The outcome of the Melbourne by-election, in which Labor has claimed a narrow victory, reflected a disappointing performance from the Greens. At the 2010 state election Labor’s victory was dependent on Liberal preferences. In the absence of a Liberal candidate, the Greens were favoured this time.
Personal votes count for less in Melbourne than in other electorates due to the seat’s high population turnover, but even so, the retirement of veteran Labor MP Bronwyn Pike should have worked in the Greens’ favour, just as the retirement of Lindsay Tanner did when Greens MP Adam Bandt won the federal seat of Melbourne in 2010.
The Greens comfortably outpolled Labor on primary votes 36% to 33%. Their defeat was on the basis of preferences. Some of this reflected Labor’s superior ability to wheel and deal. The Sex Party in particular did the Greens some damage, rather as “Pirate” parties in Europe have drained votes from the radical left. But in a contest between the centre-left ALP and the further left Greens, it would be expected for more conservative voters to support Labor.
To some in the ALP, the Melbourne result will reflect the success of their recent verbal offensive against the Greens, in particular on asylum seeker issues. In a very close contest anything is possible, but the asylum seeker issue is bewildering and complex, and few fully understand it. It serves to confirm existing party choice rather than challenge it, rather like Obamacare in the US.
Canberra insiders wildly overestimate the impact of political rhetoric on voter choice. Labor’s ritualistic evocations of its “cause” and the “true believers” leave voters about as bemused as the Greens’ strange calls for voters to “make history”. Instead, Labor’s relatively strong performance in Melbourne was a reflection of voters' feelings about state politics.
The Greens campaign in Melbourne was curiously centred on local issues, as if it were a council byelection. Issues of planning, sustainability and liveability were at the forefront of their appeal. Yet the most distinctive feature of Melbourne voters is that they are left-wing. Hence Labor’s campaign was against the Baillieu Liberal-National government.
Since the surprise election of the Liberals in 2010, those who placed trust in Baillieu’s “small l” liberal pretensions have been largely disappointed by the government’s moves against equal opportunity legislation, cutbacks to the TAFE sector and broader public service redundancies.
Labor’s campaign focused on these issues, the controversial TAFE reforms of the previous Labor government had cost it support but now the party wrapped itself in the banner of traditional Labor causes: “Labor Cares” was the theme. This is the terrain where Victorian Labor feels secure, most of all in the ascendant left in the party. The Greens largely avoided the issue, to their peril.
In the context of closely divided state parliament, Greens candidate Cathy Oke failed to say which party she would support. It is probably the case that Greens voters are more sympathetic towards cooperation with Labor than party activists necessarily entangled in day to day political conflict with the ALP. But it is never clear from Greens spokespeople exactly what the long-term vision of the party is: is it to keep Labor honest or is it to supplant Labor on the political left? The Greens evade this choice using foggy rhetoric that emphasises voting Green as an expression of personal values and commitment: “This time I’m voting Green”.
There are some to whom this discourse is attractive – educated professionals who deal in concepts – but it has a limited appeal to Labor’s constituency for whom work is not a vocation but a chore. Greens champions insist that many individual Greens policies are popular with voters, but the party’s appeal is less than the sum of its parts.
In recent years the Greens have emerged as a major force on the political left. Nobody would have predicted in the 1990s that an alternative party of the left would comfortably outpoll Labor on primaries in an electorate such as Melbourne and force Labor into an embarrassing appeal to right-wing voters.
But Labor survives. At the next federal election Labor will outpoll the Greens by about three to one. Labor supporters are entitled to a little gloating, but they should be careful.
Consider the prospect of an Abbott government introducing legislation for optional preferential voting; and consider the prospects of embittered Senate Greens supporting such a proposal. Labor’s hollow rhetoric of disdain for Green voters would suddenly be exposed. The tight contest in Melbourne shows Labor and the Greens should best regard each other as “frenemies”.
Michael Block
Idler
If you compare the ALP and Coalition policies, they are much more alike that different. We aren't far off the time when they will swap preferences between each other, finally acknowledging their role as the 2 'business as usual' parties. in that sense the Greens represent a threat to both of them as the only major party with alternative policies. Even though there would be some short-term pain there'd be a long-term advantage to the Greens in maintaining their distance from both right-wing parties and emphasising the differences.
Riddley Walker
.
"But it is never clear from Greens spokespeople exactly what the long-term vision of the party is: is it to keep Labor honest or is it to supplant Labor on the political left?"
