Call me brave, or even stupid, but after David Penberthy’s piece last week, I’ve decided to launch a defence of NSW Labor leader John Robertson on The Punch. I expect pundits are already commenting below, calling me a union hack – or worse – as often occurs when I contribute to this site.

He looks nice enough to us

One of the reasons I feel compelled to launch this defence is because I find it curious that we endlessly search for people with convictions in politics, but end up bagging a bloke who was willing to stand up for his convictions.

Unpopular as it appears to the Labor elite, his convictions were shared by the majority of people in the community and by the workers that he was paid to represent.

While the story of electricity privatisation is taking centre stage in the soul searching about NSW Labor’s loss, it’s only part of the story, and like any take on history there is more than one view.

My own view is that Morris Iemma and Michael Costa’s defiance in pushing through electricity privatisation proved to be a case of political over-reach – similar to John’s Howard’s over-reach on WorkChoices.

Both WorkChoices and electricity privatisation were introduced by governments immediately after their re-election, and neither policy was taken to the electorate to gain public support.

Both were driven by the central ideology of key players in an out of touch style of politics that said ‘we know best’. Both predictably attempted to scapegoat trade unions when the rhetoric and spin failed to cut through.

It would be wrong to present the defeat of WorkChoices and electricity privatisation as mere battles between political parties and trade unions. In each case, unions carried a more authentic voice of how people and communities felt.

In the case of John Robertson, the scape-goating of the former trade union leader goes on. But just as there is more than one view on the ‘battle of privatisation’, there is more to John Robertson than this one fight.

His strength is that he is a thinker, a campaigner, and (as we know already) a fighter. Robertson was instrumental in the establishment of the group Labor For Refugees, and during his time at UnionsNSW managed to both defactionalise the union movement and build some lasting coalitions with community organisations outside it.

He financially backed the innovative Sydney Alliance, which under the leadership of Amanda Tattersall has continued to inspire and impress as a coalition empowering diverse community voices.

And - often unusually for male union leaders - he worked closely with many women in the movement respecting and valuing their views equal to those of the blokes.

Few people would have spent a year touring around the state on a bus to talk to nurses, teachers, tradespeople and other workers about WorkChoices. Even fewer would have enjoyed it. But such was his commitment to the movements Your Rights at Work Campaign in NSW.

My only criticism of Robertson is that he took on a senior role upon being elected. I would have preferred him to use his time on the sort of policy and coalition building work that the party desperately needed. But like electricity privatisation that’s all history. And it’s time for the Labor party to move on.

As leader of the opposition, he will set a much needed new direction for Labor. In a speech he gave in 2008 at an event my organisation hosted in Sydney he outlined a number of challenges for progressive organisations and spoke of the need for a vision that people are prepared to buy into then building power to make that vision a reality. This, he said, means ‘leading public debate from the front – making our agenda good politics’.

Bringing together politics and policy in this way is not just smart, it’s essential to restoring faith in governments of all persuasions. For too long, policy and politics has been disjointed, with the former directed by insiders and then unsuccessfully politicked through to communities.

This approach is not inclusive of communities because it doesn’t take account of a wide variety views. And it doesn’t work. As an experienced grassroots campaigner, John Robertson instinctively knows this.

So expect to see him in your local supermarket, or at your railway station talking to people about the new agenda. You might even see him touring around on a bus coming to a venue near you.

OK Punchineers, get stuck in!

Most commented

94 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • LeftRightOut says:

      05:56am | 06/04/11

      What an absolutely fawning piece of rubbish, Robertson has been described by every Labor party apparatchik who’ll talk about him, as a less than desirable person, let alone leader. He and his ilk are part of the Labor problem, people such as you, Jo-Anne, are in denial - denier!

      Worries that people will you you a Union hack? - Can’t imagine why they would:

      “Jo-anne Schofield took up the role of Executive Director of the newly formed think-tank Catalyst Australia in November 2007. Prior to that Jo-anne undertook policy and research in workforce planning, superannuation, legal and executive services as part if the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet’s Public Sector Workforce Office.”

      Nope, no stereotype being re-enforced there…

      Jo-anne was also formerly an Assistant National Secretary with the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union for five years, and in all worked in a variety of research, legal and policy roles at the LHMU for 14 years. She has a BA (Hons) first class from NSW University where she undertook a double major in Industrial Relations and History and Philosophy of Science and tutored in Industrial Relations from 1988-1990.”

    • Huey says:

      08:10am | 06/04/11

      Crikey! great rebuttal. Your potted biography nicely informs the article. Thanks.

    • iansand says:

      08:33am | 06/04/11

      I don’t know much about Robertson, but believe that the attacks on him by ALP elder statesmen (were there any women) say a lot about the malaise of the Labor Party.  They are more concerned about internal ideological battles and justifying their positions than rebuilding.

    • scubasteve says:

      08:46am | 06/04/11

      I say - keep Robbo.
      condemns Labor to oblivion for maybe 20 years?

    • Brian the conservative says:

      08:48am | 06/04/11

      Jo-anne, such a wonderful write up about your labor friend who got where he is using union members money, toured around australia on a bus with all he needed paid for by union members money. The fact is, that like all no hoper union shop stewards with few, if any, brains they get the smell of money and power to further their ideologies.
      Every labor goverment is full of them and my god we need a big change.I know we can not change your left wing indoctrination views, they do a good job of brainwashing, but leave it alone, we are sick of corrupt unions and politicians. By the way, I will go around the country on a bus talking to everybody if the union members will pay all my expenses.

