The Dead Roo

Victorian political start up “People Power” is no more according to ousted party President and co-founder Vern Hughes. Obviously inspired by the example of Mark Latham, Hughes has deleted the People Power website and replaced it with a rant listing of his bitter recriminations about People Power.

It’s true, I’ve had something of an interest in the varying fortunes of “People Power”, so you shouldn’t be surprised when I offer a review of the highlights of Vern Hughes’ bizarre, self aggrandizing and often hypocritical rant over the fold.

“The People Power project has ended.”

Vern Hughes, co-founder and former President of People Power was ousted at the parties recent AGM. The demise of People Power as an organization was too be expected following their demise as a political player of any note with last Novembers Victorian election result. That said, you gotta love the audacity of Vern Hughes to go around “officially” declaring the party dead simply because he was kicked out. Hughes laments:

“Alas the old kind of politics prevailed”

Obviously the “old kind of politics” is defined as the kind of politics where he is being snubbed by his own creation.

People Power 2000 - 2006 RIP

Sorry Vern, despite your wishes to the contrary I doubt People Power will “rest in peace”. Just consider the zombie like perpetuation of the Democratic Labor Party by one or two die hard former activists? Or the continuing candidacy of Michael Denborough for the long since dead Nuclear Disarmament Party?

People Power was formed in 2000 by Vern Hughes with the support of Stephen Mayne.

With the support of Stephen Mayne (the individual who’s faction has since ousted Hughes)? So it could be said that Mayne co-founded the party? Since Mayne and Hughes publically fell out they’ve argued over “who founded it”, a symptom of the “I’ll take my bat and ball and go home” attitude that both individuals have displayed at various times throughout the short history of “People Power”.

“The aim was to be both a conventional electoral party hoping to contest several elections in 2001, and a somewhat unconventional attempt to nurture reform and renewal in other kinds of institutions (not just governments) where the organization of citizens and consumers is weak and undeveloped (mutuals, companies, councils, NGOs), with a loose Third Way philosophy.”

The notion that “People Power” was little more than a personal political vehicle for Mayne and Hughes, was always reinforced by the sheer “fuzzyness” of People power’s apparent purpose. In September last year Mayne claimed that the goal of People Power was “to empower … consumers” because “our two main parties represent employers and employees, but not consumers” (link). At other times they were apparantly an single issue anti-pokies party (I could provide numerous links, if Mayne hadn’t blanked enormous parts of the material that was on his campaign website). If you saw the name of Mayne’s campaign website, bracksed.com, you’d think People Power was an anti-bracks organization, if you took a look at the content you’d think that the whole purpose was to aid in Stephen Mayne’s vendetta against Andrew Landeryou.

A party based on the aim of nurturing self-help and self-determination

Fuzzyness.

Ideological fuzzyness was the issue the first time it was decided People Power should “rest in peace”, something that even Vern Hughes’ obliquely acknowledges:

Early in 2003 People Power shelved the party role, and became a non-party organization for reform. A rule change to this effect was made. Competing against the big machines and the media’s devotion to them was felt to be too hard, at least until a social base had been built.

Of course a social base was eventually found:

With an enforced acceptance of self-help in daily life, Australia’s 2.6 million carers and their loved ones not only loomed as the natural social base for a new political movement based on strengthening the capacity of civil society, they loomed as one of the biggest in the country. Bigger than trade unions, bigger than the farming sector, bigger than all the industry lobby groups combined. Could this not be the social base for People Power?

According to Vern Hughes, People Power eventually overcame fuzzyness with the power of opportunism, adopting as it’s cause the needs of “carers”.

Could it be done? Would the activists from the disability, mental health and carer communities come on board? Would policy reflect the new politics-in-embryo, or would it fall back on quick fix promises that politicians, journalists and voters alike have been used to all their lives?

The answer of course was “probably not”. People Power’s supposed embracing of it’s new found constituency ultimately amounted to little more than a couple of rather thin policy documents that promised the odd quick fix.

People Power will … Cut the company tax rate from 30% to 20% for businesses which employ people with disabilities and other disadvantages as 20% or more of their workforce.

