logo
Sarah Witty v Adam Bandt: how an unlikely Labor champion took down a Greens giant

Sarah Witty v Adam Bandt: how an unlikely Labor champion took down a Greens giant

The Guardian09-05-2025

Labor could hardly be considered a metaphorical David in most federal election contests. But in the progressive seat of Melbourne, where the now-beaten Greens leader Adam Bandt had reigned for 15 years, there are similarities to the oft-told biblical story.
On 28 March, when Anthony Albanese called an election date for May, Melbourne appeared on no one's list as a battle to watch.
Just five months before the campaign began, Labor's candidate against Bandt, Sarah Witty, had unsuccessfully run for a seat on Yarra city council. She came third behind independent and Greens candidates.
By February, less than two months from polling day, Witty was Labor's choice to run in Melbourne against the long-serving Greens MP.
From the outset, the seat wasn't on federal Labor's radar. 'I don't think we even had it in the winnable column,' a Victorian Labor source said.
A Greens insider said there had been no indication Melbourne was in trouble, noting the party didn't have the resources for single-seat polling in the way the major parties do.
Both the Greens and Labor will reflect on the unexpected result in the coming weeks to figure out what happened.
For the Greens, it will be a sobering look at how Bandt, regarded as a unifying leader within the party, lost the seat he had held for so long.
Local Labor volunteers from the Melbourne and Richmond branches were out on the hustings daily. Even Witty's social media was run by a volunteer, who updated the page in their free time.
How-to-vote cards were supplied by the national campaign but rank-and-file members had to fundraise through raffles and auctions to pay for campaign shirts and corflutes.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
A senior Victorian Labor source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, described Witty's campaign as 'run on the smell of an oily rag', with donations from the active Melbourne and Richmond branches.
Another Labor source, who helped the campaign, said: 'It was a very, very sparsely funded campaign, all raised from locals. It wasn't like there were massive amounts of money coming from a national office.'
The idea of Labor as David in a battle against the Greens Goliath doesn't sit well with the Greens camp. They argue that Labor's federal megaphone gives even the most under-resourced campaigns a big chance.
While the 'people-powered' campaign is credited by Labor sources as the reason Witty ousted Bandt, a 'perfect storm' had also hit.
The Greens leader's chance of winning a sixth term in office was dampened by three key factors, the electoral analyst Kevin Bonham said.
The electoral boundaries for the seat shifted before the election, lowering Bandt's primary vote from 49.6% in 2022 to 44.7%. On a two-candidate preferred basis, it had dropped from 60.2% to 56.5%.
After days of tense post-election vote counting, Bandt on Thursday conceded to Witty, saying a Greens win in Melbourne was like 'climbing Everest'.
'We needed to overcome Liberal, Labor and One Nation combined, and it's an Everest that we've climbed a few times now, but this time we fell just short,' he said.
Bonham said preference flows had not favoured the Greens this time around.
More Liberal and One Nation votes went to Labor than previously.
The rightwing activist group Advance ran a campaign against the Greens to reduce its vote in both houses, claiming Bandt's defeat as a win.
Social media advertising analysis showed the group had spent no money on targeted ads in the seat during the campaign.
A source inside Bandt's camp said a post-election review would look at third-party campaigns against the party to understand their impact on the inner-city seat.
Bonham said another factor against Bandt couldn't be written off as easily: the Greens leader's primary vote dipped just enough, even after the boundary redistribution, to set the wheels in motion for his loss.
'It's a perfect storm,' he said. 'He had a lower baseline, he had a swing against him on the primary vote, and he had a swing against him on preferences.
'Those three things combined have got rid of him.'
Swings against Bandt in progressive booths, including Fitzroy and Collingwood, will require further analysis to determine how the Greens came undone in the lower house.
A Victorian Labor source from the left faction hoped the Greens 'looked critically' at their failings.
'I really do see the value of having strong leftwing crossbenchers in the parliament,' they said. 'I think it's good for democracy, and I think it's really good for the Labor party when we do have a viable leftwing minor party.
'So I really hope that they take some time to critically look at their failings.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Australia's biggest aluminium smelter on verge of collapse putting up to 6000 jobs in jeopardy
Australia's biggest aluminium smelter on verge of collapse putting up to 6000 jobs in jeopardy

Daily Mail​

time33 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Australia's biggest aluminium smelter on verge of collapse putting up to 6000 jobs in jeopardy