    • dovif says:

      10:03am | 06/04/11

      Now that she no longer get directly paid by the ALP/state government slush fund, she need to keep praising the great leader to keep the pork rolling in.

      Quite simply, Robertson represents everything wrong with the NSW ALP. When your “friends” have a very negative view on you, like Keating, Iemma, Costa, Reese etc. I am going to agree with everything the ALP says about him

      As for the “your rights at work campaign” I would suggest he spend a year to try and get a tax payer funded pension. and he was succesful

    • Gordicans says:

      01:39pm | 06/04/11

      The main criticism of Robertson seems to be 1) he blocked the elec privitisation 2) was responsible for Iemma getting the chop.  3) he is a trade union thug

      1) if most of the public and union members were against elec privitisation, so blocking it seems the sensible thing to do
      2) Iemma chopped himself for trying to sell of elec when no one wanted him to do it except paul keating and his bank
      3) subjective ranting

      From the little I’ve seen of him,  he seems intelligent and considered.  So far so good, but the sun hasn’t even risen yet.  The main problem with NSW labour and why they were booted so hard was that everyone in NSW knew they were seriously corrupt - snouts in the trough and lining their pockets with large amounts of cash and privelege was what was actually happening.  The test of Robertson is whether or not he can rid NSW labour of corruption, and prove it!

    • Erick says:

      06:06am | 06/04/11

      Unions don’t represent the community. Last I heard, unions represented about 16% of people who had jobs - which I think would probably ampunt to less than 10% of the population in total.

      Unions represent the career path of Labor politicians (and of left-wing think tank Executive Directors).

    • TChong says:

      08:20am | 06/04/11

      Bullshite Eck.
      Why are you scared of working people having collective rights?
      Dont like the idea of workplace representation ?, people having a say ?
      Why?

    • The Original Oz says:

      09:49am | 06/04/11

      Chongy I don’t see Erick as demonstrating a fear of workplace representation or collective rights. I think the gist of his statement is that Unions, as representatives of about 10% of the population have undue influence over the workings of Government. I feel that he has made a fair and considered comment - unlike your unreasoned and illogical response to it. Troll

    • ibast says:

      10:23am | 06/04/11

      “I feel that he has made a fair and considered comment “.  He didn’t however.  The last figures I saw were 21% of the working poulation were in a TRADE union.  That doesn’t included professional unions like Doctors, Lawyers or Engineers for example.  As for reducing it relative to the population, that’s false logic too.  If I were a member of a union (and I’m not), my entire family would be represented, not just me.

      Then you consider something like the public service as an example.  Whilst only a small percentage of the public service are a member of a union, all but the senior executives benefit from union representation.  This is true of many, many workers.

      The fact is that union representation benefits well over half of the population.  You may disagree with their tactics, you may believe they have too much power, but if you believe that only 10% of the population benefit from union representation, you are seriously delusional.

      Chances are you’ve benefited from it your entire life and don’t even realise it.

    • Reg says:

      03:23pm | 06/04/11

      21% of the working population still isn’t many people…

      And professions like doctors, lawyers and accountants don’t have unions in the same sense. The have professional societies that regulate their profession. To try and put them with workers’ unions is moronic.

      Face it, only the bottom level of workers have unions. But they actually need them that far down as protection.

    • jb says:

      06:29am | 06/04/11

      Oh my, I love how you were able to turn an article about a labor thug into a story about work choices, if I didn’t know better maaam I would have thought you were a union stooge… whoops you are!
      Your diatribe is wasted here, we know you for what you are, you are a die hard Gillard the mugger suporter and by standing up for your mates very low moral fiber you gild yourself with the guilt of the lies that hold your beloved in power.
      You sanction the lies of your leader and the sooner you lot realise that GILLARD is poison the sooner you might have another chance at the title.
      At the moment if she continues to lambast on with the Swan the way they do, you lot will self destruct before our very eyes and be unelectable for 20 years and unfortunately for you incompetents the very man you actually call un electable will be PM of this fine country of ours and it will drive each and everyone of you absolutely crazy! I cant wait for that day….

    • Paul says:

      06:33am | 06/04/11

      Great article. I sincerely hope that NSW Labor keep him as leader for as long as possible.
      That is the only way of ensuring that Labor will never be re-elected in NSW.

    • Faz says:

      07:03am | 06/04/11

      Being from another state, I’d never seen the guy until his interview on The Insiders last weekend.

      I certainly read that he was not liked by many, but I thought he handled himself pretty well.

      Maybe in a ‘Nixon goes to China’ sort of way, he is the guy to fix NSW Labor?

    • stevie says:

      06:42am | 06/04/11

      Yep, you said it -  you’re a Union hack.

    • Reg says:

      07:03am | 06/04/11

      I don’t vote for men without hair. No Howard, no Robertson.

      That and the guy is not intelligent enough to run the State. So NSW Labor will be in opposition for a very long time with this muppet in charge.

    • TChong says:

      07:13am | 06/04/11

      Kinda balances the corporate hacks , and LNP spokespeople, that also feature quite regularly at this site.

    • Jim says:

      07:46am | 06/04/11

      The difference is Chongy; the corporate hacks are actually productive. They create jobs and wealth, pump money into the economy, and pay large amounts of tax dollars that go on to fund things like services and infrastructure.

      The union hacks, and the left-wing intelligentsia don’t actually do anything except promote their own narcissistic views. They cost society, they don’t value-add in any way shape or form. And in the case of union thugs, they actually cost jobs.

