Political influence and powerful allies: how relative unknown Sam Rae catapulted himself into Labor's ministry
Moments after securing a landslide victory at the 2018 state election, a triumphant Daniel Andrews showered praise on his young campaign director, Sam Rae, who has now been fast-tracked to become a federal minister at just 38 years old.
Rae remains an unknown figure to many outside Victoria, where he wielded political influence and cultivated powerful allies long before entering federal parliament in 2021 as the member for Hawke, on Melbourne's north-western fringe.
His elevation to minister for aged care and seniors, just like his preselection in Hawke, came after a bruising factional fight. Rae, along with fellow Victorian rightwinger Daniel Mulino, was promoted after frontbenchers Ed Husic and Mark Dreyfus were dumped. Labor insiders concede the demotions were brutal.
Rae's promotion has raised some eyebrows within Labor, including from former prime minister Paul Keating, who described Rae's Victorian right faction as 'demonstrably devoid of creativity and capacity'. Victorian Labor sources insist this criticism is unfair and fails to reflect Rae's experience.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
Rae worked as a factory labourer, a call centre operator and a childcare worker before becoming an electorate officer and adviser to former communications minister and Victorian right-faction power broker Stephen Conroy in 2015.
In his first speech to parliament, Rae listed Conroy as a mentor along with Labor power broker Don Farrell and the deputy prime minister, Richard Marles, who leads the Victorian right faction. On Sunday, Husic accused Marles of being a 'factional assassin' who had orchestrated his demise.
After six years with Conroy, Rae moved to Victorian Labor and ran its research and tactics unit. He then became the state party's secretary and ran the 2018 Labor campaign, which secured Daniel Andrews a second term. Rae worked alongside pollster Kos Samaras, who was not surprised by his promotion.
'He grew up in a single parent household with two other brothers and worked in factories to get himself through university,' Samaras said. 'It's not exactly been a blessed life. This is the sort of person you definitely want in the cabinet.'
Samaras said Rae had shown 'an incredible ability to grasp huge complex logistical problems' during the 2018 state election, which he described as the best campaign he had worked on.
Months after the 2018 election, Rae became a partner at PwC Australia. During this period, Rae worked with James MacKenzie, who is the chair of law firm Slater & Gordon and a board member of the Suburban Rail Loop Authority. MacKenzie is a Labor stalwart who overhauled the Victorian ALP headquarters in the late 1970s.
Rae is 'definitely not a political hack,' said MacKenzie, who worked with him on non-government projects. 'The factions don't give out MBAs. The sort of work I engaged with while he was a partner at PwC was akin to serious policy work; that is what he brings to the table.
'I was impressed by his understanding of what is a well-formulated and well-structured policy and his broad business understanding. It's not very often you come across a 'political hack' who understands what the cost of capital is.'
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
Rae left PwC Australia after being preselected to run in the seat of Hawke, which also unleashed factional divisions. Some members aligned to former leader Bill Shorten wanted a woman selected. But Rae was selected by Labor's national executive, not branch members, due to the state branch being placed into administration after branch-stacking allegations.
Several unions argued there should have been a ballot, and unsuccessfully launched court action to overturn the national executive's intervention.
As an MP, Rae lists campaigning to deliver urgent care clinics to Sunbury and Melton among his greatest achievements. He told Guardian Australia he 'was a massive pain in the arse' within the party to ensure the money was allocated.
One former senior Victorian Labor staffer, who worked with Rae but declined to be named so they could speak freely, said criticism of him as an unknown factional player was 'unfair'.
'He's a member of Labor's national executive, for one,' the source said. 'He's a deep thinker and you don't lead a landslide victory at a state election without having an understanding of both policy and politics.'
In a statement, Rae said he was 'deeply honoured to have been asked to serve as minister for aged care and seniors'.
