to woo clumps of voters in marginal seats is a tricky business. You just can't please all of the people all of the time. Add in to this messy melting pot of Labor policy a genuine change of heart by some Labor luminaries who have in the past been strong supporters of Israel and you can see that there's no smooth sailing ahead for Bill Shorten on this one.
There are people who might otherwise be steadfast supporters of Israel but who think Israel has gone too far. There are those who see the Palestinians as nothing but terrorists. Perhaps Christopher Hitchens was right when he said the truth often lies, and when it does it lies somewhere in between.
This may also be a wonderful example of nature reminding us (and policymakers in particular) that not every problem has a solution. After all, if every problem did have an identifiable and implementable solution, theoretically we'd have no more problems. Sometimes incremental improvement is all we can hope for. Sometimes the best that can be done is to manage the problem. And sometimes people have to find solutions themselves, outsiders just don't understand.
I've heard the frog and the scorpion story many times. It doesn't fill me with hope. There's a scorpion that wants to cross a river but can't swim. Seeing a friendly looking frog the scorpion asks if he can jump on his back and they can cross together. The frog says he's not a fool and doesn't want to be killed by the scorpion stinging his back. The scorpion points out if he did that they would both drown. Placated, the frog offers his back. Halfway across the river, zing! The frog feels the scorpion's sting. He asks: "Why did you do that, now we'll both drown." The scorpion shrugs and says: "But it's the Middle East."