      I know who I’d rather listen to.

    • AT says:

      09:06am | 06/04/11

      Yes, yes, Jim. The taxes your noble and selfless corporate sector pay (and never ever cheat on) “fund things like services and infrastructure.” They have the best interests of the people at heart. All of them are on an altruistic quest to create a better, equitable society. That’s why the banks aren’t bastards. That’s why our telcos have built the best and cheapest broadband network in the developed world. That’s why fuel prices never inexplicable jump just before holidays. Should I continue?

    • PTom says:

      10:57am | 06/04/11

      @Reg,
      So you will be voting for Bligh then.

    • Jim says:

      11:36am | 06/04/11

      Please do continue AT, I love a fool….if not for taxpaying individuals and companies where would all the government revenue come from? Please do tell! Is there a magic money tree in Canberra? Or do we go back to nature?

      I’m guessing you are either an unemployed tree botherer or a perpetual art student…who would pay for your chosen lifestyle?

    • dovif says:

      12:02pm | 06/04/11

      AT

      You do know that there are employers and employees

      The employer needs to make money to ensure they can pay the employees, and if they do not make money, their shareholding will withdraw their money and all the employees loses their jobs

      The government takes 30% of all the profits of the company and are happy that these companies makes money

      The Banks are not bastards, because they provide housing to anyone who are in a mortgage or in a rental accomodation. Without the banks most people would be homeless, if you do not want a mortgage, you do not have to deal with a bank

      As you previously says, employers are bastards, they are profit hungry, the fact that these people have not built “the best and cheapest broadband network in the developed world” should tell you something. Ie taxpayers will be footing the bills for a long time

      Fuel prices rise are caused by supply and demand, the more people need something, the more expensive it is. If someone runs a coffee shop and millions of people turns up, they are going to raise their price, it is Economics 101, taught to almost all 8th grade student

      Do you need anymore explainations?

    • AT says:

      01:30pm | 06/04/11

      Jim, nice of you to acknowledge individuals pay taxes, but what’s your point? Yes, govts get their revenue from taxes and they’re the one’s we entrust with the solemn duty of spending it on stuff like services and infrastructure.

      Not your self-serving, greedy, exploitative corporate buddies. Slag off “union hacks” to heart’s content, but don’t pretend “corporate hacks” are paeans of piety.

      And your last paragraph? Playground stuff. Save it, mate, makes you sound like an infantile dolt.

      dovif, why yes! Yes I do need more explanation! Especially about banks’ providing housing. Please, do tell me more.

    • Against the Man says:

      02:35pm | 06/04/11

      Looks like TChong enjoys making a fool of himself. Please continue, you are very entertaining. A true ALP zombie troll if ever there was one smile

    • VVS says:

      03:26pm | 06/04/11

      @AT
      It sounds like you need to get laid, mate.

    • dovif says:

      04:13pm | 06/04/11

      LOL @AT

      You are either under 16 or not very bright

      How do you think people with 50k deposit gets to live in a house? The Truuth fairy?

      Who do you think give money to investors, so they can negatively gear investment property, so the poorer people have some place to live?

      Rudd and Gillard shows how important the Banks are to Australia, by giving them everything they want during the GFC. Maybe you need to asked them why it is imperative that the Australian banks are strong

    • AT says:

      04:30pm | 06/04/11

      You offering, VVS? Ours will be a transcendent love, kissy, kissy.

    • AT says:

      05:03pm | 06/04/11

      Thanks dovif, that was ace. What’s the “Truuth fairy”, but? That sounds ace, too!

    • Against the Man says:

      06:51am | 06/04/11

      People in Australia are slowly learning the consequence of voting Labor. I don’t care about NSW ALP, they won’t be in any shape to do anything substantial for maybe 10 years.  Once the Federal ALP gets voted out they won’t be in for another 20 years (at each election the ads would just show a photo of Rudd/Gillard with the caption ‘Remember what they did to you?’).

      Anyway back to NSW ALP leadership. Maybe Latham should make a comeback smile The guy has fire in his blood and he would rattle a few cages and make some people fearful. And we all know a fearful politician is a more perceptive one.

    • Jim says:

      07:41am | 06/04/11

      It’s all about the swinging voter AtM…not the rusted ons from either side. Latham will not stop the flood of people swinging away from Labor…and of the ones that are swinging away now, most will never go back. Labor’s got to cut it off now before it goes septic - ditch the clown act that is KRudd/Gillard/Swann/Wong, put Stephen Smith in charge call an election before the end of the year that they have to be prepared to lose, and then maybe, just maybe, they might rise from the ashes.

      If they leave it any longer they will disappear.

    • michael j says:

      08:11am | 06/04/11

      AN admirer of Latham,? hopefully you jest,this bloke while playing the part of bobo the clown for sixty minutes before the last election told Australian people not to vote by putting a blank ballot paper in the box because he did not believe Australia’n Democracy worked any more,,
      wonder how many Australian soldiers in Afghanistan followed his lead?
      As for Robo i reckon a bald head without a heap of tattoos really looks out of place,so he should get a southern cross done on the side of his neck or get a hairpiece,,

    • Against the Man says:

      01:28pm | 06/04/11

      Michael J I’m just joking about the whole Latham leadership thing. Seriously can you see him getting Labor forward in any way?

      And Jim agree with you all the way, I posted the same idea yesterday - Kick Gillard out ASAP, get Smith in, call an election and hope for the best, if not they are finished come the next election.