'It's a challenging portfolio and I'm proud to take it alongside Labor's talented team,' Rae said. 'There's a lot of work to do and we're ready to get started.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
I study the history of Nazi resistance. Here's what the US left can learn from it
Around the end of 2022, I had an idea for a book about the history of resistance to Nazism. I wanted to show that Nazism has faced nonconformity, refusal and protest ever since it was born in 1920. I also wanted to explore beyond a handful of famous heroes and cast a spotlight on people who changed history without entering popular memory. When I began my research, Donald Trump had just announced his candidacy for the Republican ticket in 2024. When I gave the manuscript to the publisher a little over two years later, he was president-elect. His comeback, the darker version of Maga that came with him, and the Democratic party's collapse gave fresh relevance to the stories of resistance to far-right extremism that I was finding. Even as I was piecing them together, they began to intrude on the present. It was a haunting transformation – and it helped me to understand why the resistance to Trump has been flawed from the moment he stepped on to the political stage. We've never been shy about broadcasting our opinions. We've worn pussy hats, put up lawn signs, and trolled Trump and his supporters, both online and off. But while such acts may get attention, their capacity to create change is less certain. This can even be true for mass protests. Americans have sometimes underestimated the effectiveness of protest – recent demonstrations in Los Angeles and across the country are an important part of resistance. In the era of social media and the 24-hour news cycle, though, protests can risk becoming a spectacle. And when the government is given a chance to portray them as violent, their effectiveness is extinguished – because they end up benefiting the forces they mean to challenge. The resisters that I researched, by contrast, were laser-focused on creating change. Whether they were satirists drawing anti-Nazi cartoons in 1920s Germany or former neo-Nazis becoming peace advocates in the 21st-century US, they sought to improve life for themselves and others in the here and now, in any way that they could, no matter how small. The German activist Emmi Bonhoeffer is a powerful example. She built a support group for the Holocaust survivors who testified in the 1960s Frankfurt Auschwitz trials, where Nazis were tried for their roles at the death camp. In doing so, Bonhoeffer resisted the Nazis' desire for both their crimes and their victims to be forgotten. Her group – most of them homemakers – ultimately helped nearly 200 people as they took the stand. They inspired similar groups to form around other war crimes trials in Germany, too. But they didn't advertise. They didn't have a slogan or an outfit or a flag. They didn't even bother to give their group a name. Their first and only concern was to clear a path toward justice for at least some of the Nazis' victims. For Bonhoeffer, resistance wasn't about getting attention. It was about creating change. What's more, the resistance to Trump has always been stained by a judgmental streak. Whether we're denouncing them as a 'basket of deplorables' or mocking them on social media, we invariably devote too much energy to belittling his supporters. This has convinced us of our own moral rectitude. In turn, this has made us complacent, and complacency only deepens our inaction. The resisters that I learned about pulled no punches when it came to judging Adolf Hitler and his inner circle. But they spent more time judging themselves than his supporters. Consider the German émigré Sebastian Haffner. In the late 1930s, he wrote an extraordinary autobiographical book about his life as a so-called 'Aryan' in Hitler's Germany. It was only published in 2000, posthumously, after his son discovered it hidden in a desk drawer. For Haffner, publication didn't really matter. The book was, first and foremost, an imaginative space in which he subjected his own behavior and thinking and privilege to relentless scrutiny. Through this process of self-scrutiny, he grew into one of the Nazis' most effective critics in exile. The judgmental streak has also given some of our attempts to resist Trump a holier-than-thou quality that diminishes our capacity for empathy. We're too quick to believe that 77 million Americans voted for Trump out of stupidity, not desperation or disenfranchisement. By contrast, I was always struck by the sense of shared humanity among the resisters that I discovered – like the lower-level British intelligence officials who persuaded members of the German public to help them smoke out Nazi war criminals after 1945; or Leon Bass, the Black American soldier who drew on his own experiences of segregation to deepen his understanding of the suffering of the Jewish people he liberated from Buchenwald. Sign up to Fighting Back Big thinkers on what we can do to protect civil liberties and fundamental freedoms in a Trump presidency. From our opinion desk. after newsletter promotion Like every far-right leader in history, Donald Trump has intoxicated his supporters with nostalgia for a past that never existed in order to