Currently, the strongest argument for giving affiliated unions 50 per cent of the votes at the ALP's state and national conferences is the millions of dollars they donate for administrative and political purposes. If the ALP is no longer able to raise from unions the money it needs to survive, it will be forced to cast its net wider to encourage far greater rank and file membership and individual donations. This is because donations by individuals who reside in NSW will still be allowed.

So, to make up the shortfall from the ban on union financial support, the party will be forced to encourage individuals to join and donate to it. This will invariably mean giving individuals a far greater say in the decision-making forums of the ALP. Otherwise, why would anyone be prepared to make the donations the unions make?

If all this seems a little far-fetched, we need only look to the experience in Canada, where a conservative government introduced similar laws about a decade ago. In response to these laws the then-marginal New Democratic Party made huge changes to its structures and processes.

The NDP, which is the Canadian equivalent of the ALP, reduced the voting rights of affiliated unions from 50 per cent to 25 per cent and introduced the direct election of its parliamentary leader. At the time it had just nine members of Parliament. These simple changes had a dramatic effect on the NDP. The empowerment of the rank and file, the accompanying reduction in union influence and the election of a popular leader led to renewed interest in the party.

In the intervening years it has grown to have 103 MPs and a party membership which is now approaching 100,000. The NDP is financially secure as a result of its big membership and donation drives. For the first time in its history it has supplanted the once mighty Liberal Party as the centre-left party of choice and this year became the official opposition.