      In the Spriuking Gillard article from yesterday, someone named Mechano took to attacking my family. Now while I have no proof of who Mechano really is, I’m sure regular Punch posters can guess who it is. But I believe it shows that the ALP/ALP supporters are getting desperate and frustrated.

      The powerbrokers in the ALP have to prevent Gilltard from collecting that pension in June. She doesn’t deserve it and the Australian people are not going to be happy to see her get that when they have to pay flood/carbon taxes. It is Game On!

      Unleash Ruddbot and Gozilatham on Gilltard smile

    • Against the Man says:

      04:40pm | 06/04/11

      Correction:

      It was someone named Fine Words not Mechano that cowardly attacked my family rather than me personally.

      Sorry about that, a million thoughts through my poor brain…........smile

    • Fine Words says:

      05:51pm | 06/04/11

      What’s the matter Against the man?
      You can dish it out but can’t take it?
      Against the Man says:
      07:04pm | 05/04/11
      This week she is Latham’s spanking bitch and also a liar

      So it’s OK to call the Prime Minister of the country a bitch, but when someone suggests a female member of your family is a bitch, you take offence?
      Reap what you sow

    • Against the Man says:

      06:36pm | 06/04/11

      Fine Words, wonderful buddy smile

      I was hoping you would post something, I needed some proof of how low you really are. Go ahead say whatever you want, it doesn’t bother me. I just want to show the desperation in ALP/Gilltard zombies like you who would stoop so low.

      But I believe you are attacking me because I broke down John A Neve (or maybe it is you in disguise) and he needs to validate his manhood.

      Dish out your best, you’ll see it only brings me more support.

      By the way there is a tiff between mummy gillard and daddy rudd, and it is all over the news, seems like Karma is making a bitch of the ALP HaHA!

      By the way Gillard is the fake PM, get your facts right.

    • Jim says:

      07:33am | 06/04/11

      Geez Jo-Anne…did you and Ged Kearney dream up this piece over a glass or three of chardy last night?

      Your fawning appraisal for a guy that, in the private sector, would be considered borderline criminal and certainly unemployable was laughable.

      The upside I guess is that whilever he is in charge Labor won’t gain any ground at all.

    • AT says:

      08:36am | 06/04/11

      Unemployable by the private sector, Jim? Perfect credentials for a public servant. Society is not a business, citizens are not employees.

      And what’s really laughable is that none of the imbecilic regulars here have commended Paul Keating for his criticisms of Robertson. C’mon Pavlovians, acknowledge your mate, Keating.

    • Al Chunk says:

      07:39am | 06/04/11

      The double standard is annoying - the guy is a politician, they get where they are because they are self consumed, power hungry, dodgey b@rst@rds, fair weather friends to the voters and vain, .... did I mention sleazy?.  There is too much herd mentality in the media that is easily exploited by established and canny politicians .  Well done Jo-anne for going against the herd but you’ll have to get used to chewing the cud in a lonely barren corner of the paddock.

    • S.L says:

      07:41am | 06/04/11

      Are Unions really that bad? Without them we wouldn’t have the 40 (or less these days) hour working week to name one benefit.
      As a boss I’m someone they usually have in their sites but except for the odd one or two narks their reps have been quite reasonable to deal with. Yes they have given me grief over one employee I punted and had to reinstate only for her to resign shortly after with more than she should’ve got but then she tried the same stunt with her next employer when he wanted to get rid of her and the Union told her “bad luck Charley!”.
      John Robertson is in a no win situation being the new leader of a defeated party. Anyone taking this position isn’t doing it to advance their political career in my opinion.
      In saying that I do agree Unions have too much influence in the Labor Party as they only represent a nominal percentage of workers these days.

    • GB says:

      03:56pm | 06/04/11

      Those benefits you speak of S.L were fought for a long time ago when Unions were truly representative of the worker. Sadly, they’re now top heavy with individuals only in it to feather their own nest, or use it as a stepping stone to parachute into the next safe Labor seat. This latest TWU/Qantas standoff is pretty concerning.

    • jf says:

      07:43am | 06/04/11

      “I expect pundits are already commenting below, calling me a union hack – or worse”

      I can’t understand why. Every article you’ve ever written on this site has been a union pamphlet - from promoting Union run industry super funds to promoting your union comrade.

      You are everything that is wrong with unions. Like many super funds (not all I hasten to add) industry and non-industry alike, the unions quietly take fees from their members without delivering any service or value.

      Union members need delegates who work hard for them and fight for their interests. Not career bureaucrats sucking at the public tit.

      As you’ve never had a real job in your life and yet clearly manage to make a good living, I’m comfortable to not only call you a union hack but president of the club that represents everything that is wrong with the Union Movement and a sterling example of why the Union Movement (a movement with a noble cause) is so reviled in this country.

    • PTom says:

      11:08am | 06/04/11

      Do you feel the same about the National Farmers Federation or AMA, or is only the trade unions.

      With recent dealing with the wreck that is health with multiple bills for one operation, lack of specialist and high fees all thanks to the AMA.

      I think some of the non-trade unions have more to answer.

    • jf says:

      12:11pm | 06/04/11

      PTom

      I don’t disagree with your point. My point was that the union’s don’t act in their member’s best interests.

      Your point would suggest that these two industry organisations (unions if you wish) do act in their member’s best interests. Maybe a little to well - but they can hardly be blamed for that, that is what they are supposed to do. It is successive governments that have failed to be an effective counterparty.

    • james milton says:

      12:55pm | 06/04/11

      The AMA, or AMAfia is the worst of the bunch. If they don’t get their way, they threaten to strike, and we know what that means.. people die.