The Greens have always been perfectly clear on their long-term vision and have stated it repeatedly. It is to form government in their own right. Obviously this will be a gradual process, but the influence of 1 Greens MHR and 9 Senators has been a clear demonstration of the Greens commitment to achieving policy outcomes.
Concepts of "left" and "right" are fast becoming redundant. Is the ALP a left or right party? No-one can tell. Better to look at policies that provide social equity and long-term value versus policies that provide profits and influence for the wealthy few and the corporations at the expense of all the rest of us.
George Naumovski
Online Political Activist
No matter what, the Greens will never favour the conservatives. The problem with the ALP/Greens alliance to form this current government is that the Greens do not want to compromise and that in itself will mean they will lose out in the elections to come and help an Abbott government to victory and if the LNP do win the federal election the Greens will have nothing because a double dissolution election will wipe them out. It is time that the Greens become realistic because trying to change everything overnight will fail as it has!
Byron Smith
PhD candidate in Christian Ethics at University of Edinburgh
"No matter what, the Greens will never favour the conservatives."
The Greens have voted with the Coalition in the Senate against the ALP a number of times over the last few years, perhaps most noticeably in thrice blocking Rudd's CPRS. Whatever you think of that particular move (or the other instances of such voting), it demonstrates that one must never say never.
And then the old canard of the Greens never compromising. I assume you've read the Greens party policies in order to be able to state so clearly that they never compromise? Once you have, please get back to us in order to demonstrate that they have twisted the ALP's arm into implementing their entire policy agenda.
http://greens.org.au/policies/
Kelly O'neill
logged in via Facebook
"it is never clear from Greens spokespeople exactly what the long-term vision of the party is"
Maybe Geoffrey hasn't found the Greens website. Most comprehensive policies I've ever seen from any political party in Australia.
Back to the drawing board on this overblown rhetoric Geoffrey.
Giles Pickford
Giles Pickford is a Friend of The Conversation.
Retired, Wollongong
There is a mistake adopted widely in the media which constantly tells us that "federal Greens MP Adam Bandt won his party’s first ever lower house seat in Canberra".
This is not true. The first ever Green in the House of Representatives was Michael Organ who won the seat of Cunningham (Wollongong).
I notice each time it happens that Adam Bandt does not correct the error.
Megan Clement
Deputy Editor, Politics + Society at The Conversation
Thank you for picking up this error Giles, it was introduced in the editorial process and has now been fixed.
Best wishes,
Megan
Stephen Paul
Community Worker
I think it has always been clear what the intentions of the Greens have been, which is to surplant the ALP. There whole strategy has been to been to hide their policies from scutiny while smearing and sneering at their opponents. Their political position is always what ever the Labor Party says, they are further to the left, and whatever they deliver they demand that it should be more. In this bi-election the Greens were the issue. Their policies were scutinised and found wanting, and they were incapable of negotiating any sort of preference deals with other groups. Because of their ongoing support from the Age and the ABC, they behaved as if the election was a coronation rather than a campaign. Maybe it is time for the Greens to "make nice" with the ALP and instead of simply trying to win traditional safe Labor seats off the back of Liberal preferences, actually go out and try and win seats off the conservatives
Michael Block
Idler
Stephen the Greens wouldn't have to try hard to be further to the left than the ALP. There's only a bees dick separating the ALP from the Coalition on the political spectrum as it is. The ALP can't have it both ways, they can't move further to the right and still expect to have progressive voters remain ALP voters. The Greens occupy the ground occupied by the ALp in the 1970s, long abandoned by the modern ALP. That the ALP is proud to claim victory on the back of Family First preferences shows just how far they've drifted to the right.
They have a full set of policies, clearly enunciated on their web-site.
Riddley Walker
.
"There (sic) whole strategy has been to been to hide their policies from scutiny (sic) while smearing and sneering at their opponents"
The Greens policies have been freely available for scrutiny by anyone who cares to look at http://greens.org.au/policies.
In fact, the Greens run positive campaigns and avoid smear and sneer tactics. This does not mean we do not criticise others' policies - that is part of the job.
However there has been plenty of hysterical, sometimes downright offensive, and misleading commentary aimed at the Greens over the years from all sections of the media.
It doesn't worry us too much, we respond patiently with facts and clarifications, knowing that in the end even if people disagree, they respect us.