- wayback machine, PeoplePower.org.au

Occasionally there was some boasting about the fact that People Power had a carers policy, as well as a disabilities policy.

moving on…

Election trauma no.1 … Many of the activists wanted to put Labor last in a field of 16, while the Board opted for a simple ticket which put Labor 9 out of 16 (after the Greens and Liberals) on the advice of campaign manager, Nell Brown. … On finances, the candidate initially understood that she and her supporters would have to fund the campaign, but subsequently expected the Board to meet the expense.

Vern makes a big deal about the democracy and self help aspects of People Power. In this example Hughes shows how the board may have expected self help, but was far from democratic when it came to interfering with candidates campaigns. Local organizations and candidates having to raise the bulk of campaign funds, whilst suffering headquarters interference on preferences is far from unique to People Power. But the whole point, according to Hughes, was that People Power was more than an ego trip for it’s board members.

The fallout from the campaign was intense. Bill Hackett, also a Board member (and a grandparent of a son with autism), led the charge to overturn the Board decision on preferences. … Bill Hackett, Deborah Locke and the Independent who offered to pay for their reprinted HTV cards, lodged objections on every possible ground they could think of, including technicalities about membership. … Bill Hackett, not to be deterred, lodged an objection to People Power’s application for Victorian state registration in September 2006. He took his campaign to the media, causing considerable negative publicity for the party over internal membership issues.

…

There was a further shock. Stephen Mayne withdrew his upper house candidature in mid October, reversed it in late October, and publicly identified ‘internal turmoil’ in the party in the process. The media picked up the ‘internal turmoil’ theme as a result, which strengthened a media perception that People Power was to be cast off the “to be taken seriously” list.

Hackett generating no end of obstruction and taking his complaints with the party to the media, Mayne publicly bitching about the party at every turn in Crikey, and now Hughes publishing a rant on the People power website (which he appears to have hijacked).
Former board members leading vitriolic hate filled campaigns against the party seems to be a bit of a theme in the history of People Power.

In the campaign model, the principle role of each upper house candidate was to recruit and lead a team of 11 lower house candidates. Would a newly formed party based on the most invisible and marginalised sections of the community be able to do this? It was in the hands of the party’s 8 lead upper house candidates, and its committee.

At close nominations, the following recruitment had occurred:

Stephen Mayne (Southern Region) 0 recruited candidates
Linda Hancock (South Eastern Region ) 0 recruited candidates
Max Jackson (Western Metropolitan Region) 0 recruited candidates
Denise Allen (Northern Region) 0 recruited candidates
Greg Jones (Western Region) 0 recruited candidates
Gabi Byrne (Eastern Region) 0 recruited candidates
Karen Orpen (Eastern Metropolitan Region) 3 recruited candidates
_____

Vern Hughes (Committee member) 25 recruited candidates

“Other people didn’t do as much work as I did”. Once again Hughes is claiming that he in effect owns the party, presumably this gives him the right to declare “People Power, RIP” and take his bat and ball and go home.

Of course when Mayne takes his bat and ball and goes home, he’s being awfully destructive. He’s turning the party into a joke, he’s treating it as a personal publicity vehicle. Hughes on the other hand:

“The combined impact of these two factors (no workable campaign structure based on insufficient lower house candidates, and Stephen Mayne’s public declaration of ‘internal turmoil’) led Vern Hughes to withdraw from the campaign on November 20, describing it as an ‘almighty shambles’.”

moving on…

Stephen Mayne’s association with Crikey from the outset of People Power’s life was problematic.

You used him for money and publicity, he used you for a cheap story and some self promotion. Enough said.

“The two things have now unravelled, and the project has ended. Vern Hughes resigned his membership of People Power on 13 January 2007.”

Or more accurately “I’m taking my bat and ball and going home”.

“It has ended, at least, in the People Power clothing. Perhaps another outfit might be found for the project.”

Or at least he’s going to start another game, with his other friends, who’ll be nice to him this time. Let the zombie lurching begin.

Vern Hughes full rant is availible at what used to be the front page of the People Power website, www.peoplepower.org.au.

Share This