Australia's biggest aluminium smelter is in crisis talks with the federal and state governments to continue operating as crippling electricity bills threaten 6,000 jobs. Tomago, which is majority owned by mining giant Rio Tinto, is negotiating on the design of its 2026 to 2029 electricity contract, The Australian Financial Review revealed last week. The Newcastle smelter employs 1,200 people full-time but its possible closure would joepardise the future of another 5,000 workers in the Hunter region, north of Sydney. Australia's key aluminium smelter, which opened in 1983, is now seeking support from the NSW and federal governments to stay afloat as Australia's only manufacturer of long-steel, in Whyalla, is propped up by the South Australian government. The latest development comes a week after Donald Trump doubled tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium to 50 per cent. Sydney radio 2GB broadcaster Ben Fordham suggested taxpayers could be stumping up billions of dollars just to keep Tomago afloat. 'This is not good: Tomago Aluminium, Australia's biggest smelter is on the verge of collapse,' he said on Tuesday. 'Why? Their power bill is too high. They're in emergency talks with state and federal governments asking for billions of dollars just to stay open. And if it shuts, well, we're not just losing a smelter, we're risking 6,000 jobs. 'There are thousands of families, contractors, supplies and regional businesses on the line.' Rio Tinto, which owns 51.55 per cent of Tomago Aluminium Company, in January welcomed Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's Future Made in Australia plan to provide production credits to alumunium manufacturers. Chief executive Kellie Parker also begged for federal government help to pay for sky-high electricity bills. 'The Australian government's commitment shows strong confidence in domestic manufacturing and the nation's position in the global economy,' she said. 'As traditional energy sources for heavy industry become increasingly uncompetitive, today's announcement is a critical piece in helping future-proof the industry. 'Such support is crucial for sustaining and growing regional economies.' The smelter's big shareholder Rio Tinto also flagged a bailout package from the NSW government to keep Tomago operating. 'Rio Tinto also welcomes ... looks forward to working with the New South Wales Government to help secure the future of that operation,' it said in a media release. Tomago, which is majority owned by mining giant Rio Tinto, employs 1,200 people full-time but its possible closure would jeopardise the future of another 5,000 workers in the Hunter region north of Sydney Rio Tinto also owns the Boyne Smelter in central Queensland, which last year received subsidies from the state government to transition to renewable energy. Albanese in January visited the Tomago plant with the Labor member for the then marginal seat of Paterson, Meryl Swanson. 'This is my third visit to Tomago, because this is such an important facility,' he said. 'And essentially it's about people, it's about the jobs that are created here. Up to a thousand direct jobs. 'But when you look at this local community, there's 5,000 jobs depend on this facility just locally. But more importantly than that, it's the tens of thousands of jobs throughout Australia that depend on us being able to make things here.'

Sydney cleric used ‘dehumanising' generalisations designed to intimidate Jewish people, federal court hears
Sydney cleric used ‘dehumanising' generalisations designed to intimidate Jewish people, federal court hears

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

Sydney cleric used ‘dehumanising' generalisations designed to intimidate Jewish people, federal court hears

A Sydney Muslim cleric being sued for alleged racial discrimination gave a series of speeches calculated to 'dehumanise' and 'denigrate all Jewish people', the federal court has heard. But ahead of the Tuesday hearing, Wissam Haddad, also known as Abu Ousayd, took to social media to say he rejected the court's authority. Posting a video of Sydney's federal court online, he told followers: 'We disbelieve in these courts, these are the houses of the Taghut,' Haddad said, using an Islamic concept that describes the worship of anyone or anything other than Allah. In modern contexts, the term is used to dismiss, diminish or insult a non-Muslim power as anti-Islamic. Haddad is being sued by two senior members of Australia's peak Jewish body, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), over a series of lectures he gave in Bankstown in November 2023 and subsequently broadcast online, in which he is alleged to have maligned Jewish people as 'vile', 'treacherous' and cowardly. The claim alleges Haddad breached section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which prohibits offensive behaviour based on race or ethnic origin. Peter Wertheim, one of the applicants in this case and ECAJ co-chief executive, told the federal court on Tuesday that Haddad's speeches used 'overtly dehumanising' language. 'Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards … are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising,' Wertheim said. His barrister, Peter Braham SC, told the court Haddad's speeches repeated a range of offensive tropes and were designed to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate Jewish people. The court heard Haddad had sound recording and camera equipment installed to record his speeches, for the purpose of disseminating his message far beyond his congregants. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Braham told the court the intent of the five speeches was to 'persuade an audience that the Jewish people have certain immutable and eternal characteristics that cause them to … be the objects of contempt and hatred'. Braham argued Haddad's inflammatory rhetoric was an 'exercise that's so dangerous'. 'It's threatening, it's humiliating and it's offensive. It's calculated to denigrate all Jewish people, including the Australian Jews for whom we appear. 'It involved repeating a large range of offensive tropes about Jews: they're mischievous, they're a vile people, that they're treacherous, and that they control the media and banks et cetera.' But Haddad's barrister, Andrew Boe, argued the cleric's speeches were addressed to, and intended only for, a private Muslim congregation of 40 people and that Haddad was not responsible for them being published online. Boe said it was unlikely a Jewish person would have discovered the speeches, to then be offended by them, if the recordings had not been covered and thus amplified by mainstream media. 'It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it,' Boe told the court. Boe argued there must be room, in a democratic society, for 'the confronting, the challenging, even the shocking'. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion He said the court should take a 'rigorous and detached approach' in applying the Racial Discrimination Act, and remain careful to uphold the 'intended balance between … proscribing racially motivated behaviour that may be harmful in the Australian community, and … preserving the freedoms of speech and religion that are so essential to the continued existence of a free democracy'. Haddad's defence case argues that his sermons were delivered in 'good faith' as religious and historical instruction. If his sermons are found to breach 18C, then, his defence submission argues, the law is unconstitutional because it restricts the free exercise of religion. The long-running dispute, which failed to find resolution at conciliation, came before the federal court Tuesday, with the case set to test the limits of religious expression and hate speech under Australian law. A directions hearing last week heard expert witnesses would be called to assess whether Haddad's sermons were accurate representations of Islamic scripture, with the court likely to be asked to adjudicate whether Haddad's sermons, in which he quotes the Qur'an and offers interpretation of it, amount to incitement or are protected religious expression. The applicants are seeking an injunction that Haddad's five offending sermons be removed from the internet, and an order that he refrain from publishing similar speeches in future. Wertheim and his co-applicant, Robert Goot, are also seeking publication of a 'corrective notice' on Haddad's prayer centre's social media pages, and to be awarded the legal costs of bringing their action. They have not sought damages or compensation. In his social media posts ahead of the court hearing on Tuesday morning, Haddad said he rejected the court's authority, telling online followers that 'the Jewish lobby' was 'dragging us into [a] court', whose jurisdiction he did not recognise. 'But we're not going to come unarmed, we are going to fight them with everything we have. 'Isn't it about time that somebody stands up to these bullies.' The hearing, before Justice Angus Stewart, is expected to run until the end of the week.

