Albanese suspends rebel Senator Payman indefinitely from attending the Assembly after she said she would switch sides again

Anthony Albanese took action after his recalcitrant senator, young Muslim Fatima Payman, gave a defiant interview on ABC Insiders on Sunday morning in which she vowed she would switch sides again if similar circumstances arose.

This time there was no stroke of the pen, as there was last week after she broke party solidarity to vote for a pro-Palestinian Green motion.

Albanese then had what Payman described as a “tough but fair conversation” with her, but merely excluded her from this week’s caucus meeting.

On Sunday he summoned her to the lodge and informed her that she was barred from attending the meeting for an indefinite period of time unless she accepted the meeting’s disciplinary measures.

A government spokesman later said: “Senator Payman, through her actions and statements, abused the privileges that come with attending the Labor Party caucus meeting in the federal parliament.

“If Senator Payman decides that she will respect the caucus and her Labor colleagues, she may return. However, until then, Senator Payman is barred from attending Labor caucus meetings and proceedings in the Federal Parliament.”

Payman remains a member of the Labour Party.

Last week, Albanese ran into trouble with some party members over his unilateral handling of the Payman matter, who claimed that disciplinary matters were a matter for the party, not the prime minister.

He can count on the support of the management team in his latest action.

The Payman affair confronted the Labor Party with an existential problem regarding one of its core principles: that members of the party are obliged, out of solidarity, to vote as a bloc in Parliament.

In parliamentary votes, backbenchers dutifully follow the decisions of the party – or those they agree to under a cabinet or leadership decree. Those who do not do so face suspension or expulsion from the party that decides their fate.

This has always been clear.

Payman, 29, from Western Australia, not only stood firm on her position but also said without reservation that she would switch sides again if there was a motion like the one passed last week that “the Senate must recognise the State of Palestine”. (The motion was defeated because both the government and the Coalition opposed it.)

In her interview, she placed her situation in the broader context of diversity policy. This is a sensitive issue for the Labour Party, which campaigns a lot for a more diverse Parliament.

“It’s not possible to have this diversity of personalities and representation without there being a diversity of views and opinions,” she said.

“You see, we had different views in the group from (…) different people, different perspectives,” she said. “But I think we have to be able to accept this diversity of opinion.”

When push comes to shove, almost all Labour MPs have for years been prepared to put their commitment to solidarity over their commitment to other groups or causes in parliamentary votes. The example of current Senate Leader Penny Wong and her call for marriage equality is often cited. She joined the Labour opposition while fighting internally for a change in party policy.

But for Payman, her commitment to the Palestinian cause and her Muslim community is more important than her willingness to show solidarity.

Given Australia’s increasing diversity and the associated adaptation of Parliament, will the solidarity rule become obsolete or no longer enforceable?

From other perspectives, some in Labour disagree with the tight ties MPs have to all issues. More than a decade ago, Chris Bowen, now Energy Secretary, argued that Labour’s rules were generally too restrictive compared to, say, what happens in Britain, where backbenchers have more freedom to vote on some issues.

In the Payman dispute, the principle of solidarity was upheld, which should make some group members feel better the next time they are called to account for their parliamentary vote.

But this indefinite suspension will also have disadvantages.

This will give Payman political martyr status among her supporters in the wider labor community and among some of her union supporters.

Worse still, saying that a young Muslim woman is no longer welcome in the party because she is committed to Palestinian causes will not paint a good picture in areas like western Sydney, where Labor already fears losing Muslim votes.

This puts pressure on the two Muslim ministers, Ed Husic and Anne Aly, and other Labour MPs, to explain to the Muslim community why Labour’s solidarity rule is more important than the right of a backbencher to express his opinion.

Solidarity within the group has both traditional and practical reasons, but even in the wider community it will not be so easy to justify disciplining a parliamentarian who remains true to his principles.