push a corrupt and hateful agenda of his own. Eventually, many will realize that he's lied to them. Perhaps they'll lose their jobs because of his economic policies, or see law-abiding friends and family deported because of his immigration policies. Perhaps their children will suffer from measles because of his health policies. Whatever the case, when their moment of realization comes, we must be ready to embrace them, and to weep with them for what they've lost. If there's one thing that I learned while writing my book, it's that effective resistance to the far right is never just about defeating the enemy. It's about creating a better future for everyone. Teachers and librarians are championing the written word as a tool of resistance. Colleagues in the field of Holocaust education are collaborating on free and innovative events to inform the public about the collapse of democracy in early 20th-century Europe – and to establish what we can learn from it today. And, as I argue in my book, the arts can connect us to our own humanity, and to the humanity in others. Supporting your local art museum, attending a concert or joining a book club should all be cause for hope – because in a divided, partisan society, such acts constitute resistance. Luke Berryman, PhD, is an educator and author of the forthcoming book Resisting Nazism, to be published by Bloomsbury in 2026
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Dining across the divide: ‘He didn't believe women still face discrimination in the workplace'
Occupation Financial services Voting record Mixed over the years, moving right and recently Conservative. 'The more worldly-wise you get, and the more tax you pay, the more it pushes you along that axis' Amuse bouche Julian has twice been on a plane struck by lightning. The first time was scary: all the lights went out. The second time he was relaxed, and told the pilot on the way out, who, looking a bit pale, replied: 'That's the first for me' Occupation Geneticist Voting record Labour until Starmer, now Green. Describes herself as 'an old-fashioned socialist' Amuse bouche Livvy was going to study medicine, but discovered she had a phobia of blood when she passed out during a blood test. 'I would have been the worst doctor in the world' Livvy It was my first evening out after having my baby. Julian was genial and kind. I thought he might be from a posher background than me, but we later found out we had both grown up on council estates. It just shows you shouldn't judge before you know. Julian Livvy was really easy to talk to, obviously intelligent. We were both the first in our families to go to university, and both see education as key to social mobility. Livvy I had gnocchi with butternut squash. And a lemonade and lime – very outlandish! Julian I had sea bass, which was nicely done, and a couple of beers. We both had chocolate brownie for pudding. Livvy Julian didn't believe women still face discrimination in the workplace. Julian There are very senior women in the company I work at. They've attained high roles in the company on merit, and that's how it should be. It's not the same as it was in the 70s. Livvy Studies have shown that if you have a CV with a female name on it, and a CV with a male name on it, the male will get more interviews. Julian Maybe there is unconscious bias – that would be wrong and I wouldn't try to defend that in any way. The bit we honed in on was if women take some time to have family, then their careers are effectively stagnating. For me, positive discrimination is a red line, because it is still discrimination, and you might have discriminated against somebody who is better for the job. I just can't settle with that feeling fair. Livvy I know I'm less likely to get a job because I'm a woman, and of child-bearing age. I think I opened his mind about maternity leave a little: he didn't realise that when I go back they don't have to give me the same job. They can give me a different job that has the same level of importance and salary. Sign up to Inside Saturday The only way to get a look behind the scenes of the Saturday magazine. Sign up to get the inside story from our top writers as well as all the must-read articles and columns, delivered to your inbox every weekend. after newsletter promotion Livvy We agreed that women's rights are a good thing. I just believe they need to go further and carry on. We saw the same problems, but we just had very different ways of trying to tackle those problems. Julian It probably helped that we both have scientific backgrounds – I studied engineering – so we both applied a lot of logic rather than emotion. Livvy We disagreed on the European convention on human rights. I think it's a good thing. It provides guidance on the freedom to have your own views; it makes sure you can't torture someone; you have free elections and fair trials. And the right to have a family life. Julian We should leave. When people have been told all the way up the British courts that they can't have what they want and they're in the wrong, it's a kind of 'get out of jail free' card used as a means to avoid deportation or whatever. Livvy There's so much that brings people together, but we tend to put a magnifying glass on what we disagree on. Some of it is fundamental – if I'd sat down with someone who'd said, 'This race of people is terrible', I would have called a taxi. But there are some differences where you need to be able to see the other person's side of the story. They're not evil, or wrong – this is just what they've taken from their life experience. Julian More people need to do this. It was a really pleasurable evening – it's good to have someone rattle your ideas a little bit, about things you thought you were convinced of, to hear a well-argued alternative point of view that is just as valid as your own but different. Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Julian and Livvy ate at The Waterfront, Ipswich. Want to meet someone from across the divide? Go to
