Talk:Labor Right

Australia: Politics Start‑class Low‑importance

	Australia portal Labor Right is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

What the feck is with "Labor Forum" being a Right faction? It's Marn's Left.

Do you live in Queensland? Labor Forum here is the AWU. Slac speak up! 07:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Labor Leftie myself, although i agree with much of the account of this faction it seems very biased and unacademic, if more historical and bibliographical info could be included that'd be better. User:Leftie

Is the section, "Current members of the Labor Right", only for current members of federal parliament? The heading with "current members" doesnt make that very clear. What about state politicians and political figures associated with Labor Unity?58.168.180.223 02:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is that 'Labor Unity' isn't a national thing - the different states have different right factions, and not even necessarily only one per state - WA has the new and old right. Some people are not even necessarily in a 'Right' faction in their states but vote with the Right nationally. Federal is easier to write about here because there's more written about it *out there*, but assuming alignment is clear, there's no reason why State people who are aligned nationally can't be included.

Incidentally, the count of Right people in Federal Caucus and the number of Caucus members was wrong, and Labor Unity isn't heard at student conferences (that's Centre Unity, so as not to scare off AUJS etc), but at Party conferences. Dibo ^{T | C} 03:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Exactly where is the information found to identify that all these Labor MPs come from the Right faction? If no sources are provided I am considering wiping the list of names completely. Timeshift 17:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's all pretty well-known, and there are numerous newspaper articles outlying these articles. One source which may be of use is an article called "The Fractions" by Tony Wright in The Bulletin of March 22, 2006. I bookmarked it for future reference last time people started being difficult about the Labor factions. Really, a Google search should be easily able to verify this for most, if not all of these people - I doubt a Factiva search would even be necessary. Rebecca 00:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me it's not so much about if its "pretty well-known" but anything that is controversial, such as labelling an MP from the Labor left or right, should be backed up with a citation. Not to say they are from the left or right, but my biggest queries out of the list (in SA anyway) are: Kate Ellis, Lindsay Simmons (saw Labor Right on pollbludger but nowhere else and makes me wonder where they read this), Chloe Fox, Robyn Geraghty. Timeshift 01:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ellis is certainly in the Right, but I don't know about the SA State people. Dibo ^{T | C} 03:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with us going through and referencing these individually. The entire federal caucus could be cited to the article I mentioned above, and I very much doubt sources for the state MPs would be hard to find. With this in mind, I don't think it's necessary to wipe the existing list, though if any are particularly disputed, I would not object to their removal. Rebecca 05:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sounds about right - where there's an argument, ditch it. Though under WP:BLP it might be slanderous or defamatory to label someone as being in the Right in the absence of refs (... well I'd be offended). :D Dibo ^{T | C} 06:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edit re social democracy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy - they embrace the market economy whilst "removing perceived injustices". How were Keating and Hawke moving away from this? Timeshift 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity to the Libs

I changed a line that said 'A criticism of the dominance of the Right in the ALP is that it has led to a situation where the Liberal and Labor parties are virtually identical on some serious issues of policy, in particular economics, gay rights and abortion.' to 'A criticism of the dominance of the Right in the ALP is that it has led to a situation where the Liberal and Labor parties are virtually identical on some serious issues of policy, in particular economics and national security.'

This change is partly because gay rights and abortion issues are to more or lesser extent dealt with by conscience votes, so neither the ALP nor the Libs party positions to be similar to one another, partly because many members of the Right take quite progressive views on these issues and partly because these issues are ones that are mainly raised by groups in the non-Labor left - it's not something that regularly pops up in media commentary. Contrast this with national security, where Labor has just recently been panned over the Haneef affair from all corners of media. Dibo ^{T | C} 03:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need to update due to election outcome

This page needs an update because of the outcome of the November 2007 Federal Election. There are now different people in different places. 202.155.163.221 (talk) 11:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]