Stephen Paul
Community Worker
Thank you Michael for the reiteration of the Green's speaking notes. I am not sure if you have checked the calender lately but the 1970's were 40 years ago and I would have thought for any organisation to continue to exist there would be some need for some updating of their approach, & "Shame Fraser Shame" was such a successful strategy. I think there are major differences between the ALP and the Coalition and there always will be. While you say the ALP has moved to the right, I believe they have…
Read moreRiddley Walker
.
"as I understand it the Greens were caught out saying one thing in the electorate on education and having something different on their web-site. They were also found not to have properly costed their policy proposals."
= "smear".
Got evidence or references for this?
"the Greens lost and maybe their supporters should suck it up and get on with their lives and stop being poor losers."
= "sneer".
Thanks for the instant illustrtaion of my previous point.
Riddley Walker
.
sorry for typo hit send too fast.
Stephen Paul
Community Worker
"the Greens lost and maybe their supporters should suck it up and get on with their lives and stop being poor losers." = "sneer".
Riddley - Check the VEC website
Michael Block
Idler
I agree with you that it's individuals that allocate preferences in the ballot box, but it's the ALP that was desperate for FF preferences - shame on them, one would have thought that they'd learnt their lesson after the Steve Fielding debacle. That they prefer to see FF elected over the Greens really does say a lot about where the ALP positions itself on the political spectrum. If you take the time to read Greens education policy you'll see that the 'contradiction' was an ALP strawman argument raised as disinformation rather than fact.
Michael Block
Idler
My point Stephen is that the ALP has 'updated its approach' as you put it, by shifting to the Right, yet they are outraged at those thieves from the Greens for stealing THEIR vote, a constituency that the parliamentary ALP has abandoned long ago. The rank and file of the ALP If there are many left) may share many core values with the Greens, but the parliamentary party has abandoned them as well, all in the name of 'pragmatism'.
Tony P Grant
Neo-Mort
Since last federal conference (ALP) 2200 new members approx?
John Newton
Author Journalist
Agree entirely with Riddley Walker - we have to get out of the lockstep knee jerk 'left right',left right' march to nowhere.
It seemed to me when I joined the Greens that mainstream politics was and is still being fought over who owns the planet, worker or boss - my rather crude distillation of Marxist theory – rather than who will best steward the planet.
And who or what exactly is left and right in the twenty first Century?
In the Australian context, you only have to look at the blurring of the distinction between the Liberal Party and Labor (the ‘Claytons’ Liberals).
As Frank Moorhouse points out in his book The Inspector-General of Misconception, we no longer have two parties with widely differing ideologies, we have two parties with management teams offering different strategies for winning power.
When will there be a merger?
Tony P Grant
Neo-Mort
All the "padding" about our political system...positioning blah!
For me it is "policy" the NBN/Taxing the Mining Industry/Pacific Highway work and assistance for lower income folk. It is always non-conservative governments that build this nation and conservatives that throw us into wars, more often than not by using our young men (women) from working class/rural/regional areas to do their bidding!
The Greens are that percentage (population) that are becoming the "activist class" keeping Labor policy active. Labor is full of pure opportunists...no room in the conservative ranks, too, the Roman Catholic Right is dominate in NSW..Pell has Abbott and any number of Labor politicians he can call upon!
Gil Hardwick
Anthropologist
The Greens have never supported good planning or design or sustainable housing, ever, or Permaculture or Organics, or Integrated Catchment management, or Natural Resource Management, or Biodiversity. Nor have they ever collaborated or participated in any of this work over more than 30 years I have been involved.
The best we have ever managed to get out of them is something they call "lifestyle" and media coverage in place of hard science and practical implementation, which in places like Margaret…
Read moreJohn Newton
Author Journalist
My goodness Gil, I've never heard such tripe. I don't know whether you've really had any contact with The Greens political party or with some who call themselves 'greenies' (odious word) but in my almost 20 years woith the Greens i have been oinvolved in at least some of those pursuits - organic and biodynamic farming mainly - but know of many other Greens involved in everything you have listed.
I doubt the veracity of everything you have written
Gil Hardwick
Anthropologist
Well, no doubt you can doubt. I'd name them were it not for the risk of being sued by them, which has already happened too often now as their methods are queried and their many contradictions brought to light, which must be done of all presuming to represent us in parliament.
The Greens spout 'community', but then ostracise and abuse those who seek to engage debate with them. They campaign to ease the drug laws while back on the 'farm' they cultivate high-strength marijuana. The campaign to save…
Read moreMichael Block
Idler
Gil are you suggesting that every Greens member or only every politician is cultivating high strength marihuana?