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Every time Starmer wants us to think the best of Trump, the US president proves him wrong
Just five days ago Sir Keir Starmer sat down with the travelling pack of UK journalists at the G7 in Canada and assured them and their readers that Donald Trump would not attack Iran. He said:"There is nothing the president said that suggests he's about to get involved in this conflict, on the contrary, the G7 statement was about de-escalation. "I think what he said was he wanted to go beyond a ceasefire effectively and end the conflict. And I think he's right about that. I mean, a ceasefire is always a means to an end. "That is consistent with what we agreed around the table yesterday. And throughout the dinner yesterday I was sitting right next to President Trump, so I've no doubt, in my mind, the level of agreement there was in relation to the words that were then issued immediately after that, pretty soon after the dinner.' He made a point of being at the table sitting next to Trump to underline that his reading of what the US president would do was correct. At that point Trump had left the resort in Alberta early and was back in the White House. Just hours later he was posting threats to Iran on Truth Social. Then last night, five days after Starmer addressed journalists, he authorised the bombing of Iran having given them two weeks on Friday to get back to the negotiating table. The question though is: Why does the prime minister just keep getting it so wrong about what the US president will say and do? This is not the first time that Sir Keir has suggested Trump will do one thing and then the US president has done the opposite. We can go back to Starmer's cosy chat in the Oval Office when the two had their first formal meeting as prime minister and president in March. At the time and just before handing Trump the invitation from the King for a state visit, Sir Keir said he wanted 'to thank you for changing the conversation on the war in Ukraine.' It seemed an odd phrase even then given that Trump seemed to be dead set on forcing Ukraine to accept a peace on Russia's terms. But it looked far worse 24 hours later after vice president J.D. Vance and president Trump berated and humiliated Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelensky in the same Oval Office forcing him to leave their meeting. Then in May Sir Keir and President Trump were on the opposite ends of a public zoom call congratulating each other for the trade deal they had just struck over the White House's global tariff regime. 'Donald, thank you for your leadership,' the prime minister said, emphasising the first name terms. All seemed well until later in the month when Trump announced steel tariffs would be 50 per cent, not 25 per cent, and it turned out the UK/ US trade deal had not actually been implemented. It took til last week to get most of the deal implemented apart from steel which is still subject to discussions with the UK tariff remaining at 25 per cent with a hope of zero per cent still on the table. At every turn it appears that the prime minister wants us to think the best of Trump only for the US president to be apparently determined to prove him quickly wrong. It may be wishful thinking on Sir Keir's part. After all, he is constantly hoping Trump will do the right thing. There is a case to point out that what else could he say in these circumstances especially as his primary diplomatic policy appears to be to assuage Trump's ego and butter the US president up as much as possible. To be fair, Starmer has had more success than most on the international stage and he rightly speaks of his 'warm relationship' with the US president who in turn has gone out of his way to praise the prime minister's leadership. There is a sense from a popular American phrase of 'speaking things into existence', in that if you want something to happen it is better to say it will happen and hope that is enough to ensure it does. But perhaps it is because of the quixotic nature of the US president. He thinks one thing at one moment and then changes his mind when he leaves the room. It could be all of the above. But even those who wanted to believe Starmer last week thought he was being extremely naive in suggesting the president was pursuing de-escalation. It all reflects a complex international situation for the prime minister in his first year and one which is only going to heat up further. The problem is that our prime minister seems incapable of guessing what the biggest international player and UK's most important ally will do next.