      So it’s “give us more money or people will die and the govt will have blood on their hands”.

      Mafia tactics, for GP’s that already earn 3 times more than their European counterparts.

    • St. Michael says:

      01:06pm | 06/04/11

      Go and read some of the industrial agreements first.  The AMA has actually given away the right for doctors to strike in some of them.

    • jf says:

      01:19pm | 06/04/11

      James Milton

      That may or may not be the case. But that is not the point. You (and PTom) are saying that the AMA represents its members to well. The AMA is paid for by it’s members to represent their interests. They do this and do it vigorously. It is not up to the AMA to represent the voter’s interests; that’s the Government’s job.

      My point is that the Trade Unions puportedly exist to represent their members and are paid to do so. However, rather than vigorously represent their member’s interests the union exists as a sheltered workshop for ALP executives and as a finishing schools for ALP politicians.

    • Seamus says:

      07:47am | 06/04/11

      Yes, Jo-anne, I’d settle on stupid ahead of brave.

    • Gladys says:

      07:48am | 06/04/11

      You’re right, Schofield. You are exceedingly brave jumping to Robbo’s defence.

    • DJ says:

      08:17am | 06/04/11

      Well, only a Union Hack could write such a load of rubbish. Paul Keating’s endorsement was enough for me.

      Anyone who proof read a book then claimed to co-author would have to be a dope. He ensured he had zero credibility from day one.

    • killerbee says:

      08:23am | 06/04/11

      I can’t believe how so many committed Labor powerbrokers can get the NSW situation so wrong.
      The voters didn’t kick Labor out because of the Power sale. The ways and means of it’s sale contributed with the proroguing of Parliament but the principle of the power sale was immaterial.
      NSW Labor lost the uncommitted Labor voters because they were seen as incompetent, corrupt and gave zero thought to the interests of the voters.
      They lost the committed Labor voters because the party faithful had been disenfranchised. The membership had lost any say in the running of the party, in preselection of candidates, in State Conferences and having their opinions heard. The upper house was seen as a retirement bonus for retired Union leaders and Party financial benefactors. The lower house members were selected for their factional leanings and their union pedigree.

      Ms Schofield obviously fits into one of the above categories and it would appear that she is beginning her play for a seat. She has ignored the real problems because that would require her to be critical of those in command and they control party selection. The other alternative is that she is treating the voters in the same way the State ALP have treated the voters for some time and spin doctoring away the troubles of the party.

    • Paul says:

      08:35am | 06/04/11

      Not surprised you are roundly criticised when as an academic and Labor union hack, you find a reason to support Mr Robertson.
      (And throw in an anti-Howard comment)
      You conveniently forget the all-important fact that the Labor’s unelected back-room, faceless force, rolled a decision of the elected members of the parliament. Taking out a premier as well.  This same unelected and therefore unaccountable team went ahead and took out a prime minster.
      Are you really paid to think?.

    • NicoleG says:

      08:38am | 06/04/11

      Can I please have the three minutes of my life I just lost back?

    • Vaunted says:

      09:08am | 06/04/11

      Jo-anne says ‘Calling me a union hack - or worse’; well that’s what you are, dear. Of course you’re going to say Robbo is a good bloke, that’s how union politics works, isn’t it? Conviction; you look after Robbo and Robbo will look after you; a process that in numerous cases leads inexorably to nepotism, graft and corruption. It’s the closest thing we’ve got to a Mafia in Australian society and in my view the number one reason why union membership is declining and why the ALP got thrashed in the NSW election.

    • AdamC says:

      09:09am | 06/04/11

      “I expect pundits are already commenting below, calling me a union hack ... ” Aren’t you? Your bio would suggest that you are. And why is it offensive to be so described? Are you actually one of them anti-union conservatives in disguise or something?

      “One of the reasons I feel compelled to launch this defence is because I find it curious that we endlessly search for people with convictions in politics, but end up bagging a bloke who was willing to stand up for his convictions.”

      Except that’s not what happened. Once Robertson had assassinated a sitting Labor premier and swanned his way into the parliament, energy privatisation didn’t seem so big a deal. Where’s the conviction there?

      I will be honest, I couldn’t get past about a third of this ridiculous drivel - it was too embarrassing.

    • AT says:

      10:09am | 06/04/11

      “...I couldn’t get past about a third of this…”

      And yet you speak with such certainty. Yep, you’re entirely credible.

    • Seanr says:

      10:22am | 06/04/11

      If I was her, I’d be embracing the ‘union hack’ term, looking at all her contributions to The Punch, she so obviously is one she might as well enjoy it.

      I forced myself to finish the article, it was actually so bad, it was amusing.

    • AdamC says:

      10:35am | 06/04/11

      AT, a discerning reader would have noted that I only commented on what I read,  and quoted relevant comments directly. (One of which is, in effect, factually wrong) So, unless our mate Jo-Anne’s piece says, halfway through: “Please disregard the first half of my article - it’s claptrap and I actually have the opposite view”, my comments about her directly quoted assertions are perfectly credible.

      I think you should try again, or go back under your bridge.

    • AT says:

      11:18am | 06/04/11

      A “discerning reader”, eh, Adam? Why would a discerning reader extend the courtesy to you and your post that you decline to extend to the author and her blog before commenting? Maybe you honestly believe snide jibes pass for “credible” commentary?

      No discerning reader is fooled by your escapades. You don’t have anything interesting, insightful or original to say. You’re not entertaining or funny. In fact, you’re a massive bore. Insist that you’re “credible” if you must, but please understand no one else is obliged to share your delusions.

