The widening chasm between Labor's commitment to democracy and our internal practice of it undermines our policy agenda. We must take the lead in restoring trust in politics by reforming ourselves, writes ALP Senator John Faulkner.

I have always believed that politics is worthwhile. This is not, nowadays, a popular view.

Important issues are, we are told, "above politics" - because politics, by implication and expectation, are the province of the low road.

No more damaging charge can be made than to say someone is "playing politics" with an issue - because, by implication and expectation, politics is a game played for personal gain and for entertainment.

Without trust politics is a contest of personalities, not ideas - a contest with no more relevance than an episode of MasterChef. For without trust in the political process how can any of us believe that the votes we cast influence the future direction of our country?

Our trust in our democratic institutions - such as parliament and our political parties - has been undermined by how they're portrayed and perceived, but also by the very real flaws in our democracy.

Spiralling costs of electioneering have created a campaigning "arms race" - heightening the danger that fundraising pressures on political parties and candidates will open the door to donations that might attempt to buy access and influence.

I have argued long and hard about the need for reform of our electoral funding laws at the federal level. The reforms I proposed as Special Minister of State included significant measures:

To reduce the donations disclosure threshold from its current level of $12,800 to $1000 and remove indexation;

To reduce the donations disclosure threshold from its current level of $12,800 to $1000 and remove indexation; Prohibit foreign and anonymous donations;

Prohibit foreign and anonymous donations; Limit the potential for "donation splitting" across branches, divisions or different units of parties;

Limit the potential for "donation splitting" across branches, divisions or different units of parties; Require faster and more regular disclosure of donations; and

Require faster and more regular disclosure of donations; and Introduce new offences and significantly increase penalties for the breach of electoral law.

These reforms would have enhanced the transparency and accountability of political donations, and I would like to think they would have had at least some dampening effect on the behaviour that is being exposed at ICAC in NSW.

Labor at its best would take the lead on this. The best way for Labor to demonstrate that we are genuine in pursuing reform is to reform ourselves.

Labor's original structures, although they varied from colony to colony, all reflected that basic belief in democratic participation. As the party grew, the sheer practical difficulties of a mass party in a nation the size of the continent were resolved with models based on delegation.

Labor's model of delegated democracy was cutting edge - in 1891.

We now have technologies that offer unprecedented opportunities for the direct and secure communication of information. More importantly, they provide us with unprecedented opportunities for interaction. And they are woven into everyday life so inextricably that, to the younger members of our community especially, they have become invisible.

Australian political parties have begun, perhaps more slowly than in other countries, to engage with social media as a campaigning tool. Even I am now on Facebook. But the internet - email, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, YouTube, Google Plus - are not merely broadcast mediums with the potential to reach many more people for much less effort and expense than mail-outs or television advertisements. They are immediate, interactive tools for community activism.

Their prevalence - and for more and more Australians, their pervasiveness - has, I believe, profoundly changed our ideas of community and our expectations of what community - and political - involvement looks like.

Structures that were once the cutting edge of delegated democracy are now used as a way to prevent democracy, to prevent open debate, and to consolidate the power of the powerful in the Labor Party.

As a party, we should be true to our heritage and embrace real reform and an opening-up of the party's decision-making processes. We should, to the maximum extent possible, adhere to the fundamental principle of one person, one vote.

Labor's recent leadership ballot was an important first step. But promising first steps should not be confused with the journey's end. There are many more steps on the road to increased participation of voting members.

Our branch members have been the lifeblood of our party, but branch attendance is no longer the only way to measure activism and commitment, and voting in our internal ballots ought not to be regarded as a reward earned only by those able to negotiate arcane rules.

Preselections ought to be the opportunity to determine who is best suited to campaign for Labor values in the community and legislate for them in parliament. They must have wide participation from Labor members and supporters.

I support the community preselections trialled in NSW with weighted votes from party members equalling declared supporters, and I believe they should become the rule, rather than the exception.

I continue to argue for a full, statewide ballot of all party members to preselect candidates for upper houses - again, to test their abilities to persuade and represent their statewide constituency.

I proposed this rules change at the recent NSW Annual Conference and it was defeated. I do not pretend to think that this reform or others, are or will become more popular with factional managers and powerbrokers.

There are very few voices among those with formal or informal power within our party who are willing to contemplate, let alone advocate change - despite the increasingly loud calls for reform from members and branches.

I may be beating my head against a brick wall, and of course I will be criticised for what I am saying, but I cannot in good conscience cease to argue for a cause I believe is both right, and necessary, and in the Labor interest.

Labor's state and national conferences should also become more representative and democratic. Conferences must begin to include a component of directly elected delegates. Every eligible member of the party should have the opportunity to vote for these conference delegates, through direct member ballots. Proportionate regional zones could ensure broad geographical representation.

The existing and widening chasm between Labor's commitment to democracy and our internal practice of it, between our focus on the future and our antiquated organisation, undermines our policy agenda and casts doubt on its authenticity.

And I say to those who resist the opening up of our structures to more participation and more democracy, because they see their control over managed and pre-negotiated outcomes slipping away - stop clinging to the wheel. You are steering us straight for the rocks.

We do not become less a Labor Party because we scrutinise ourselves. Any more than we are less a Labor Party because of the reforms instituted by McKell or Whitlam.

The party's relationship with affiliated trade unions should also no longer be just about direct control through 50:50 rules and the like, but about greater consultation and involvement. We have to make the relationship more meaningful and mutually beneficial.

Trade unions are, and will remain, important for Labor. They are a social force, albeit a declining social force, but in an age where collective identity and endeavour is fracturing, union membership is a connection to shared efforts and progressive ideas: to economic justice, to solidarity, to co-operation.

We will not meet the urgent challenges of this new century without those values, and unions, and union membership, build and strengthen those values in our community.

But all too often unions are viewed - and behave - in the Labor Party as just institutions: large, faceless institutions controlled by union secretaries, who are in turn obedient to factional cartels. And right now, that is how union engagement with the Labor Party works.

I would like to see our party actually engaging union members: giving them a voice, giving them a vote. They should have a direct say, just as party members should have a direct say, not have their opinions filtered through layers of delegation.

Influence over ALP policy should depend on the strength of your case and the quality of your argument, not on the number of members you claim belong to your union - a claim that, as we have seen recently, does not always accord with reality.

All union delegates to party conferences should be elected through a ballot of union members, conducted under the principle of proportional representation, and should not be appointed without election. Unions should be required to amend their own rules, to fulfil this objective.

Labor has at our core the values that can revitalise our political system and restore faith and confidence in the power of democratic government to resolve our differences and surmount our difficulties.

Having those values, we cannot turn our back on the problems our democracy now faces. It is our challenge, and our duty, to take the lead in restoring trust.

We must start by reforming ourselves.

This is an edited extract of a speech Senator Faulkner gave at the Revesby Workers' Club on October 7. View the original transcript here.

John Faulkner is an ALP Senator for NSW. View his full profile here.