Albanese staunch on under-16s social media ban and defence spending as possible Trump meeting looms
Albanese staunch on under-16s social media ban and defence spending as possible Trump meeting looms

The Guardian

time3 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Albanese staunch on under-16s social media ban and defence spending as possible Trump meeting looms

Anthony Albanese has pledged not to back down on plans to ban under-16s from social media and force online giants to pay for Australian news – two key policies opposed by big tech companies with the ear of Donald Trump – ahead of his expected meeting with the US president next week. The prime minister also declared that 'Australia should decide what we spend on Australia's defence', shrugging off demands from the Trump administration to rapidly increase military spending, even as he kept open the option of budgeting more for new assets. In a Tuesday speech setting out his second-term agenda, Albanese repeatedly pushed back on concerns raised by the US over Australian policy positions. The prime minister said the 3 May election – which delivered Labor a thumping majority – was an endorsement of 'a progressive patriotism where we are proud to do things our own way', adding that Australians had voted against 'importing ideologies' and 'policies copied from overseas'. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'We certainly support the news bargaining code, and we've made it very clear, for example to the US, and we made it clear publicly, that that is not on the table [for negotiating] any more than the social media ban for under-16s is,' Albanese told the National Press Club. 'We respect the role of particularly local papers, as a local here in Canberra. It plays a vital role, and it is of critical importance that those media organisations are able to survive.' The government outlined its plans for a news media bargaining incentive in December, after outlets flagged that existing deals were expiring and might not be renegotiated. It updates the existing code, after concerns that tech giants were sidestepping mechanism would require large online platforms – including Google, Meta's Facebook and Instagram, and Bytedance's TikTok – to pay a fixed charge or enter direct deals with Australian media outlets to recognise the value of news content on those platforms. The new plan was met with strong opposition by social media platforms, who urged the Trump administration to target 'coercive and discriminatory' Australian media laws. The Australian government has not spoken much about the incentive recently, raising fears it would be watered down. But on Tuesday, Albanese said the government remained committed to the policy, and the under-16s ban. 'This is about government creating a community standard, as well as a legal one. Making it clear that social media companies have a social responsibility … This matters, and we won't be taking a backward step on it,.' Noted the changing media landscape, the prime minister said: 'Legacy media isn't everything, but it is important.' Albanese travels to Canada for the G7 meeting this week, and may meet Trump during that trip, but a meeting has not yet been locked in. Australia has meanwhile been pushing for exemptions to US tariffs, with the trade minister, Don Farrell, conceding this weekend that the final decision on any exemptions would be made by Trump himself. Asked about his potential meeting with Trump, and what a trade deal could include, Albanese said he would 'only sign up to things that are in Australia's national interest'. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'Things like the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the media bargaining code, our biosecurity in agriculture – they're not on the table as far as we're concerned,' he said. 'But are there areas in which Australia and the United States can have win-wins? Yes, I believe that there are.' The US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, met Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles last weekend in Singapore. Hegseth said Australia should increase its defence spending to 3.5% of GDP 'as soon as possible', a figure Albanese and other senior Labor members have downplayed, saying Australia does not set such arbitrary spending targets for any other area of government. The prime minister repeated that position on Tuesday, though did not rule out raising defence spending if needed. 'There is no reason why defence should be governed by anything other than one factor: what do we need? What is the capability we need to keep us safe … Of course, we'll always provide for capability that's needed,' Albanese said. 'I think that Australia should decide what we spend on Australia's defence … Arbitrary figures lead to a cul-de-sac, and we want to make sure as well that every single dollar that defence spends results in actual assets.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store