    • fairsfair says:

      11:31am | 06/04/11

      AdamC - I love you and you know it.

    • AdamC says:

      11:41am | 06/04/11

      “Why would a discerning reader extend the courtesy to you and your post that you decline to extend to the author and her blog before commenting?”

      AT, you are the one who read my comment and, in turn, commented on it. I didn’t make you do it. (It even seems like you read the whole comment, though I wouldn’t ever accuse you of being a discerning reader.’)

      “Maybe you honestly believe snide jibes pass for “credible” commentary?”

      Well, I don’t know, AT. I pointed out the strangeness of someone so closely connected to unions being offended by others describing her as a union hack. Then I made the point that her attempts to characterise an arch opportunist and factional snakeman as a conviction politician sticking up for his values are embarrassingly ridiculous. You haven’t even tried to argue that I am wrong about these points, so I would say I must be pretty credible.

      “You don’t have anything interesting, insightful or original to say. You’re not entertaining or funny. In fact, you’re a massive bore.”

      Well, maybe not original, as it seems the negative response to Jo-Anne’s absurd post is just about universal (except fot you). But if I am so uninteresting and boring, feel free to take your trolling elsewhere. I can assure you I will be just fine.

    • Hamish says:

      12:13pm | 06/04/11

      AT, I haven’t even read a single line of the article because Jo-anne’s articles are so boringly predictable I don’t have to read them to comment on what I know she said. These facts are self-evident and universally true:

      Jo-anne is one of Australia’s preeminent Union hacks.
      Anything she says about an ALP politician or fellow Union hack is almost certainly untrue or generous to the point of being untrue.
      Anyone who refers to Robertson as having ‘convictions’ and/or ‘integrity’ (or whatever Jo-anne said) is either a liar, delusional, mis-informed or such a Union hack that they qualify as all of the above.

      I say embrace the Union hack term. Derogatory terminology loses all its power when co-opted by the denigratee. Hence terms like ‘gays’ and ‘queers’ now being part of common acceptable parlance rather than insults. She should shout from the rooftops ‘I’m a Union hack and I’m proud!’

    • AT says:

      12:44pm | 06/04/11

      Give it a rest, sport. Repeating the same insipid declamations over and over and over again doesn’t make them less insipid.

      Oh, and when you talk about the ‘just about universal negative response’, you do realise you’re talking about only The Punch? There’s a whole universe beyond this site that has a more balanced view of the world — they’re sensible, they’re no fun at all — so if it’s all the same to you I’ll continue trolling here where the idiocy is so predicable and bountiful one is guaranteed a handsome haul every time.

        ~  Cue AdamC…

    • AT says:

      01:37pm | 06/04/11

      Hamish, wilful ignorance.

      Wallow in it if you wish, but don’t bore anyone else with it.

    • AdamC says:

      03:11pm | 06/04/11

      “Give it a rest, sport. Repeating the same insipid declamations over and over and over again doesn’t make them less insipid.”

      I couldn’t agree more, AT, having read your ‘contribution’ to the debate below this article.

      “Oh, and when you talk about the ‘just about universal negative response’, you do realise you’re talking about only The Punch?”

      Um, no, AT. John Roberson has been almost universally derided, even within his own party. I can’t envisage any publication in which this almost delusional article would not have been ridiculed.

      “There’s a whole universe beyond this site ...”

      Indeed there is, AT. Maybe you would have more luck with your ineffectual personal attacks there. I notice you still haven’t even tried to contradict what I actually wrote about the article.

    • AT says:

      03:43pm | 06/04/11

      Yay! In an uncertain, ever changing world Adam can always be relied upon to take the bait.

      One day you may realise you’re not being taken seriously, but in the meantime could you clarify something in your latest post for me please?

      You suggest I might have more luck with my ineffectual personal attacks on sites other than The Punch. This remark doesn’t make much sense as my ineffectual personal attacks are directed at you and most specifically your comments on this thread, so posting my ineffectual personal attacks elsewhere would be a futile exercise, wouldn’t it?

      Thanks in advance for what is bound to be a reasoned gracious explanation.

    • NicoleG says:

      04:19pm | 06/04/11

      AT, what does that stand for? Annoying Twit?

    • AdamC says:

      04:46pm | 06/04/11

      “One day you may realise you’re not being taken seriously.”

      And I am also allegedly a bore with nothing insightful or original to say. Yet it hasn’t stopped you coming back for more, has it? Or taking the bait, as it were, and as you accuse me of doing. And you evidently don’t really do serious, so I wouldn’t expect you to take me seriously. And I am more than happy to return the favour.

      ” ... my ineffectual personal attacks are directed at you and most specifically your comments on this thread, so posting my ineffectual personal attacks elsewhere would be a futile exercise, wouldn’t it?

      Why would it be futile? This schtick of yours is clearly not topic specific. You haven’t even mentioned the topic; I assume you have no interest in or knowledge of it. And I have no doubt that you will be doing a very similar circus act somewhere else tomorrow.

    • AT says:

      04:49pm | 06/04/11

      NicoleG, yes, that’s exactly right. You got it one. Outstanding.

    • NicoleG says:

      05:05pm | 06/04/11

      Good. Do I get a prize?

    • AT says:

      05:19pm | 06/04/11

      Sure it’s “topic specific”, Adam. The topic is AdamC — anyone who admits they only read a 3rd of an article before commenting on it obviously considers their comments more topical than the article itself, ergo; AdamC is the topic.