Marlon Perera
-
Gil I'm sorry, but that is the biggest pile of nonsense I've ever heard.. are you sure you're not the one that's been smoking something? While you're entitled to your opinion of a certain party, this is just hyperbolic vitriol full of generalisations.. worst of all the idea that somehow Greens members 'cultivate high-strength marijuana'.. I wonder, maybe that's where they get their name! Do you expect people to take you seriously after this?
You offer no facts whatsoever, simply personal experience that is extremely subjective, i.e. to them you may have been the problem etc, and lets face it.. may well be fabricated.
The Greens aren't in a bigger place politically today not because they are incompetent or unwilling to engage, but because Australia is still a very conservative country at its heart, and this is something that is only just starting to change...
Giles Pickford
Giles Pickford is a Friend of The Conversation.
Retired, Wollongong
Dear Marlon
I don't always come to the defence of Gil, but on this issue I will.
I am a farm boy and have spent a lot of time in the bush in WA, NSW and Qld.
Like Gil, I notice that the Greens tend to be inner city people who simply don't understand what is happening out there. I hold the Greens responsible for the regulations that made the devastating Victorian Bush Fires possible: likewise for most other outer urban fires that never make it into the inner city.
I am in a country town now because I am old. But I will never forget what I know about the Australian environment as it really is.
Giles Pickford
Wollongong
Paul Wittwer
Orchardist
I strongly urge everyone here to google search Gil Hardwick. If you still want to engage with him at least it will be from an informed position.
Michael Block
Idler
Giles are you talking about Greens or greens here? Do you mean that there are no paid up members of the Greens outside large cities, no local Greens candidates etc or are you suggesting that there are no people with an understanding of green issues outside rural areas? Conflating the 2 is like suggesting that all ALP politicians are the equivalent to ordinary union members or all large business people are the same as Coalition MPs.
Byron Smith
PhD candidate in Christian Ethics at University of Edinburgh
"The Australian Greens want effective habitat management, including ecologically appropriate use of fire."
http://greens.org.au/policies/environment/biological-diversity
While it may well be that the Greens reflect an urban base, I don't think you're pointing the blame in the right direction on that one Giles.
And the Greens are only party to take the long term bushfire risk (and risk to all Australian agriculture) posed by climate change seriously. The other parties treat it as so much window dressing.
Paul Wittwer
Orchardist
Giles, why don't you read the report by the royal commission into the Victorian bushfires before spreading such nonsense about the Greens.
Your generalisation that Greens are inner city is equally tosh. Have you thought that those inner city residents may actually get out into the bush regularly and probably appreciate it all the more for having to live in the environmentally hostile confines of the inner city the rest of the time?
And a reminder to do a google search of the person you jumped to the defence of. This alone should give you reason to question your perceptions of the Greens.
Shirley Birney
retiree
Yeah thats right, the Greens dun it. They're the cause of our rivers on life support, mass fish and birds kills, the estimated 100,000 contaminated sites in this country, rising water tables, salinity, threatened flora and fauna species and extinctions, contaminated groundwater and toxic plumes, the plight of the Murray Darling, the dioxin contaminated Sydney Harbour, fudging of stack emissions, carbon emissions running amok, lead poisoning, occupational deaths and diseases of silicosis and asbestos and the coverups, state-corporate crimes against the people and environment etc. etc.
And all this since the first Greens Party member was elected to parliament in 1982. Astonishing how fast they dun it. Hey the Greens sure have clout. I had no idea they were in charge. Am I missing something here?
Lynne Newington
Lynne Newington is a Friend of The Conversation.
Researcher
Some issues are above politics, and David Shoebridge happens to be the Greens Member in NSW Upper House, the only one who has taken the plight of those treated so abominably by the Catholic Church by trying to change the laws preventing it from escaping their trusts rorts.
No one has ever taken this particular road before.
He's still a member of the Greens Political Party and he would hate to go down in history on that point alone, and I'm sure he won't, and there would be many who would be supporting his team on this point alone, out of gratitude.
Mark S
Self Storage Franchisee at Archive Storage
I recall having this discussion with some co-workers from the storage facility servicing Burwood, and it was rather a very intense discussion between the Labor and the Greens. Though I have followed closely the elections at Melbourne, I was not really paying attention at that time the politics and issues because I was so wrapped up with a lot of things in the office, with new projects coming up that involved a few storage facilities, not only in Burwood, but in Ashfield, and Strathfield. The discussion was about the various issues that the Greens were criticized of, and how it led to their disappointing performance.