      You should be flattered. The second paragraph in your 04:46pm post is a bit whiny, though.

    • AdamC says:

      06:30pm | 06/04/11

      Perhaps I would be flattered, AT, if that were true. But I’m not so special. You made several comments here this morning, looking for a rise. I just reciprocated. Actually, I had initially assumed you were a Labor tragic clutching at straws (‘you didn’t read the whole article !!!) rather than an attention-seeker chucking hand grenades. More fool me. I’m not complaining, though, you were entertaining enough, pompous affectations aside.

      But the working day is over, and you seem to have run out of ideas. (In fact, you’ve come full circle.)

      Unsubscribe.

    • AdamC says:

      06:34pm | 06/04/11

      Addendum -

      Sorry, I missed your comment, Fairsfair. Thanks!

    • Jim says:

      07:13pm | 06/04/11

      Crikey Badger…how many pseudonyms have you used today? AT, fine words…anyone else?

    • AT says:

      08:31pm | 06/04/11

      Oh, an attention-seeking grenade chucker’s work is never done, Adam, my sweet.

      Just for your records you may care to note that in this thread you’ve posted about the same number of words as the original article. That’s an awful lot of commentary given you only read one third of it.

      Also, I don’t think it’s possible to unsubscribe from your own thread. You’d have to abandon it and that would be a concession of defeat.

    • The Badger says:

      08:42pm | 06/04/11

      Yes jim, I’m everyone who disagrees with you and the rest of the conservative fringe dwellers who worship at the altar of the one trick pony.

    • AdamC says:

      09:44am | 07/04/11

      Clarification -

      No, AT, not from my thread, just from you.

    • AT says:

      12:47pm | 07/04/11

      No need for the clarification, Adam, I think it was pretty obvious what you were “unsubscribing” from. Except you had to make your 09:44am | 07/04/11 comment, eh? Kinda negates the impact of your earlier “unsubscribe” post.

      Anyway, apart from the second last paragraph in your first post, you haven’t addressed the topic of this blog at all. The rest of your first post is snide and sneering mocking of the author and in every other one of your posts on this thread (every-single-one-of-them, Adam) you’re having a go at me.

      So, at the point during your jaunt when you say I “haven’t even tried to contradict what [you] actually wrote about the article”, I can tell you it’s because you’ve only written one opinionated paragraph which makes all manner of assumptions and which does not merit a response.

      Everything else from you in this (your) thread is a scornful burlesque act. My involvement here is, admittedly, on that same insincere level; I’m indulging in a bit of squalid fun, but I do have a serious question for you if you’d care to answer — we’re off page one one, now, no one’s gonna see it anyway;

      Why do you bother? Why do you and your cohorts persist with this stuff? You’re not serious, you don’t engage with the subject and no one who’s up for convincing will be swayed by your antics. So why? Is there any benefit derived from your postulations or is it just some tawdry entertainment for you?

    • AdamC says:

      01:12pm | 07/04/11

      “I do have a serious question for you if you’d care to answer.”

      No, I don’t. See above.

    • AT says:

      03:32pm | 07/04/11

      AdamC @ 01:12pm | 07/04/11

      Did you really have to post that last comment? Did you really have to post that you aren’t gonna play any more? If you couldn’t rise to the challenge of answering a few simple questions, you couldn’t just let it go? You had to come back and say you weren’t gonna answer them? Really?

      I suspect you’re a rather insecure and timid fellow who compensates for his diffidence with all this online belligerent bluster. And that’s fine, it’s tedious and crass, but if it’s therapeutic for you; go for it.

      I’m just curious what motivates your mob. It’s not of any consequence, of course, except the stain your lot leave on comment pages such as this one cheapen the entire hosting site. What should be a wonderful platform for community discussion is commandeered by infantile bullies.

      Your mighty tribe rules the roost here at The Punch, you can afford to be a little magnanimous and answer a few questions, can’t you?

      (PS. There’s no need to reply saying you won’t reply.)

    • Craig says:

      09:43am | 06/04/11

      Union hack

    • Chewy says:

      09:57am | 06/04/11

      “So expect to see him in your local supermarket, or at your railway station talking to people about the new agenda. You might even see him touring around on a bus coming to a venue near you.”
      I will bet my house John Robertson will not tour my local safe Liberal electorate. No Labor politician ever gave a stuff about us. Labor only ever govern for their own electorates. The best safe Liberal electorates can expect from Labor is indifference at worst its a sledge hammer.

    • Anne_N says:

      03:49pm | 06/04/11

      Chewy, I don’t expect to see him either.  For over 16 years Labor took the heartland for granted, and the minute the electorate bit back, and on the same day he’s annointed Supreme Being of NSW ALP there’s Robbo out and about shaking hands in St Marys - now in a Liberal seat….like a child who doesn’t want that toy until someone else takes it. 

      Bad luck for me I’m in one of the remaining Labor seats, despite my vote being among the huge swing against the sitting member.  I still expect to be ignored.

    • Chewy says:

      10:08am | 06/04/11

      Actually for sheer entertainment value if it means we get to see more Keating in fine form I say give Robbo a go!
      John Robertson is Fatty O’barrel’s Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy all rolled into one. What more could a drovers dog ask for?

    • Don says:

      10:09am | 06/04/11

      Union hack thinks other union hack is great because he wants to bankroll and adopt the policies of left wing activist groups. If Robbo does this then it will be a VERY long time till Labor sit on the government benches again.

    • Paul C says:

      10:19am | 06/04/11

      Did you in your think-tank pause to consider why your diligent Labor team of unionists and associated power brokers, stood by as over the last 16 years 130 NSW Labor branches closed down due to either lack of interest, or more likely disgust?
      Do you really believe the likes of Mr Robertson are worth supporting over the people the ALP once represented.

    • UnionMaid says:

      10:58am | 06/04/11

      A union hack?  No I know you.  You aren’t a hack, if you were you wouldn’t be writing this, you would be joining in the chorus of people condemning Robbo and laying at the feet of the Keating altar.

      And of course if you were a real hack you would be working in a cushy job having really contributed nothing to the lives of ordinary people. Union Hacks don’t get cushy jobs unless of course they prostituted their lives to the Party - well then they are Party hacks and not union hacks and of course the Liberal Party has never rewarded one of their hacks has it.  Robbo can’t be a union hack because he is putting himself into the most uncomfortable role that public life offers.  I wouldn’t wish that job on anyone - least of all Robertson.  I reckon that the odds are that the terrigals with do their best to continue to fight to retain power rather than work for relevance.  I think that Robertson has the capacity to contribute to positive change but I don’t think he is a miracle maker.  One person does not a Party make.

      I am proudly union.  I am happy to admit that.  I’m not a member of the ALP.  I am just as happy to admit that.  I guess we are comfortable with our own values. Sticks and stones and all of that. 

      Do you think Jo that there are enough comments here from the supporters of Iemma, Costa and “let’s cosy up to big business” types here?  I thought they might have been better organised.  I’m disappointed in that.  But then given between them that lot is still ducking for cover and trying desperately not to take any share of the accountability for the rot in the ALP, I am not surprised. It’s so much easier to blame and howl than to stand up and own your own mess.

      The regular comment providers here have become so predictable and now boring.  Come on you lot!!!!.  I expect you to do better!  Democracy is only effective when the opposition is effective - I have learnt that living in this state.  It takes a really hopeless Opposition to allow a Government to fail so spectacularly.  I am confident that my poodle could have won a seat from the ALP had she run as a Liberal.

      So to the regular commentors, you don’t like Robbo and you don’t support him.  I get that much.  Why is it important to you who leads the ALP?  I bet it means nothing to you, it’s just an opportunity for you to whine on.  I respect your right to whine and whinge, it’s just that I am really hoping for a little more effort and variety from the regular contributors.

      Dig deeper folks.

    • Rosie says:

      11:42am | 06/04/11

      All Laborites, including Paul Keating should give Robertson a fair go to prove himself! Like Tony Abbott aiming to become PM, Robertson should be applauded for having the guts to take on the wreckage that his Labor Party caused in the 16 years they were in Govt. Tony Abbott for having the courage to hold to account an incomptent Labor Govt whose leader will go down in history as Australia’s first female PM who lied to the people to get her party elected.

      PS - the Gillard Govt should stop complaining about the Insurance Companies who are not paying insurance to flood victims and use the flood levy money to help in some kind of everyday comfortable living, while they wait to work out their future. There are still people living in tents and will have no future if the insurance companies do not pay up!

    • Andras says:

      12:16pm | 06/04/11

      Geez Jo-anne I wish you hand’t started off so defensive. ‘Cause you are right Robbo is what the party needs right now to re-connect with the Western Sydney.Eric Roozendal living in cushy Eastern Suburbs sure never understood Parramatta or further West. Will Robbo ever be Premier. I doubt it. He’ll be too old by the time Labor next gets a chance to knock off the Coalition. But between now and then he will have the honourable role of rebuilding the Labor brand, reconnecting to the Labor soul

    • stephen says:

      12:39pm | 06/04/11

      As someone famous once said Jo’...‘he’s as sharp as a bowlin’ ball’.

    • Holly says:

      01:48pm | 06/04/11

      I was pleasantly surprised when I saw Robertson interviewed on tv after all the condemnation from the opposition, media and his own party. 

      I am intrigued by the continued demonisation of unions in this country.  It would seem we have a huge number of workers who are willing to condemn unions while at the same time grab the benefits negotiated on their behalf - like ungrateful children really.  Just as child like as the total unquestioning following of the coalition in its avowed intent to smash the unions.  It’s about cutting your pay packet sillies.  Don’t suppose these same people ever wonder why the “born to rulers” want to reduce the role of workers unions while at the same time supporting professional organisations.

    • Ben81 says:

      07:41pm | 06/04/11

      “It would seem we have a huge number of workers who are willing to condemn unions while at the same time grab the benefits negotiated on their behalf “

      I believe most of the condemnation is in response to their huge disproportionate influence over the Labor party and politics in general, Holly. 
      And there’s not much of a choice when it comes to that when they continually drive up the cost of doing business, which increases the cost of living for everyone through those increased labour costs directy passed on to consumers, which then has to be continually compensated through more wage increases so people can keep up and unions can call it a victory to justify the dues they charge.
      Even in areas where these costs aren’t passed on directly like the public service they contribute to it by people and unions in other sectors watching them and demanding the same things.

      I’ll just keep working without paying an organisation to spend my money on political campaigns I don’t agree with, thanks.

    • SM says:

      02:09pm | 06/04/11

      Good Lord Punch

      If you want someone to write a piece about Robertson, why not get someone who isn’t a union stooge?

      Laughable

    • handbags says:

      07:39am | 13/06/12

      It is hard to find knowledgeable people on this topic, but you sound like you know what you?e talking about! Thanks

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter