tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/adam-bandt-3043/articlesAdam Bandt – The Conversation2023-09-11T05:39:31Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2132482023-09-11T05:39:31Z2023-09-11T05:39:31ZGovernment provides another $1 billion to finally win Greens’ support for long-delayed housing bill<p>The government has provided another $1 billion for public and community housing to secure a deal with the Greens to finally pass the Housing Australia Future Fund.</p>
<p>After months of stalling, the Greens agreed to pass the legislation through the Senate this week, despite the government refusing to give ground on the minor party’s demand for controls on rents. </p>
<p>During the battle over the fund, a core Labor promise, there were suggestions from the government that its blocking could end up in its eventual use as a double dissolution bill. </p>
<p>The $10 billion fund will provide an annual $500 million for social and affordable rental housing.</p>
<p>The government earlier this year announced $2 billion for social and affordable housing in an unsuccessful effort to secure the Greens’ backing for the legislation. It also gave a guarantee the annual amount from the fund would be at least $500 million, rather than being able to be variable. </p>
<p>Greens leader Adam Bandt said: “Pressure works. Labor said there was no more money for housing this year and we pushed them to find $3 billion”. He said the Greens would continue to push Labor to put an end to what he called “unlimited rent rises”. </p>
<p>“Renters are on the march, and the Greens will be fighting alongside them all the way,” Bandt said.</p>
<p>Greens housing spokesman Max Chandler-Mather said: “Renters have a national voice for the first time”.</p>
<p>“Greens power secured six times what Labor wanted to spend on social housing in a single year for public and community housing, and now we are going to use that power to win a freeze and cap on rent increases.”</p>
<p>The government used question time in parliament to spruik the coming passage of the bill, which already has the support of some of the other Senate crossbench.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213248/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After months of stalling, the Greens agreed to pass the legislation through the Senate this week, despite the government refusing to give ground on its demand for controls on rents.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2082992023-06-22T08:45:54Z2023-06-22T08:45:54ZWord from The Hill: A wild and badly behaved parliamentary fortnight<p>As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.</p>
<p>In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the free-for-all between Coalition, government and Greens in the final sitting fortnight before the winter break. </p>
<p>The Coalition’s offensive on Katy Gallagher over the Higgins saga backfired when Liberal Senator David Van was accused of inappropriate behaviour and kicked out of the Liberal party room (he later quit the party). </p>
<p>The government announced an extra $2 billion for social and affordable housing, hoping to win Greens’ support for its $10 billion signature Housing Australia Future Fund. To the government’s fury, the Greens held out, leading to angry accusations between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Greens spokesman Max Chandler-Mather. </p>
<p>The politicians are now returning to their electorates, where they are likely to face plenty of talk from constituents about those rising power prices and other bills.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208299/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the wild final sitting fortnight before the winter breakMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2055812023-06-04T20:05:17Z2023-06-04T20:05:17ZLabor and the Greens don’t get along. Here’s why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529691/original/file-20230602-27-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Relations between a centrist Labor government feeling its way and an ascendant Greens party have become surprisingly strained of late.</p>
<p>The rancorous tone of public exchanges reveals deep-seated enmities born of an increasingly direct electoral contest in the inner cities, legitimate policy differences, and a hyper-sensitivity to criticisms made of each other.</p>
<p>A current flashpoint is Labor’s housing policy, or, as the Greens would describe it, Labor’s failure to square up to a full-blown rental affordability crisis.</p>
<p>Among its suite of policies, Labor proposes a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/22/what-is-labors-10bn-social-housing-fund-and-will-it-be-torn-down-by-parliament">Housing Australia Future Fund</a> (HAFF), which would use the earnings only on $10 billion in capital (up to a cap of $500 million a year) to build 30,000 social and affordable homes over three years.</p>
<p>Labor’s bill to create the HAFF is currently before the parliament. But it faces a difficult future with the Greens flagging they will join with the Coalition in the Senate to vote it down, insisting it lacks ambition. This is essentially the same rationale the Greens relied on to justify defeating the Rudd government’s 2009 Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill, which they said at the time, “locks in failure”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IknmB42k-IY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Labor is apoplectic. It accuses the smaller party of hypocrisy in claiming to speak for society’s most vulnerable while lining up with the conservatives to deliver no new social and affordable housing.</p>
<p>In parliament, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has described the Greens’ calls for a nationwide rent freeze - incentivised by a $1 billion federal fund - and a five-fold increase in social housing expenditure as “absolute pixie dust”.</p>
<p>Foreign Minister Penny Wong, who is also government leader in the Senate, rounded on the minor party’s housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather, claiming he was engaging in stunts to boost his profile.</p>
<p>Responding to Greens senator Nick McKim in the Senate on May 11, a furious Wong <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2023/may/11/australia-politics-live-dutton-prepares-budget-response-trade-minister-flies-to-china-welfare-space-brittany-higgins?page=with:block-645c23398f08e5a61abaf559">said</a>: “Your spokesman on housing (Chandler-Mather sits in the lower house) is now prioritising media attention (before) housing for women and kids fleeing domestic violence. That’s shameful you know, this man’s ego.”</p>
<p>McKim hit back, saying Wong’s anger showed “that Mr Chandler-Mather is getting right under the skin of this government”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qvOOx_0H1aQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Such bitterness might seem curious given both Albanese and Wong hail from Labor’s left, the faction closest in values to the Greens party. But perhaps that closeness on the political spectrum is actually the problem.</p>
<p>Just as it is drily observed that the arguments in academia are so bitter because the stakes are so low, there is a sense that the deepest vitriol in parliamentary politics is actually reserved for parties of a similar philosophical hue: that is, parties competing for the same voters’ affections.</p>
<p>This tendency is not confined to the left. Even within the Coalition, subterranean antipathies between Liberal MPs holding rural-regional seats and Nationals occasionally bubble to the surface.</p>
<p>Liberals have also gone to extreme lengths to see off smaller right–wing parties. One notable case involved Tony Abbott in the late 1990s, when he urged One Nation members to take legal action against their fledgling party’s founder, Pauline Hanson. Abbott <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/abbotts-role-in-helping-ruin-hanson-20030826-gdw8q9.html">said</a> in 2003:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I met with numerous One Nation dissidents back in 1998 because I was very keen to bring about an end to what I thought was the counterproductive and destabilising influence of One Nation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While Labor MPs would be unlikely to say so publicly, it is likely many regard the Greens as a similarly “destabilising influence” on their end of the spectrum, if only because Greens MPs can propose spending, uninhibited by the likelihood of having to balance an entire budget themselves.</p>
<p>Current hostilities go back a long way. Labor resents being sniped at from its left flank for not moving fast enough on matters of climate, social policy and economic redistribution.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WKJUnyYAkm0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>For its part, the Greens bristle at being labelled “ideologically pure” – a tag clearly intended in the pejorative sense. </p>
<p>Bad blood lingers from the legislative <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-the-10-year-anniversary-of-our-climate-policy-abyss-but-dont-blame-the-greens-128239">failure of Rudd’s CPRS</a>. The country ended up with no economy-wide mechanism for emissions reduction. That situation continues to this day.</p>
<p>Indeed, it was probably memories of this that led to a compromise on the Albanese government’s toughened safeguards mechanism on industrial polluters earlier this year. This succeeded despite the Greens grumbling that the mechanism amounted to trying to put the climate fire out while pouring petrol on it.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-safeguard-mechanism-deal-is-only-a-half-win-for-the-greens-and-for-the-climate-202612">Australia's safeguard mechanism deal is only a half-win for the Greens, and for the climate</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, on housing, the smaller party is taking a harder line.</p>
<p>How much of this is principle and how much is political positioning depends on perspective.</p>
<p>As the major parties’ share of first preference votes erodes, the minor party believes it can take a greater slice of the more progressive, younger vote by styling the Greens as the natural party of renters.</p>
<p>With Labor and the Coalition reluctant to curb generous tax breaks for property investors – negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions – the Greens believe they can specifically speak for those locked out of home ownership.</p>
<p>Speaking to the ABC’s Insiders program on Sunday, Chandler-Mather <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-04/greens-housing-spokesperson-max-chandler-mather/102438374">made that ambition manifest</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Last year, they recalled parliament around the country to put caps on energy prices, you see the treasurer get up and say, ‘we’ve put caps on energy prices. But all of a sudden, rents don’t matter. Why is it that a third of the country don’t get the sort of representation - renters - that a lot of other people in this country do?’.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>At just 30, Chandler-Mather scored one the last election’s most surprising upsets when he seized the Labor-held Brisbane seat of Griffith for the minor party. It was one of three lower house seats the Greens won in Queensland, which along with Melbourne, held by party leader Adam Bandt, took their total to four.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529696/original/file-20230602-23-jsaz8u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At just 30, the Greens’ Max Chandler-Mather won the Queensland seat of Griffith from Labor at the 2022 federal election. He is now the party’s spokesperson on housing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A savvier political operator than any of his predecessors, Bandt has proved to be a shrewd negotiator. He is also a clear communicator, capable of delivering sharp attack lines against the government even as he reaches compromises.</p>
<p>His brand of assertive, values-based politics, tempered with a higher degree of political realism, has proved effective with his party room now 16–strong.</p>
<p>But, in politics, growth brings its own challenges.</p>
<p>Presenting as a party of immovable principle, rather than one of practical government, means that backing down in order to achieve some level of progress can become difficult. Party members may view compromise as retreat, failure or, even worse, as the politics of orthodoxy, major-party style.</p>
<p>This probably explains why, when Bandt’s party eventually supported Labor’s safeguard mechanism legislation in March, its votes came wrapped in scathing rhetoric more consistent with having opposed the bill. Bandt <a href="https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/government-still-captured-by-the-coal-and-gas-corporations-greens-leader/video/29227e5a10d4380cdc48ebc08e4e766c">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It’s become readily apparent that we are dealing here in this parliament with a government that is still captured by the coal and gas corporations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A further difficulty for parties built on unwavering fidelity to principles, above all else, arises when strongly professed standards are not lived up to internally.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/greens-senator-says-shes-faced-racism-within-party-as-leader-acknowledges-problem/g8b2kraf1">Claims of racism</a> within the party – first made by a Victorian First Nations senator, Lidia Thorpe, who has become an independent senator, and then <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/may/30/mehreen-faruqi-reveals-she-has-experienced-racism-in-the-greens">by a current Greens frontbencher</a>, Pakistan-born NSW senator Mehreen Faruqi, present Bandt with a conundrum.</p>
<p>The Greens leader must be seen to be doing all he can to establish the facts behind the allegations while his instincts – just like his major party competitors – will be to reject the suggestions to protect the party’s reputation as uniquely enlightened.</p>
<p>“The Greens are an anti-racist party, the Greens are an anti-hate party,” he told Radio National Breakfast following the allegations.</p>
<p>There’s no doubt that this is his party’s policy, but is it also its practice in every interaction? It’s a big call, and another example of the interface between good intentions and competitive politics on the ground.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/205581/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Kenny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As they fight for the affections of the same voters, the two parties have engaged in a particularly nasty debate over housing.Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1991102023-05-11T12:11:38Z2023-05-11T12:11:38ZGrattan on Friday: Peter Dutton warns of threat to ‘working poor’ in budget reply lacking a big picture<p>Peter Dutton needed to sketch a big picture in his Thursday night budget reply – to look like an alternative prime minister. He failed to do so. </p>
<p>With the Liberals rating parlously among those aged under 40, Dutton should have been speaking especially to these voters. But his address was more of the same from a Coalition that’s unable to refresh and regroup. </p>
<p>The bar was always going to be too high for Dutton. This week’s budget, whatever criticisms can be made of it and however things work out in the months ahead, has been an elusive target for the Liberals. </p>
<p>Dutton pointed to the formidable issues Australia is grappling with – very high inflation, a housing and rental crisis, crippling power bills, millions of people having gone backwards. </p>
<p>But he lacked prescriptions, let alone ones that were any more convincing than the government’s are. </p>
<p>He risked the government’s accusation of “punching down”, dividing those on welfare (who have benefitted from the budget) and working people on low wages. The cost-of-living relief “is targeted at Australians on welfare but at the expense of the many including Labor’s working poor”. The budget “hurts working Australians”, he declared; “worse, it risks creating a generation of working poor Australians”. </p>
<p>Dutton ticked off on budget items the Coalition agrees with or doesn’t oppose. But he left up in the air the fate of the $40 a fortnight rise in JobSeeker, arguing it would be better to raise the amount the unemployed could earn, rather than increasing the base rate. Interviewed later, he would not confirm the Coalition would support the $40 increase, but it is hard to see it opposing it when push comes to shove. Nevertheless, he has left himself vulnerable to obvious attack. </p>
<p>Dutton homed in on concern, which is likely to grow, about the looming large net migration influx (much of it a post pandemic “catch up”). Labor’s “big Australia approach” would worsen Australia’s cost-of-living and inflation problems, he said. </p>
<p>“Over five years, net overseas migration will see our population increase by 1.5 million people,” he said. “It’s the biggest migration surge in our country’s history and it’s occurring amidst a housing and rental crisis.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-day-after-the-night-before-chalmers-and-taylor-on-the-budget-205431">The day after the night before - Chalmers and Taylor on the budget</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet Dutton did not say what his alternative would be – his statement a Coalition government would “sensibly manage migration” is a declaration of intent, not a policy. </p>
<p>He had plenty of familiar Coalition lines and sentiments. “Under a Coalition government I lead, your taxes will always be lower.” “Taxation is the killer of aspiration.” “Labor recklessly spends, carelessly cuts and inadequately saves.” </p>
<p>But his policy offerings were small beer: a ban on sports betting ads during the broadcasting of games; commitments on health; imposing a greater onus on big digital companies to stop scams and financial fraud; the restoration of the cashless debit card. A personal priority was a promise to double the size of the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation.</p>
<p>What was missing was any ambitious initiative on a central issue. While it’s still relatively early in the term, and Anthony Albanese showed the benefit of holding policy back, Dutton is in a different situation. </p>
<p>He is confronting a popular government, not one on the slide. And voters won’t be attracted to an opposition that can’t project what it stands for, or whose values are seeming out of sync with the times. </p>
<p>Notably, Dutton as yet is giving no commitment on one significant tax measure in the budget – the changes to the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax, due to yield $2.4 billion over the forward estimates. The government hopes for opposition support, rather than a haggle with the Greens, whose leader Adam Bandt on Thursday said his party would, if it had the opportunity, fight to make the companies “pay their fair share of tax”. </p>
<p>The Greens’ aggressive response to the budget has underscored the challenge ahead for Labor from an increasingly assertive electoral competitor.</p>
<p>This came in a week when the broader hostility between Greens and Labor exploded in the Senate. </p>
<p>The Greens sided with the Coalition to prevent the government bringing to a vote on Thursday legislation for its $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the interest on which would finance social and affordable houses. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-the-budget-does-not-make-further-interest-rate-rises-more-likely-205391">No, the budget does not make further interest rate rises more likely</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Senate leader Penny Wong lashed out at Greens housing spokesman Max Chandler-Mather (who last year won the Queensland seat of Griffith from Labor), accusing him of “prioritising media attention from stunts and obstruction over housing for women and kids fleeing domestic violence”.</p>
<p>“This man’s ego matters more than housing for women fleeing domestic violence and older women at risk of homelessness. What sort of party are you?” she said.</p>
<p>The Greens and Coalition also teamed up to ensure a longer Senate inquiry on family law legislation. </p>
<p>In response to the budget, predictably the Greens have delivered biting assessments, declaring it hasn’t gone far enough to help the needy. </p>
<p>Ahead of next year’s budget, this pressure from the left will just intensify. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-2023-at-a-glance-major-measures-cuts-and-spends-205211">Budget 2023 at a glance: major measures, cuts and spends</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government’s economic inclusion advisory group, which was a major player in forcing the budget’s across-the-board (modest) rise in JobSeeker will produce another pre-budget report. That will inevitably urge further rises in welfare payments. </p>
<p>Assuming the government fell short of meeting the full recommendations, this would be manna for the Greens. And there’ll be a fresh round in the argument over the Stage 3 tax cuts. If these are not recalibrated, the Greens will have more ammunition. </p>
<p>Framing the 2024 budget, the government could be pulled between delivering more on welfare, keeping its promises on the tax cuts and, with an eye to the election due by May 2025, doing something substantial for middle Australia. </p>
<p>The last election, which added three more seats to the Greens’ lower house representation, bringing them to four, and boosted their Senate numbers from nine to 12 (now 11 with Lidia Thorpe’s defection), was a sharp reminder to Labor that the threat to it from the left is on the march. </p>
<p>It’s perhaps telling that budget week has seen the government rather complacent in the face of a weak opposition, but agitated by the minor party.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199110/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The bar was always too hard for Dutton. This week’s budget, whatever criticisms can be made of it, has been an elusive target for the LiberalsMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2027392023-03-29T02:34:15Z2023-03-29T02:34:15ZSafeguard deal shows Bandt’s Greens party has come of age<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518063/original/file-20230328-22-pf2a0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is understandable if observers have struggled to neatly categorise the <a href="https://theconversation.com/greens-will-back-labors-safeguard-mechanism-without-a-ban-on-new-coal-and-gas-thats-a-good-outcome-202444">agreement struck</a> on Monday between the Albanese Labor Government and the Australian Greens party to progressively reduce industrial emissions.</p>
<p>Across political, environmental, and even business circles, opinions vary over whether Labor’s substantial renovation of the Coalition-era safeguards mechanism represents a decisive break from Australia’s decade of climate paralysis or is simply more tinkering when structural reform was needed.</p>
<p>At best, it is modest progress that could unlock wider action on emissions while making it harder for new fossil fuel projects, particularly coal and gas mines, to get going. That’s the view of the Australian Conservation Foundation for example, and of the Grattan Institute’s Program Director, Energy, Tony Wood.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1640501440564318209"}"></div></p>
<p>To that extent then, it is a net environmental positive. Perhaps even a major one.
But critics, such as <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/greens-capitulation-represents-labor-s-biggest-victory-over-minor-party-20230327-p5cvks.html">Osman Faruqi</a>, culture news editor for Nine Entertainment, are scathing. The former Greens party candidate believes his old party, whose raison d'etre is environmental protection, has been politically manipulated by Labor. </p>
<p>Under Adam Bandt’s leadership, the Greens played hardball in the negotiations, publicly slamming Labor’s climate credentials and demanding a full ban on all future coal and gas projects in exchange for its crucial Senate votes.</p>
<p>“You can’t put the fire out while you’re pouring petrol on it,” Bandt had said to any microphone he could find. He depicted Labor’s approach of forcing existing industrial players to cut year-on-year emissions while also allowing new fossil fuel ventures as contradictory.</p>
<p>This was, and remains, a serious point – even if in the end, Bandt’s party settled for a hard cap on overall emissions by the 215 industrial polluters, limits on greenhouse gas production from any new projects, and a ministerial obligation to step in if agreed emissions limits are exceeded.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/a6dMdO7naCo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Both sides claimed a major victory, which might be the best sign there is of a fruitful negotiation.</p>
<p>For the Greens though, long derided as a party happier in protest mode rather than legislative process, the deal hints at what might be a subtle shift towards seeking material outcomes, even if that means compromise.</p>
<p>To its supporters’ deep umbrage, the party had long carried the blame for having joined with the Coalition to bury Rudd Labor’s emissions trading scheme in 2009, known formally as the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme or CPRS.</p>
<p>According to a persistent narrative, the environmental party had succumbed to the mistake of “making the perfect the enemy of the good”.</p>
<p>Greens’ loyalists still bristle at this criticism, eager to point out that Bob Brown cooperated with the subsequent Gillard-led Labor government to deliver an economy-wide carbon price-cum-emissions trading scheme that was superior to the “flawed” CPRS.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-the-10-year-anniversary-of-our-climate-policy-abyss-but-dont-blame-the-greens-128239">It's the 10-year anniversary of our climate policy abyss. But don't blame the Greens</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Faruqi calls the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2011A00131">Clean Energy Act</a> of 2011 that instituted those advances “the most serious climate legislation in Australia’s history”.</p>
<p>While this is arguable, it rather ignores its fatal context – namely a polity so divided on climate following the demise of the CPRS that it boosted Tony Abbott and fellow centre-right climate deniers. This ultimately poisoned the well of public support for Gillard and for progressive policy more broadly.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518088/original/file-20230329-24-82yw68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Julia Gillard and Bob Brown sign their agreement in 2010.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alan Porritt/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Wherever one stands on this historical debating point, there is no denying the dark shadow of 2009-10 loomed over the most recent negotiations around Labor’s improved safeguards mechanism.</p>
<p>Bandt appears to have concluded that sinking another Labor attempt at emissions control – and on essentially the same grounds – would be hard to justify.</p>
<p>But if he was limited at that end by the risk of repeating the CPRS error, he was hemmed in at the other end by the very public interventions of Brown and others. Brown, the party’s revered founding leader, publicly defended his party’s need to vote down Labor’s bill unless it contained the coal and gas ban.</p>
<p>Bandt’s answer to this predicament was to talk tough and look immovable on coal and gas in order to secure other improvements.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NofamzsK8vE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>What does this tell us about his leadership style and nature of the party he leads?</p>
<p>When Bandt succeeded Richard Di Natale three years ago, <a href="https://theconversation.com/adam-bandt-will-be-a-tougher-leader-but-the-challenge-will-be-in-broadening-the-greens-appeal-131145">I suggested</a> in these pages that he might drag his party further to the left, such had been his combative rhetorical style.</p>
<p>On reflection, I now think this underestimated the significance of his status as the party’s only lower house MP. </p>
<p>What the current episode shows, is that if anything, he has pulled his party towards a more practical orientation, with an emphasis on getting things done.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-safeguard-mechanism-deal-is-only-a-half-win-for-the-greens-and-for-the-climate-202612">Australia's safeguard mechanism deal is only a half-win for the Greens, and for the climate</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This may reflect several things at once. First, the party’s maturing electoral base, which is seeking something more than determined talk in the face of a gathering climate emergency. </p>
<p>Second, Bandt’s own experience as an MP rather than a senator. And third, the Greens party’s surprising success in the House of Representatives in 2022. In the federal election of May 2022, one MP became four. The presence of other lower house members may have affected the nature of debate and the identification of priorities within the party room.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518089/original/file-20230329-28-87xdy0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">After the 2022 federal election, one Greens MP became four.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Lower house electorates call for political representation that is qualitatively different, closer to voters, and therefore closer to political mortality. Terms last a maximum of three years, not six. To hold a House seat, an MP must connect with a broader cross section of voters than in the Senate.</p>
<p>The voting method for senators uses state-wide proportional representation. That means the Greens, as a Senate-based party, could afford to present arguments for strong action on global heating acceptable to a sliver of voters state-wide - sufficient for a senator or two from most jurisdictions.</p>
<p>In contrast, holding onto lower house seats forces MPs to consider the immediate on-ground economic and employment implications of policy positions.</p>
<p>It may well be that the very presence of three new lower house MPs in the Greens party room has shifted the balance of internal debates to more politically attuned goals. And to debates where the economic and employment downsides of policy must be more frontally addressed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202739/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Kenny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The deal shows the Greens leader has pulled his party towards a more practical orientation, with an emphasis on getting things done.Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2012872023-03-08T02:30:29Z2023-03-08T02:30:29ZThe Greens aren’t grandstanding on a new coal and gas ban – they’re negotiating well<p>This fortnight, Australia’s parliament is considering an amendment to the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1819/Australias_climate_safeguard_mechanism">safeguard mechanism</a>, which is the main way we’ve tried to cut emissions over the last nine years. As you may already know, it <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-may-be-heading-for-emissions-trading-between-big-polluters-188799">hasn’t done</a> what it was meant to do. </p>
<p>The mechanism was meant to force our largest greenhouse gas polluters to buy carbon credits if they emitted over a baseline. But almost no one ever paid, as the baselines were set very high. That’s why Labor wants to tighten up Australia’s overly flexible <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/Infohub/Markets/Pages/About-Carbon-Markets.aspx">carbon trading scheme</a> as part of this bill. </p>
<p>But to pass it, the government needs support from most of the crossbench, which is unlikely, or from the Greens, given the Coalition has refused to support it. Australia’s third largest party has offered to “<a href="https://youtu.be/fyE7fxZh7ok?t=1087">support the bill tomorrow</a>” – if the Albanese government agrees to stop <a href="https://greens.org.au/safeguard">all new coal and gas</a> projects. </p>
<p>Labor won’t agree to this. But it <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/carbon-credits-for-emitters-could-be-blocked-by-greens-20230111-p5cbv7">will need</a> to negotiate to have any chance of success. </p>
<p>Are the Greens grandstanding, as some commentators have suggested? Hardly: they’re negotiating hard to try to get the best outcome for the climate. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-adam-bandt-is-wedged-by-greens-overreach-on-emissions-legislation-200083">Grattan on Friday: Adam Bandt is wedged by Greens' overreach on emissions legislation</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The trouble with negotiating strong carbon market rules</h2>
<p>If the Greens were in power, they might choose a different approach. But they are limited by what Labor is offering: the ability to improve the rules of Australia’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5ych9oDtk0">carbon market</a>. </p>
<p>In 2023, our methods of driving down emissions are still limited. Labor has decided to focus on improving the safeguard mechanism, which is a <a href="https://www.oecd.org/env/tools-evaluation/emissiontradingsystems.htm">baseline-and-credit</a> carbon offset scheme <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/F2015L01637">first legislated </a> by the Abbott Coalition government in 2014. </p>
<p>Because of <a href="https://theconversation.com/nearly-30-of-australias-emissions-come-from-industry-tougher-rules-for-big-polluters-is-a-no-brainer-190264">very loose</a> baselines given to the 215 major emitters covered by the scheme, emissions actually grew. The previous government also bought carbon credits through the flawed <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-emissions-reduction-fund-is-almost-empty-it-shouldnt-be-refilled-92283">Emissions Reduction Fund</a>.</p>
<p>What <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6957">Labor proposes</a> is to make the mechanism function more like the carbon market set up by the Rudd/Gillard Labor governments over a decade ago. </p>
<p>How? By adding rules to allow new flexibility options for crediting and trading of carbon rights. The current safeguard bill also adds a “reserve” carbon budget for new fossil fuel projects, which would allow them to be built.</p>
<p>At the same time, the <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction/independent-review-accus">Chubb review</a> into our carbon offset laws is recommending <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/09/chubb-review-recommends-new-integrity-body-for-australian-carbon-credits-scheme">more oversight</a> into the scheme following <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/23/australias-carbon-credit-scheme-largely-a-sham-says-whistleblower-who-tried-to-rein-it-in">integrity questions</a>. </p>
<p>In sum, though, climate change minister Chris Bowen’s proposed amendments are <a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-scheme-to-cut-industrial-emissions-is-worryingly-flexible-197525">still too flexible</a>. </p>
<p>If Labor gets its amendments through unchanged, big industrial emitters <a href="https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2023/march/nick-feik/great-stock-n-coal-swindle">will likely</a> be able to avoid actually having to reduce how much carbon dioxide and methane they can pump into the skies through loose baselines and unlimited offsets. </p>
<h2>Is ‘no new coal and gas’ viable?</h2>
<p>Since the early 2000s, the environment movement have campaigned for “<a href="https://www.routledge.com/Climate-Action-Upsurge-The-Ethnography-of-Climate-Movement-Politics/Rosewarne-Goodman-Pearse/p/book/9781138941595">no new coal</a>”. As the gas industry surged in the 2010s, environmentalists called for limits on fracking and exports. </p>
<p>It’s entirely reasonable for the Greens to push the government to come clean about plans for emissions-intensive industries. Mining workers <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/no-one-is-coming-clean-on-climate-20220214-p59wa3">want to know</a> what the future will hold. Labor voters are <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/labor-nod-to-fossil-fuels-is-betrayal-of-voter-trust-20220824-p5bcgg.html">also wondering</a>.</p>
<p>The Greens want a <a href="https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/greens-launch-full-climate-and-energy-plan-powering-past-coal-and-gas-0">managed transition plan</a> out of thermal coal by 2030 and coking coal (used for steelmaking) by 2040, with packages to help workers change jobs. They want Australia to be the first major fossil fuel exporter to limit production. </p>
<p>That’s what they want. But what can they get, given carbon-pricing mechanisms like the safeguard mechanism leave these decisions <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-11-17/gillard-lauds-genius-of-carbon-market/2339564">to the market</a>? </p>
<p>This week, the Greens and the Coalition are forcing the government to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/07/coalition-and-greens-team-up-to-force-labor-to-release-emissions-modelling">release its modelling</a> of the future of emissions-intensive industries. </p>
<p>How big does the government expect fossil fuel production facilities to be in the future? How much will big emitters rely on offsetting rather than reductions at the source?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="pilbara gas export" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/514089/original/file-20230308-2352-6mqsou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the last 15 years, Australia’s gas exports have skyrocketed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Trading offset reform for no new coal and gas?</h2>
<p>Crossbencher David Pocock is pushing for <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/post/max-opray/2023/03/03/pocock-insists-offsets-overhaul">reforms on carbon offsets</a>. But the Greens have offered to “<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-15/greens-offer-support-for-safeguard-mechanism-coal-and-gas-bans/101971888">put aside</a>” their concerns about offsets if Labor moves to ban new fossil fuel projects. </p>
<p>If the Greens were successful in strengthening safeguard rules to introduce a zero-carbon limit on all new coal and gas mines, new fossil fuel projects would have to find carbon offsets for 100% of their emissions each year. But if Labor keeps refusing this approach, compromise may have to come elsewhere.</p>
<p>Greens leader Adam Bandt says they are making “<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-19/greens-leader-adam-bandt/101995392">an offer, not an ultimatum</a>”. They want to bargain. </p>
<p>What could this look like? </p>
<p>Labor might seek to group Pocock and the 12 Green senators together to negotiate limits on permissible carbon offsets. If so, the Greens would end up where they were in 2009–11, trying to ensure carbon market rules minimise use of offsets. </p>
<h2>What are the most likely deals we could see?</h2>
<p>We could see four other compromises. In order of likelihood, they are: </p>
<p><strong>Pausing new coal and gas mine approvals until environmental laws are stronger</strong></p>
<p>Our biodiversity and environment laws are <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6812019/how-did-our-environmental-laws-get-so-broken-and-what-can-we-do-to-fix-them">not up to the task</a>. Labor <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/20/labor-to-set-up-independent-environmental-protection-agency-and-restore-trust-and-confidence">has pledged</a> to fix them. </p>
<p>Making federal environmental laws stronger is arguably a clearer way to reducing fossil fuel expansion. Why? These laws overlay state planning laws which keep churning out new mining licences. The Greens will want influence here. </p>
<p><strong>The ‘climate trigger’</strong></p>
<p>The Greens want to create a climate trigger modelled on the “<a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/epbc/our-role/what-is-protected">water trigger</a>” negotiated by former independent MP Tony Windsor. </p>
<p>A climate trigger, if it got up, would mean future projects would be assessed on greenhouse impact. But it wouldn’t be the same as a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-greens-climate-trigger-policy-could-become-law-experts-explain-how-it-could-help-cut-emissions-and-why-we-should-be-cautious-187998">direct ban</a> on new coal and gas. The Greens have a climate trigger bill <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_LEGislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=s1344">before parliament</a>, which would permit the climate change minister to reject large mines. </p>
<p><strong>Replacing offsets</strong> </p>
<p>Offsets are often rubbery. But there are other ways to <a href="https://theconversation.com/carry-over-credits-and-carbon-offsets-are-hot-topics-this-election-but-what-do-they-actually-mean-116748">finance carbon cuts</a>. A decarbonisation fund could permit democratic decision-making about carbon and biodiversity improvements.</p>
<p>Given carbon offset credits have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/13/australia-risks-being-a-state-sponsoring-greenwashing-if-it-relies-on-carbon-offsets-expert-warns">political risks</a> for the government and <a href="https://www.afr.com/markets/debt-markets/inside-the-billion-dollar-market-for-junk-carbon-offsets-20221121-p5c053">corporations</a>, there’s merit to returning to fixed carbon pricing. </p>
<p><strong>Negotiate with the states about fossil fuel industry transition</strong> </p>
<p>Labor could offer to negotiate with the states about managing the path away from coal and gas. Talking about what we have to do to stay in <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-climate-clock-what-s-the-world-s-carbon-budget-and-what-s-australia-s-share-20211021-p5924q.html">our carbon budget</a> could foster parliamentary good faith and end finger pointing. </p>
<h2>Climate wars – or real progress?</h2>
<p>The Greens have a long history of pushing back against weak climate policy. Labor, in turn, has a history of criticising what they see as doctrinaire refusal. But when the cameras are off, these two parties have managed to achieve compromise and progress. It’s happened before, and it will most likely happen again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/201287/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Pearse receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Recovery and Resilience Agency. </span></em></p>Labor has ruled out banning new fossil fuel developments. Even so, there are many climate deals the government and the Greens could strikeRebecca Pearse, Lecturer, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2008332023-02-28T08:15:56Z2023-02-28T08:15:56ZPolitics with Michelle Grattan: Greens leader Adam Bandt on trying to force Labor’s hand on reform<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512622/original/file-20230228-16-uvnu26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C12%2C8206%2C5475&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>Adam Bandt aspired to power-sharing with a Labor government. That was never going to happen but, possessing the major slice of the balance of power in the Senate, the Greens have considerable potential muscle – at least in theory. </p>
<p>In this podcast, we get a glimpse of the gap between Greens leader Adam Bandt’s aspiration for ambitious reforms and the reality that the government is only giving concessions at the edges to the minor party.</p>
<p>“There’s a capacity for this to be a golden era of reform in this parliament,” Bandt says. </p>
<p>“For us to pass laws that tackle the climate crisis and to protect the environment. That tackle the cost of living crisis. </p>
<p>"At the moment, the only obstacle is Labor’s willingness to do what needs to be done, and that would in fact be very popular,” he says.</p>
<p>“I think what we’re going to see during this parliament is the Liberals become a far-right irrelevance. Labor becomes a centre-right party, but it’s still wedded to neo-liberal economics. And the Greens are advancing the social democratic alternative.</p>
<p>"I understand the government wants to project that they are in majority and that everything is within their control […] At some point the penny needs to drop with the government that they will have to work with others if they want to not only get their agenda through but tackle the problems that people are facing.”</p>
<p>Bandt discusses the Greens’ attempt, rejected by Labor, to force a ban on new coal and gas projects, and their reservations about the government’s national reconstruction and housing funds. </p>
<p>Interestingly, he dodges when quizzed on the action of his former colleague, now crossbencher, Lidia Thorpe in briefly disrupting the weekend Mardi Gras march. </p>
<p>“Lidia Thorpe is able to speak for herself. I’m not going to pass comment on that. Ultimately this is an event that is by and for the LGBTIQ+ community. I’ll leave it up to them and the organisers and those who are involved to to comment on that.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200833/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In this podcast, Michelle Grattan and Greens leader Adam Bandt discuss climate change, the cost of living crisis and the Voice.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2000832023-02-16T09:31:59Z2023-02-16T09:31:59ZGrattan on Friday: Adam Bandt is wedged by Greens’ overreach on emissions legislation<p>If Peter Dutton is caught in a classic rock-and-hard-place dilemma over the Voice to Parliament, the same could be said for Greens leader Adam Bandt on the safeguard legislation to underpin the government’s climate policy. </p>
<p>The Greens are putting as a condition of supporting the bill – now before parliament – that the government commits to a ban on new coal and gas projects. </p>
<p>They pitched for the ban when parliament was considering legislation for the 43% emissions reduction target, but the government stared them down and they ended up backing that bill. </p>
<p>Now, the stakes are much higher – for both government and Greens. </p>
<p>The 43% target didn’t have to be law. That was just icing on the cake. In contrast, the government needs the safeguard legislation – which forces the biggest polluters to reduce their emissions – to implement its policy. </p>
<p>Reform of Australia’s emissions reduction regime is at the heart of Labor’s agenda. To be stymied on implementation would be a major setback. </p>
<p>From the Greens’ point of view, to have failed once to force the government’s hand can be brushed over. To fail twice risks making the party look impotent in the eyes of its supporters.</p>
<p>It should be noted the Greens say they are not issuing an “ultimatum”, leaving themselves wriggle room for retreat. But their words are strong, and stepping back would be seen as precisely that.</p>
<p>Just like the Liberals, the Greens have a base that is split between hardliners and moderates. At the radical end, their activists don’t want the party to compromise on core issues; in contrast, its mainstream voters want outcomes. </p>
<p>The Greens have history on standing in the way of progress on climate policy, and the government is rubbing their noses in their past. Greens opposition killed the Rudd government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (when their vote suddenly became significant after a leadership upheaval in the Liberals). Their explanation is that it “was bad policy that would have locked in failure to take action on climate change”.</p>
<p>Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek on Thursday said, in answer to a Greens questioner in parliament, “when you lined up with the Liberals last time to block the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, what we saw was more emissions for longer because you voted with them”. </p>
<p>Of course given that, on an ordinary interpretation of “mandates”, Labor has one for its climate policy, the Coalition should let the legislation through – which would make the Greens irrelevant. </p>
<p>But the opposition is spurning any recognition of Labor mandates for core election policies, contesting its $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund and the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund as well as the safeguard bill. This deals the Greens (and non-Greens Senate crossbenchers) into the centre of things. </p>
<p>But while holding a whip hand, the Greens are also wedged on the safeguard legislation. </p>
<p>It’s hard to see that, at the end of the day, they have anywhere else else to go than to vote with the government. Do they really want to line up with the Coalition (again) to reject a major initiative – to be accused (again) of making “the perfect the enemy of the good”? </p>
<p>Bandt rejected that line on the Voice. Senator Lidia Thorpe defected from the Greens to sit on the crossbench because she thought the party wasn’t being pure enough on Indigenous policy. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/lidia-thorpes-defection-from-the-greens-will-make-passing-legislation-harder-for-labor-199299">Lidia Thorpe's defection from the Greens will make passing legislation harder for Labor</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Thorpe argued a Treaty should be given priority over the Voice. But Bandt, while noting the Greens still think a Treaty should come first, said he didn’t believe a “no” vote on the referendum would bring a Treaty closer. It was sensible pragmatism. </p>
<p>Neither would a no vote on the safeguard mechanism be likely to bring closer a ban on new coal and gas ventures. </p>
<p>The market is increasingly cooling on new coal projects. Gas is another matter. Ukraine and the debate about its role in the transition to cleaner energy are driving mixed market messages and investment.</p>
<p>Labor, already facing deepening economic problems, would trash its credibility with investors, business generally and voters if it agreed to the Greens’ ban. </p>
<p>Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen says he is open to negotiation on the safeguard legislation, within the policy Labor took to the election. That provided for new fossil fuel projects to be considered on their merits. </p>
<p>Apart from the issue of project bans, the safeguard bill itself – due for a Senate vote in March for a July 1 start – and the associated draft rule are coming under fire, especially for being too generous on carbon credit offsets. </p>
<p>The head of The Australia Institute, Richard Denniss, wrote in the Guardian: “The reality is the safeguard mechanism does more to safeguard the fossil fuel industry than it does to safeguard the climate. It hides its support for fossil fuel expansion behind a fig leaf of dodgy carbon credits and offsets.”</p>
<p>In contrast, Carbon Market Institute CEO John Connor argues the safeguard mechanism reforms, reducing pollution limits by 5% a year, are significant. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-scheme-to-cut-industrial-emissions-is-worryingly-flexible-197525">Labor's scheme to cut industrial emissions is worryingly flexible</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>“They will send a multi-billion-dollar and growing signal to our largest emitters to drive at source decarbonisation, while requiring investments in emission reductions elsewhere in the economy when they can’t do so immediately at the relevant facility,” he says. </p>
<p>“With our high-carbon political economy and historic policy convolutions, it would be a major setback to lose the safeguard mechanism reforms,” Connor says, although adding there should be some amendments to the legislation. </p>
<p>As he tries to chart his course for exercising the Greens’ share of the balance of power in the Senate, Bandt might at times mull on the now-extinct Australian Democrats and their one-time leader Meg Lees. </p>
<p>Lees negotiated a deal with the Howard government for the introduction of the goods and services tax. She extracted concessions for the Democrats’ support, and she did the right thing facilitating the legislation. It was a change to the tax system the country needed. </p>
<p>But Lees paid a high price in a party that was divided over the issue, with many of its supporters abhorring compromise. Ultimately, it cost her the leadership. </p>
<p>This is not an argument against Bandt compromising, which he should and almost certainly will have to. It’s just a reminder that sensible decisions can impose great pressures on the leaders of minor parties when those parties exercise real make-or-break power.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200083/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Like the Liberals, the Greens have a base that is split between hardliners and moderates. At the radical end, their activists don’t want compromise on core issues; its mainstream voters want outcomes.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1897902022-09-01T10:52:06Z2022-09-01T10:52:06ZGrattan on Friday: Should Anthony Albanese keep his word on the Stage 3 tax cuts?<p>The final, mega stage of the Coalition’s tax cuts, worth more than $240 billion over a decade, is now in the gun sights of many critics, who are calling for Anthony Albanese to dump his promise to deliver it.</p>
<p>This week Greens leader Adam Bandt, releasing an analysis of the distributional impacts prepared by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office, said the tax cuts “cost a fortune, and the wealthiest 20% get close to 80% of the money”.</p>
<p>Bandt said they would “turbocharge inequality” and widen the gender pay gap. The benefit for women is half that for men, because women earn less. Over the decade men would get $160.6 billion, while women would get $82.9 billion. </p>
<p>Independent senator David Pocock, from the ACT, on whose vote Labor is expected often to rely when there is contested legislation, said “things have changed a lot since these [tax cuts] were legislated”, and suggested better ways some or all the money could be used.</p>
<p>But Albanese, answering questions on Labor’s 100 days anniversary on Monday, reaffirmed he had no plans to try to un-legislate the tax cuts – although some commentators felt he was leaving a smidgeon of wriggle room.</p>
<p>The cuts were announced in Scott Morrison’s final budget as treasurer in 2018, and tweaked in 2019, with Stage 3 commencing in mid-2024. The part of Stage 3 that benefits most taxpayers cuts the rate that applies to incomes over $45,000 from 32.5 cents in the dollar to 30 cents. The bigger part extends that 30 cent rate all the way up to $200,000, abolishing an entire rung of the tax ladder. </p>
<p>For high earners, the part of their income that was taxed at 37 cents will be taxed at 30, as will income above $180,000 that was taxed at 45 cents. The 45 cent threshold will cut in above $200,000.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/government-to-legislate-for-multi-employer-bargaining-strengthening-push-for-wage-increases-189786">Government to legislate for multi-employer bargaining, strengthening push for wage increases</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The argument about the cuts is a mishmash of economics and politics. It’s been so since the start, although circumstances have deepened the dilemmas surrounding them.</p>
<p>Labor voted for Stage 3, using as justification that it was part of a package containing relief in earlier years for those on lower incomes, but also for political reasons. The decision was in line with Labor’s small-target strategy. This was underlined by the fact the then-opposition didn’t propose to repeal the cuts or make changes if it won the election. Indeed, quite the opposite. </p>
<p>Although these cuts, legislated before COVID, had many critics at the time, the case against them increased with the budgetary hit imposed by the pandemic. That transformed the landscape.</p>
<p>Independent economist Saul Eslake says: “From the standpoint of economic management, the main argument for abandoning or deferring [them] is that the medium-term budget outlook is now very different from when those tax cuts were proposed and legislated.</p>
<p>"At that time, the budget was projected to be in surplus throughout the 2020s, and net debt reduced to zero by the end of the decade. Now, deficits are projected to continue as far as the eye can see, and net debt to continue growing in dollar terms into the early 2030s. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-albanese-announces-more-than-1-billion-in-federal-state-tafe-funding-189776">Word from The Hill: Albanese announces more than $1 billion in federal-state TAFE funding</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>"It’s understandable that the government feels bound to honour the pledges it made But that would seem to make inevitable that, sooner or later, the government will need to look for other means of raising additional revenues in order both to meet the electorate’s expectations for higher spending in disability, aged and health care, and to put the budget on a more sustainable medium-term path,” Eslake says.</p>
<p>Ditching the tax cuts on the grounds of changed circumstances would have two clear Labor precedents.</p>
<p>Bob Hawke promised tax cuts before the 1983 election. Then, on the basis of discovering an unannounced $9.6 billion deficit when he reached office, the promise was quickly buried.</p>
<p>Years later the Labor government, then under PM Keating, legislated tax relief before the 1993 election. It boasted the cuts were L.A.W. Post-election, the second round of these was scrapped.</p>
<p>Hawke, riding a tide of honeymoon popularity and making a convincing case, wasn’t damaged by his broken promise – which was just that, a promise, not something set in law. Keating, who had just enjoyed one of those miracle election wins but was at the fag end of Labor’s term, suffered serious harm.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/treasurer-chalmers-on-boosting-migration-and-a-resilience-budget-189632">Treasurer Chalmers on boosting migration and a 'resilience' budget</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Since the Hawke and Keating days, voters have become more distrustful of politicians, and the political danger in breaking undertakings has increased.</p>
<p>If Albanese wanted to repeal or change the tax cuts, he would have the Senate numbers to do so, with the Greens and Pocock. But trashing an election pledge would have major implications for his credibility.</p>
<p>At the 2025 election, opponents would have the argument that Albanese’s word could not be trusted. With his eye already on a second term, he has to think of the long game.</p>
<p>Treasurer Jim Chalmers made two defences of the tax cuts this week. He challenged the argument they were just for the rich. And he maintained that scrapping them would not address current budgetary problems.</p>
<p>“It’s important to remember that these tax cuts kick in at $45,000. For a lot of Australians with quite modest incomes, they will be getting an additional tax cut in stage three - we shouldn’t lightly dismiss that,” Chalmers said.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/summits-old-and-new-what-was-bob-hawkes-1983-national-economic-summit-about-187763">Summits old and new: what was Bob Hawke's 1983 National Economic Summit about?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>(The benefit accruing to a taxpayer earning between $45,000 and $60,000 is small, no more than $375 a year, which is much less than the recently abolished tax offset of up to $1,500 – meaning that, taken together, the changes will leave some low to middle earners worse off.)</p>
<p>Chalmers also made the point that “even if a government were to tweak those Stage 3 tax cuts, they don’t come in for another couple of years.</p>
<p>"So they have absolutely no bearing on some of these challenges that we’re dealing with right now." </p>
<p>Of course the fact the tax cuts don’t start until mid-2024 of itself gives the government latitude to change its position, and allows for sustained lobbying.</p>
<p>In today’s uncertain conditions, that’s an eternity in policy terms.</p>
<p>But the passage of time also imposes constraint. The closer a government gets to an election, the harder it becomes to take risky decisions. Especially decisions that go to the question of trust.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/189790/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The final stage of the Coalition’s tax cuts, worth more than $240 billion over a decade, is now in the gun sights of many critics, who are calling on Anthony Albanese to dump his promise to deliver it.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1881532022-08-03T04:28:40Z2022-08-03T04:28:40ZGovernment set to legislate its 43% emissions reduction target after Greens announce support<p>The government is now assured it will secure its legislation to enshrine its 43% 2030 emissions reduction target, after Greens leader Adam Bandt pledged his party would support it in both houses. </p>
<p>The government has the numbers on its own in the House of Representatives. In the Senate, it only needs one more vote, apart from the Greens. It expects the vote of ACT crossbencher David Pocock. The bill will be voted on in the lower house this week and will go to the Senate next month.</p>
<p>Bandt’s announcement follows long negotiations with the government which, however, refused to budge on the minor party’s demand for a ban on new coal and gas mines. </p>
<p>The Greens’ decision came after it took two party room meetings to reach their position. Bandt said it was a “consensus” decision. </p>
<p>The government doesn’t require legislation to implement its policy, but has been anxious to put the target into law to send a strong signal including to prospective investors. </p>
<p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said after Bandt’s announcement that while the legislation wasn’t necessary, it “locks in” progress. </p>
<p>The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said the announcement “is in Australia’s national interest and will provide certainty for business”. </p>
<p>The opposition formally decided this week to vote against the legislation. </p>
<p>Bandt told the National Press Club that Labor’s refusal to stop new mines was “ultimately untenable”. </p>
<p>He said Labor might not get a United Nations climate summit, which it will be seeking, if it was willing to allow new projects.</p>
<p>“We will pull every lever at our disposal,” to make a ban happen, he said.</p>
<p>“Labor is set to undo parliament’s work by opening new coal and gas projects, unless we stop them,” Bandt said. </p>
<p>“Over the next six to 12 months the battle will be fought on a number of fronts. We will comb the entire budget for any public money, any subsidies, hand outs or concessions going to coal and gas corporations and amend the budget to remove them. </p>
<p>"We will push to ensure the safeguard mechanism safeguards our future by stopping new coal and gas projects. We will push for a climate trigger in our environment laws. </p>
<p>"We will continue to fight individual projects around the country, like Beetaloo, Scarborough and Barossa. I call on all Australians to join this battle. This battle to save our country, our communities and indeed our whole civilisation from the climate and environment crisis.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, one of the Liberal moderates, Warren Entsch, has given strong support to the Coalition decision to inquire into nuclear power as a potential policy. Entsch told Sky that as coal went out of the system, we had to have “something to back up” renewable alternatives.</p>
<h2>Territories legislation sails through lower house</h2>
<p>Legislation to allow the ACT and the Northern Territory to make laws on voluntary assisted dying has passed the House of Representatives by 99 to 37. </p>
<p>MPs on both sides had a conscience vote. Leader of the House Tony Burke was among several Labor members to vote against the bill, which overturns a 1997 ban on the territories legislating for euthanasia. Liberal leader Peter Dutton and Nationals leader David Littleproud were both yes votes. </p>
<p>The bill will go to the Senate next month, where it is expected to pass.</p>
<h2>UPDATE on climate bill – Liberal to cross floor</h2>
<p>Tasmanian Liberal Bridget Archer told parliament late Wednesday that she will cross the floor and vote for Labor’s climate bill. </p>
<p>“At the end of the day, it’s important to me that when I am back in my
own community, I am able to sincerely say that I used the
opportunity afforded to me with the power of my vote, to stand up
for what they want and need and to move on from this debate.”</p>
<p>She said she had had constructive discussions with Peter Dutton
“about my views and that of the party on this issue. </p>
<p>"While there is much we do agree on, he understands why I have made this
decision. </p>
<p>"I have respect for him and he has my support as our party
formulates our own plan to combat climate change while supporting
the Australian economy. </p>
<p>"However, while that happens, it is important that we do move forward and act now and not delay until the eve of the next election.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188153/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The government is now assured it will secure its legislation to enshrine its 43% 2030 emissions reduction target, after Greens leader Adam Bandt pledged his party would support it in both houses.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1874392022-07-21T10:30:20Z2022-07-21T10:30:20ZGrattan on Friday: Climate bill front and centre when parliament starts but it’s the least of Albanese’s problems<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/475409/original/file-20220721-24-5oek3w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1140%2C283%2C2524%2C1202&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you’re outside staring in, you’d probably say the Albanese government is looking good. If you’re inside gazing out, you’d likely think its challenges appear little short of dire. </p>
<p>Next week the new parliament will commence with a fortnight’s sitting. There’ll be focus on the government-Green negotiations on the legislation for Labor’s 43% climate target. But it’s the economy and COVID that will actually be the more immediately worrying issues. </p>
<p>Treasurer Jim Chalmers, perhaps with an eye to the politics, has been using a megaphone to say he’ll have bad news when he gives a state-of-the-economy address to the House of Representatives on Thursday – a day after the release of the latest inflation figure, expected to be a shocker. </p>
<p>The revised economic projections will be affected by a range of factors, including to an extent the current, still-worsening, COVID wave, which governments are trying to manage without the imposition of restrictions people would no longer accept. </p>
<p>As we confront this wave, it would be desirable for the new parliament to have a repeat of the COVID Senate committee that did good work in the last term in questioning officials and extracting information. </p>
<p>Determined to show it is serious about its promises, the government released on Wednesday a list of the first pieces of legislation it will introduce. </p>
<p>These are bills for aged care reform, a new jobs and skills statutory body, domestic violence leave, and the climate change target. The integrity commission legislation will wait for the September sitting.</p>
<p>Bringing in the bills is the easy bit. Take aged care. The government says its legislation “will put nurses back into nursing homes, it will put a stop to high administration and management fees for home care [ .. ] and it will improve integrity and accountability for residential aged care homes”. </p>
<p>But finding all the needed nurses – to say nothing of the increased number of other staff vital for effective reform – will be enormously difficult.</p>
<p>Those who might have seen Labor’s win as an end to our national climate wars were prematurely optimistic. Ironically, the early days of the new parliament will see another stage in this battle. </p>
<p>Labor doesn’t need to legislate its new target, but wants to do so to underline its intentions and send strong signals to investors and the world in general. To get the legislation through will require the support in the Senate of the Greens and one more senator. </p>
<p>The Greens party room on Wednesday reiterated its view that Labor’s policy is not ambitious enough, but gave leader Adam Bandt authority to negotiate. </p>
<p>After the meeting the Greens said: “Areas of concern remain the adequacy of the target, the need for targets to be ratcheted up and for the bill to operate as a floor not a ceiling, the lack of enforcement mechanisms, and new coal and gas projects that would lift pollution.”</p>
<p>One Greens source says “we’re at the diplomacy table, not in the trenches”.</p>
<p>Labor has indicated it is open to tinkering with detail but won’t budge on core substance. There will be no change in the target, no ban on new mines.</p>
<p>The government can’t afford to make sizeable concessions to the Greens, not least because that would cast doubt on the reliability of its word. It is also anxious to signal it is not hostage to the Greens, despite its dependence on them in the upper house when legislation is contested.</p>
<p>Can the Greens afford to give in to the government and not oppose the bill? They would disappoint their hard-line supporters. They too, in political terms, need differentiation. But if they were to sink the legislation, they’d be accused of putting purist ideology ahead of supporting progressive policy. The Greens have quite a lot on the line in their decision.</p>
<p>All this will take some time to play out. The legislation could go to a Senate committee. The final vote could be a way off.</p>
<p>The Coalition’s “internals” on the climate legislation will be interesting. Peter Dutton has flagged his opposition. “I’m making it very clear to the Labor Party now that we aren’t supporting the legislation,” he told the ABC in June. The much-reduced Liberal moderates are not happy with that “captain’s call” ahead of the party-room discussion. There is speculation one or two might cross the floor. </p>
<p>And what about the teals? Their votes are irrelevant in the lower house, but crossbencher David Pocock’s vote might be needed in the Senate. The government will want to be polite to the teals, but in the end it’s the numbers that count. </p>
<p>The parliamentary fortnight will be closely observed for its tone, its “vibe”, as well as its substance. </p>
<p>While the teals and other crossbenchers won’t be determining outcomes in the House of Representatives, the crossbench there, now numbering 16, will have a significant presence, including a reasonable opportunity to quiz and critique ministers.</p>
<p>When parliament is sitting an opposition has a platform, but the Coalition will be struggling to make the most of it, at least in the foreseeable future. </p>
<p>Dutton has a ragtag bunch to manage, with senior people having trouble finding their feet in their straitened political circumstances. There are still major arguments to be had about how the opposition positions itself. </p>
<p>This is not uncharted ground. Labor faced the same situation after its 2019 defeat when it was even more shattered, because the loss was unexpected. The lesson for Dutton (though it would go against the grain) should be to stay low-key for a while until he’s listened and thought things through. It’s a long road to the next election. </p>
<p>Presently the opposition is speaking with conflicting voices on current issues – for example, it has been divided over whether the border to Bali should be closed to keep out foot and mouth disease.</p>
<p>The government will spruik its own plans in parliament but it will also keep reminding the public of criticisms of the Morrison government. This will complicate the opposition’s attempts to pursue ministers. For instance, it would be logical for the opposition to home in on Minister for Aged Care Anika Wells, given the COVID crisis in residential facilities. But Labor would quickly hark back to the record of former minister Richard Colbeck.</p>
<p>In various areas, the government will be arguing “we can’t turn around a decade of neglect immediately”. That’s true enough although this crutch will reach its use-by date with many voters fairly soon. And it’s not just neglect the Albanese government is grappling with – fresh problems are emerging all the time. </p>
<p>Once Albanese sits in the PM’s chair at the parliamentary dispatch box, the reality of “accepting responsibility” will take on a new intensity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187439/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If you’re outside staring in, you’d probably say the Albanese government is looking good. If you’re inside gazing out, you’d likely think its challenges appear little short of dire. Next week the new parliament…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1837192022-05-24T06:13:30Z2022-05-24T06:13:30ZGood timing and hard work: behind the election’s ‘Greenslide’<p>During Saturday’s election, 31.5% of the voters deserted the major parties, with a swag of female <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/inside-the-teal-wave-how-the-independent-revolution-happened-20220522-p5ani0.html">teal independents</a> tipping Liberal MPs out of their heartland urban seats. </p>
<p>By contrast, the underestimated Greens had a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/22/australian-greens-hails-best-result-ever-with-dramatic-gains-in-lower-house-and-senate">sensational election</a>, surprising many pundits with the strength of their support. </p>
<p>Even though their lower house vote increased by just 1.5% overall, their concentrated support saw the Greens gain two, potentially three, seats in Brisbane. Their traditional strength in the Senate is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/results/senate">set to grow</a>, potentially to an all time high of 12 senators. That would give them the balance of power. </p>
<p>So, how did the Greens do it? A combination of good timing and hard work. The climate election arrived at last, Scott Morrison was deeply unpopular, and the third party of Australian politics harnessed support it had been quietly building for years, especially in conservative-leaning Queensland. The only surprise is that many of us weren’t paying attention. </p>
<h2>How did the Greens do it?</h2>
<p>The Greens have hit a new high-water mark in the lower house with 11.9% of the vote. While good, it’s barely better than their 2010 best of 11.76%. Even so, because of the concentration of their support, their leader Adam Bandt will likely be joined by two other Greens in the lower house and possibly one more. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-big-teal-steal-independent-candidates-rock-the-liberal-vote-183024">The big teal steal: independent candidates rock the Liberal vote</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>If Labor is unable to secure a majority, the Greens will likely support minority government. Australia’s only other Greenslide election was in 2010, when the Greens shared the balance of power in the lower house, and held it in the Senate. They were <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-01/greens-labor-seal-deal/966044">on board</a> then with Labor’s reformist agenda and <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1112/12rp07">smoothed the passage</a> of its bills. </p>
<p>As a result, the minority government was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/datablog/2018/dec/23/turnbull-scores-lower-than-abbott-gillard-and-rudd-on-productivity-in-parliament">our most productive</a> government in recent years. </p>
<h2>Playing to party strengths</h2>
<p>Are these <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-22/queensland-federal-election-greens-politics-analysis/101088630">results a shock</a>? Not really. The party has played to its strengths by targeting specific seats at least since 2010, when they had the biggest swings to their party across the country. That was when <a href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2010-Climate-of-the-Nation-web.pdf">85% of us</a> wanted climate action, before the climate wars set us back a decade. </p>
<p>Every election since has been about growing the Green vote across the country whilst expanding their inner-city strongholds, with very specific targeting of seats like Melbourne (Adam Bandt’s safe seat), Kooyong, Goldstein, Sydney, MacKellar, Warringah, Brisbane, Curtin and Grayndler.</p>
<p>In March 2021, the Greens released their election strategy in a largely neglected but <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22media%2Fpressrel%2F7868529%22">extremely clear</a> press release. They identified nine priority lower house seats, three additional Senate seats, and the balance of power in both houses as party goals. Notably, their campaigning efforts only overlapped the teal independents in the seat of Kooyong. </p>
<p>It looks like they’ll win the three Queensland seats of Ryan, Griffith and Brisbane from, respectively, the Liberals, Liberal National Party and Labor. Adam Bandt is <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/greens-on-the-march-in-queensland-with-four-seats-in-sights-20220411-p5acja.html">now confident</a> the Greens are “on the march” in the sunshine state. That’s quite a turnaround from 2019, where Queensland proved critical to Morrison’s miracle victory. </p>
<h2>From the ground up</h2>
<p>Crucially, Green politics is built from the ground up, beginning with participation at local council level and in state parliaments. </p>
<p>In 2020, the party won two state seats, following their gain of a seat on Brisbane City Council, and have continued to build on that momentum into this election with sophisticated <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/22/how-knocking-on-90000-doors-delivered-queensland-labor-heartland-to-the-greens">grass roots campaigning</a>.</p>
<p>This is a long term effort. In the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/ryan">seat of Ryan</a>, for example, which takes in much of Brisbane’s leafy west and hinterland, the Greens have been slowly building up strength since reaching just under 19% in 2010. On Saturday, Elizabeth Watson-Brown wrested Ryan from the LNP with a primary vote of 31.1% and a two-party-preferred vote of 53.2%. </p>
<p>Traditionally, the Greens have posed more of a threat to Labor. While they have done most damage to the Liberals this election, Labor knows that it is not immune to this rising third force. Adam Bandt’s seat was solidly Labor for over one hundred years. </p>
<h2>A Green mandate</h2>
<p>Gaining the balance of power in either or both houses would give the Greens greater leverage to introduce parts of their agenda. The election result was <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/2022-Election-Analysis-_V2_low-res-single-page-for-web.pdf">clearly a mandate</a> for strengthened climate action, and they will seek that immediately.</p>
<p>What could this look like? Think of the key achievements of the Gillard minority Labor government, which included Green initiatives such as clean energy legislation, carbon pricing and the establishment of the Climate Change Authority, Renewable Energy Agency and Clean Energy Finance Corporation. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-this-the-end-of-the-two-party-system-in-australia-the-greens-teals-and-others-shock-the-major-parties-182672">Is this the end of the two-party system in Australia? The Greens, teals and others shock the major parties</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In 2022, Greens preferences to Labor across the country proved vital in unseating Liberal MPs. Despite Labor’s traditional discomfort with Green incursions into “their” seats, this trend is here to stay. Labor will have to deal with it. The Greens back much of the teal independents’ agenda of climate action and political integrity, making them collectively a powerful crossbench for change.</p>
<p>In his post election speech, Bandt made clear what he wants: a principled, stable Labor government, with an end to coal and gas, a just transition for displaced workers, and investment in climate resilience. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Utt8Z-Jatfs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Greens leader Adam Bandt speaking after the 2022 federal election.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By neglecting environmental issues and failing to adequately tackle Australia’s growing inequality, both major parties have created the political space which Green politics fills. </p>
<p>Over the last decade, as climate-linked crises have intensified, public concern has soared. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/06/eye-watering-climate-change-disasters-will-cost-australia-billions-each-year-study-finds">economic cost</a> of this neglect is already in the billions and climbing. </p>
<p>The Greens and teal independents will likely seek to end fossil fuel subsidies and to ban fossil industry donations to political parties. Had the political parties kept a distance from corrosive fossil fuel influence in the first place, they would not find Greens and teals replacing them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183719/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Crowley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In 2022, the ‘Greenslide’ took seats from major parties. Here’s how they did it.Kate Crowley, Adjunct Associate Professor, Public and Environmental Policy, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1817052022-05-02T03:26:03Z2022-05-02T03:26:03ZPolls show a jump in the Greens vote – but its real path to power lies in reconciling with Labor<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460702/original/file-20220502-16-7d1jod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C6%2C3997%2C2476&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Russell Freeman/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-leads-polling-at-the-campaign-s-halfway-mark-20220501-p5ahiv.html?btis">major poll</a> published yesterday suggests the Greens are set to grow as a political force at this month’s election, showing its primary vote has risen markedly from 10% in 2019 to a current high of 15%.</p>
<p>Recent <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/climate-rises-as-the-no-1-voter-concern-20191115-p53auw">surveys</a> show <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-22/vote-compass-federal-election-issues-data-climate-change-economy/101002116">large numbers</a> of voters see climate change as their biggest concern, and the jump in Greens’ support indicates the issue is determining the way many people plan to vote.</p>
<p>The party goes to next month’s election armed with ambitious, big-spending policies. It strongly <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/greens-expecting-to-hold-balance-of-power-20220410-p5acem.html">fancies its chances</a> in at least five lower house seats and hopes to pick up three more Senate seats.</p>
<p>But for the Greens, the path to real power lies in a hung parliament where they can seek to extract policy concessions from a minority Labor government. The Greens and Labor have a <a href="https://www.mup.com.au/books/whitlams-children-electronic-book-text">mixed record</a> of working together, but can learn from past experience. So let’s take a closer look at what we can expect from the Greens in a hung parliament.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="rows of cupcakes bearing Greens logo" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460708/original/file-20220502-21-8q34bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The sweet smell of success: The real path to power for the Greens lies in a hung parliament.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">David Crosling/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Seeking the balance of power</h2>
<p>Opinion polls earlier in the election campaign put the Greens at <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/federal-election-2022-newspoll-and-ipsos-polls-yet-to-see-big-impact-from-campaign/cf47963e-b9b3-4a8c-84c0-f2f70562dbd7">between 11%</a> <a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2022/04/25/ipsos-55-45-to-labor/">and 13%</a> of the primary vote.</p>
<p>In 2010 they polled <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1112/12rp07">11.76%</a> in the House of Representatives (giving them a shared balance of power) and 13% in the Senate (delivering the balance of power outright).</p>
<p>The 2010 election led to the first federal hung Parliament in 70 years, although these are common outcomes in the states and territories. Labor Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s deal with the Greens in 2010 to form a minority government ended acrimoniously.</p>
<p>Labor leader Anthony Albanese has <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-rules-out-fringe-deal-in-rebuff-to-greens-on-climate-20220207-p59uj9.html">ruled out</a> such a power-sharing deal this time around, as Bill Shorten did ahead of the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/no-deals-major-parties-rule-out-return-to-gillardera-coalition-government-20160510-goqst4.html">2016</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/26/bill-shorten-rules-out-joint-climate-policy-process-with-greens-if-labor-wins-power">2019</a> elections. </p>
<p>But if a hung parliament does eventuate and Labor refuses a power-sharing deal, it would be left clinging to power, vote by vote. In any case, Labor would have to negotiate support from the Greens and independents in order to govern – and offer a swag of policy concessions in return.</p>
<p>The Greens are also a chance of recapturing the balance of power in the Senate, which means their influence after May 21 may still be significant.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-lead-steady-in-newspoll-and-gains-in-resolve-how-the-polls-moved-during-past-campaigns-181953">Labor's lead steady in Newspoll and gains in Resolve; how the polls moved during past campaigns</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The ability to influence policy is key to the legitimacy and relevance of minor parties such as the Greens. </p>
<p>Under the Gillard Labor minority government, the Greens had significant policy <a href="https://greensmps.org.au/articles/10-years-greens-labor-agreement-formula-progressive-change">success</a>. They pushed Labor towards a carbon pricing policy that briefly turned around energy emissions growth, and a <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fhansardr%2Fde045419-4cf3-4a48-a502-ec68c5e81782%2F0009%22;src1=sm1">dental health</a> package for children and low-income earners. </p>
<p>These signature policies were short-lived though; abolished by Abbott Coalition government after the 2013 election.</p>
<p>Some Green initiatives <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Budget_Office/About_the_PBO">survived</a>, however, such as the Parliamentary Budget Office, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.</p>
<p>Relations between Labor and the Greens eventually failed once the Gillard government adopted a watered-down <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/b97aac1a-8567-11df-aa2e-00144feabdc0">mining tax</a>. The Greens also <a href="https://greensmps.org.au/articles/christine-milne-addresses-national-press-club">decried</a> Labor’s failure to make headway on environmental protection, national heritage, the Great Barrier Reef, Tasmania’s wilderness, the Murray Darling Basin and more.</p>
<p>So what policy demands can we expect from the Greens this time around?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="man and woman shake hands at table" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460710/original/file-20220502-19-3v8d4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Relations between Labor and the Greens eventually failed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alan Porritt/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A big policy agenda</h2>
<p>In the case of a hung parliament, the Greens would demand a <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/greens-will-demand-coal-gas-moratorium-as-condition-for-support-20220206-p59u54.html">halt</a> to all new coal, gas and oil projects for at least six months while they negotiate with Labor over climate policy. It would also push for a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/apr/28/greens-to-push-for-coal-export-levy-if-they-hold-balance-of-power">coal export levy</a> to fund disaster recovery and clean export industries.</p>
<p>In their 2022 electoral platform, the Greens are again aiming high. Their <a href="https://greens.org.au/platform">headline</a> policies include:</p>
<ul>
<li>a treaty with First Nations people</li>
<li>free dental and mental healthcare</li>
<li>wiping out student debt </li>
<li>building one million publicly owned, affordable, sustainable homes</li>
<li>overhauling labour laws to outlaw insecure work and increase wages. </li>
</ul>
<p>Should the Greens hold the balance of power, they would likely also call for the next government to urgently release the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/action-on-environment-report-card-stalls-as-government-slow-to-release-20220406-p5ab75.html">delayed</a> State of the Environment report, and to implement the recommendations from a 2020 independent review into Australia’s <a href="https://epbcactreview.environment.gov.au/resources/final-report">environment laws</a>.</p>
<p>The party’s <a href="https://greens.org.au/platform/enviro#greenaus">environment platform</a> offers the usual extensive suite of policies and detailed measures to address the extinction crisis, green jobs, clean water, caring for country, sustainable agriculture, preventing animal cruelty, eliminating single-use plastics and improving ocean health.</p>
<p>As well as phasing out coal, oil and gas, the Green’s <a href="https://greens.org.au/platform/climate">climate policy</a> includes:</p>
<ul>
<li>banning political donations from fossil fuel companies</li>
<li>installing cleaner, cheaper power for homes and business</li>
<li>assisting workers in the clean energy transition</li>
<li>funding climate resilience</li>
<li>supporting cleaner cars, electricity and manufacturing.</li>
</ul>
<p>Their energy plan allocates A$17.1 billion to electrify Australian homes, $14.8 billion electrifying small businesses and $12.6 billion installing <a href="https://naturalsolar.com.au/solar-news/solar-battery-boom/">small-scale solar</a> batteries.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-it-needs-it-australia-can-draw-on-significant-experience-of-minority-government-62095">If it needs it, Australia can draw on significant experience of minority government</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Where next for the Greens?</h2>
<p>If the polls are right, the Greens are a chance to reclaim the balance of power in the Senate and to share the balance of power in the House of Representatives. </p>
<p>In the longer term, the Greens aspire to <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/pale-labor-needs-greens-says-bob-brown/news-story/aa91d395809e700cceba6d613c7e43c4">replace Labor</a> in government. But as experience in Tasmania and the ACT shows, Greens ministers can successfully serve in Labor cabinets.</p>
<p>For now, the Greens are nipping at the heels of the major parties. The party’s best prospects for realising its policies in national government lie in reconciling with Labor and learning to work in coalition.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-pledges-to-make-gender-pay-equity-a-fair-work-act-objective-182281">Albanese pledges to make gender pay equity a Fair Work Act objective</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181705/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Crowley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Greens and Labor have a mixed record of working together, but can learn from past experience.Kate Crowley, Adjunct Associate Professor, Public and Environmental Policy, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1806712022-04-12T03:43:28Z2022-04-12T03:43:28ZVoters love the Greens’ message more than ever – but it may not lead to a surge of votes for them<p>The Greens have long battled against the perception they’re the radical fringe or the electoral ingenues of Australian politics.</p>
<p>Today, neither of these labels bedevil them in quite the same way they might have previously. </p>
<p>Two factors make it increasingly difficult to typecast the Greens in these terms. First, the issue that elevated the Greens to electoral prominence – the environment – is no longer an abstraction for the public.</p>
<p>The second is the party is a known quantity. The Greens’ federal leader, Adam Bandt, is ensconced in one of the safest federal seats in the country, and is also one of Australia’s most “believable” politicians, according to the <a href="https://www.perthnow.com.au/business/morrisons-believability-questioned-in-new-poll-which-finds-some-have-never-heard-of-albanese-c-6362164">Believability Index 2022</a>.</p>
<p>So what are the Greens’ prospects this federal election? </p>
<p>Although the electoral and political context is more amenable to the Greens’ message than ever before, it may not translate into a dramatically improved vote.</p>
<h2>More experienced</h2>
<p>The Greens’ experience is showing in their approach to the campaign.</p>
<p>The messaging around the party’s policy agenda is more disciplined and strategic. </p>
<p>Consider, for example, its net zero carbon economy agenda. The party’s commitment to a net zero carbon economy is unchanged, but it’s more adept at foregrounding the importance of a transition “plan” and guaranteeing affected communities won’t be left behind. Bandt even <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/feb/25/greens-unveil-19bn-plan-to-subsidise-coal-workers-to-transition-away-from-fossil-fuel-jobs">paid homage</a> to coal workers:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We owe coal workers a debt of thanks for powering our country. We don’t need to choose between taking urgent climate action and supporting coal communities. We can do both.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Crowded electoral space</h2>
<p>Campaigns are always noisy affairs, and 2022 is no exception.</p>
<p>In addition to the usual problem of visibility in an electoral context dominated by the two major parties, compounding the situation for the Greens is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-07/clive-palmer-united-australia-party-election-spending-influence/100973064">Clive Palmer’s</a> extraordinary media advertising purchase power, and the fascination with the “teal” <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7665996/the-teal-wave-the-new-breed-of-independents-shaking-up-australian-politics/">independents</a>.</p>
<p>The problem of visibility in a crowded electoral space is reflected in the opinion polls.</p>
<p>If current trends are any indication, the Green vote won’t surge (with the possible exception of stronger growth in Queensland) but will remain stable at <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/victory-within-albanese-s-grasp-but-morrison-still-in-the-race-20220404-p5aaoy.html">10-11%</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-wentworth-project-polling-shows-voters-prefer-albanese-for-pm-and-put-climate-issue-first-in-teal-battle-179839">The Wentworth Project: polling shows voters prefer Albanese for PM, and put climate issue first in 'teal' battle</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Seats to watch</h2>
<p>Nevertheless, every election presents opportunities, and the Greens rate their prospects in <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/02/19/greens-reveal-their-target-seats/164518920013357">eight lower house seats</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/bris">Brisbane</a> (LNP), <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/grif">Griffith</a> (Labor) and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/ryan">Ryan</a> (LNP) in Queensland</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/higg">Higgins</a> (Liberal), <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/kooy">Kooyong</a> (Liberal) and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/macn">Macnamara</a> (Labor) in Victoria</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/rich">Richmond</a> (Labor) in NSW </p></li>
<li><p>and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/canb">Canberra</a> (Labor) in the ACT.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>With the exception of Richmond, these are inner metropolitan seats. They’re also seats where the Greens have attracted over 20% of the primary vote, and the party has shown consistent vote gains over the past three electoral cycles. </p>
<p>However, some of these seats are more promising propositions than others. The Greens’ prospects are strongest in Liberal-held seats where their candidate has previously finished in second position, or in Labor-held seats where there is little difference in the Greens and Labors’ primary vote. Another useful requirement is that the incumbent’s primary vote is under 40%. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1468502335701729284"}"></div></p>
<p>Based on this, Brisbane, Ryan, Kooyong and Higgins are likely dim prospects. In these seats, the incumbent’s primary vote was over 45% in 2019 and, with the exception of Kooyong, the ALP candidate polled in second place. The swing against the incumbent is likely to benefit Labor, assuming the electoral momentum in Labor’s favour holds. </p>
<p>The outlier of the four Liberal seats is perhaps Kooyong, because of Monique Ryan, one of the “teal” independents. </p>
<p>Kooyong becomes very competitive for the Greens if Ryan is able to attract double digit support away from Liberal incumbent Josh Frydenberg, but fails to surpass the Greens’ vote. If so, it might be an exciting finish for the Greens, even if Frydenberg is still widely tipped to win. </p>
<p>The situation is more dynamic in Canberra, Macnamara and Griffith. Here, Labor’s primary vote is under 40% (or slightly over 40% in the seat of Canberra) and the Liberals typically finish in second position behind Labor. </p>
<p>These seats become winnable for the Greens if the Liberal vote collapses and the Greens emerge as the main beneficiary of this collapse. Under these conditions, these seats should become a two-way contest between Labor and the Greens. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1512956656170455040"}"></div></p>
<h2>Preferences?</h2>
<p>Whether the Greens succeed in winning these seats will, of course, depend on how the preferences of excluded Coalition candidates split. </p>
<p>We don’t have much federal data on this but based on the distribution of Liberal preferences in the seat of <a href="https://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/HouseDivisionTcpFlow-17496-228.htm">Melbourne in 2013</a>, the overwhelming majority of these votes transferred to Labor. </p>
<p>Yet more recent <a href="https://antonygreen.com.au/analysis-of-the-2020-queensland-election-result/">state electoral data</a> indicates the Greens can also emerge as the main beneficiaries of the votes of excluded Liberal candidates.</p>
<p>Of course, there are still a lot of unknowns, such as the actual size of Labor’s much vaunted swing and in which states and seats, as well as the lower house preference strategies of the major parties.</p>
<p>In spite of the Greens’ optimism, its sluggish <a href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au/">ad spend</a> in most of their targeted lower seats suggests they’re quite cautious about their prospects.</p>
<p>Whatever the outcome in the House of Representatives, the Senate presents an opportunity to build the party’s representation in the powerful upper house. Of the Greens’ nine serving senators, three are up for reelection.</p>
<p>If the party is able to maintain its primary vote, it will swell its ranks to 12 senators, returning it the balance of power in the Senate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180671/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Narelle Miragliotta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Although the political context is more amenable to the Greens’ message than ever before, it may not translate into a dramatically improved vote.Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1734302021-12-08T07:20:50Z2021-12-08T07:20:50ZPolitics with Michelle Grattan: Adam Bandt on hopes for a dozen Greens senators and a ‘power-sharing’ parliament.<p>Greens leader Adam Bandt is hopeful his party could have 12 senators in the next parliament. </p>
<p>Only three of the party’s nine senators are up for re-election (in Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania). So, assuming they hold their seats, with possible wins in South Australia, Queensland and NSW there is the opportunity to bring the total to a dozen, he says. </p>
<p>Bandt says that in 2019, 10% of Australians voted for the Greens and “that is a very strong show of support and one that I hope will grow and that will help put us in a strong position after the next election.”</p>
<p>Given there’s currently a lot of speculation about the possibility of a hung parliament, Bandt says the Greens have “got a real chance of being in balance of power in both houses of parliament.”</p>
<p>With the government talking up a scare about a Labor-Green alliance in government – which Labor says it would not enter – Bandt says if there was a “power sharing” parliament the Greens would seek to work with Labor. But “we would approach that situation with strong principles, but an open mind as to how best to ensure that we have a stable, effective and progressive government to replace the current terrible Morrison government”.</p>
<p>“There will be principles that we have and policies that we want to see enacted. We want to tax the billionaires, get dental and mental health care into Medicare and act on coal and gas. They will be the priorities for us.”</p>
<p>“I think people want to see politicians and parties work together, especially on something so important as the climate. We in the Greens are willing to do that.”</p>
<p>On this core issue for their party, the Greens are firm that “we need to do what the science requires, and it is clear now that after Glasgow, where the world reaffirmed the commitment to limit global heating to 1.5 degrees, there’s no room for coal, oil and gas in that future.</p>
<p>The Greens want Australia’s coal-fired power stations and coal exports phased out by 2030.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/173430/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Greens leader Adam Bandt discusses his hope that the Greens could have 12 senators in parliament after the election. As well as his thoughts on climate and the idea of a Labor-Greens allianceMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1673632021-09-10T05:52:19Z2021-09-10T05:52:19ZVital Signs: the Greens’ super-profits tax idea could end up burning muscle, not fat<p>Earlier this year, the Australian Greens proposed a <a href="https://greens.org.au/taxthebillionaires">wealth tax</a> on billionaires straight out of the (former US presidential candidate) Elizabeth Warren playbook.</p>
<p>This week it added what it called a “tycoon tax” that would tax so-called <a href="https://greensmps.org.au/articles/tycoon-tax-raise-338-billion">super-profits</a> made by companies with annual turnovers of more than A$100 million.</p>
<p>It might not be the winner it seems. </p>
<p>If Australian taxpayers want to get more tax from super-profitable companies there might be better ways to do it.</p>
<p>Under the Greens proposal some companies, even large ones, would escape the extra annual tax. It would apply only to that part of their post-tax profits that exceeded an “allowance for a corporate equity”. </p>
<p>The allowance would be 5% of the value of the company plus the long-term bond rate, which at present is 1.2%, meaning at the moment the threshold would be a post-tax return on capital of 6.2%</p>
<p>Extra profit — so-called super-profit above the threshold — would be taxed at 40%, meaning almost half of it would lost.</p>
<h2>An idea with a backstory</h2>
<p>The Greens system is the system (and the rate) recommended by the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_1_consolidated.pdf">Henry Tax Review</a> for taxing the larger-than-normal profits from mining, and it’s the system used since 1988 for the larger than normal profits from <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Petroleum-resource-rent-tax/">off-shore petroleum</a>.</p>
<p>What the Greens propose would apply not only to the earnings of Australian companies but also to the share of a multinational’s operations in Australia.</p>
<p>The mining sector would be dealt with on a project-by-project basis rather a company-by-company basis, which is what happened with Labor’s short-lived <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Minerals-resource-rent-tax/">minerals resource rent tax</a> (also 40%) between 2012 and 2014.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420412/original/file-20210910-23-1f5t4tn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A 2010 Perth rally against the Resource Super Profit Tax proposed by the Rudd Labor government. Josh Jerga/AAP.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Josh Jerga/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some years ago the idea was put forward by the <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/1783/unrealised-gains_the_competitive_possibilities_of_tax_reform_final_14-6-2009-pdf.pdf?1631404737">Business Council of Australia</a> as part of a plan to remove the tax on normal company profits (something the Greens are not proposing to do). </p>
<p>In its 2009 submission to the Henry Tax Review, the Business Council said taxing only returns that exceeded a “normal” return had the “potential to stimulate investment both for locally based companies and inbound investors”.</p>
<p>But there are problems with the idea, as the Business Council acknowledged.</p>
<h2>It’s hard to get right</h2>
<p>One problem is that it is hard to know where to set the threshold between “normal” profit and “super” profit (what economists call “economic rent” which is returns in excess of those needed to justify the activity).</p>
<p>The threshold is unlikely to be 5% plus the bond rate across the entire economy.</p>
<p>If we end up not only taxing excessive economic rents but also genuine needed returns we might damage the engine of the economy. We would be like an athlete who is burning muscle as well as fat.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-resources-tax-back-to-the-future-281">The resources tax: back to the future?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Investors take a risk when they put money into a business. </p>
<p>Sometimes the investment goes well, other times it will fail. Grabbing 40% of the extra upside, but leaving investors to wear all of the downside or accumulate losses to offset against future profits, would create an asymmetry.</p>
<p>It’d seem like “heads Adam Bandt wins, tails I lose”.</p>
<p>Many of the companies that make so-called super-profits would stay here grudgingly. The big five banks make profits way in excess of the threshold. Some multinational franchise operations probably make them as well.</p>
<h2>We can’t be certain companies would stay</h2>
<p>But other companies might decide to wind down their operations in Australia, redirecting investment to somewhere else. Jobs and wages might suffer.</p>
<p>Also it would be hard to measure the capital base of the the company to work out how to measure the return and calculate how much of it was above 6.2%.</p>
<p>The Greens did the right thing getting the independent Parliamentary Budget Office to assess how much the tax would raise.</p>
<p>The PBO’s best guess is that the mining component would raise $124.78 billion over 10 years and the non-mining component $213.9 billion.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coalition-to-axe-mining-tax-but-petroleum-will-keep-on-giving-17952">Coalition to axe mining tax, but petroleum will keep on giving</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The costing of one of those components (the <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/1781/Corporate_Super_Profits_Tax_PDF.pdf">non-mining component</a>) includes so-called “behavioural responses” which in this case means it assumes 20% less tax would be paid than calculated as companies restructured their affairs.</p>
<p>That might be too mild an assumption for such a big tax change.</p>
<p>The costing of the <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/1782/Mining_Super_Profits_Tax_PDF.pdf">mining component</a> has not been adjusted. Anyone who remembers Kevin Rudd’s mining super-profits tax remembers the threats of big behavioural responses. They helped end Rudd’s prime ministership.</p>
<h2>There are more promising ideas</h2>
<p>On Monday at the ANU Crawford Leadership Forum, former Australian finance minister Mathias Cormann, who is now secretary general of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, outlined a more promising proposal.</p>
<p>The OECD has developed a worldwide plan to get multinationals with annual revenues of more than €750 million (about A$1.2 billion) to pay a minimum tax rate of <a href="https://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/cormann-outlines-major-tax-reform-in-crawford-address">at least 15%</a> all over the world.</p>
<p>US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wants to go further. She is working on a global minimum corporate rate of 21%.</p>
<p>They are ambitious plans, but they have a real chance of success.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167363/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Holden is President-elect of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.</span></em></p>Taxing super profits sounds like a a good idea, but it’s hard to get right and there might be better ways to get more company tax.Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1632002021-06-22T13:38:26Z2021-06-22T13:38:26ZSenate knocks out regulation allowing ARENA to fund carbon capture and blue hydrogen<p>The Senate on Tuesday night disallowed a government regulation that would have allowed the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) to invest in technologies such as carbon capture and storage and blue hydrogen using fossil fuel.</p>
<p>Labor, Greens and crossbench votes defeated the regulation, so preventing the expansion of ARENA’s remit beyond its present area of solar and wind renewable energy.</p>
<p>The regulation would have enabled ARENA to support a wide range of technologies.</p>
<p>They would have included energy efficiency projects, carbon capture technologies, blue hydrogen from gas using CCS, energy storage technologies to back up renewable energy, technologies that reduce emissions from aluminium and steel, and soil carbon.</p>
<p>The $192.5 million new funding involved included money for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, microgrids in rural and regional areas, and technologies to make heavy trucks more fuel efficient and to reduce the energy consumption of heavy industry.</p>
<p>Energy minister Angus Taylor tweeted after the vote: “Labor have shown their true colours - opposing investment in new clean technologies which will create jobs and economic opportunities”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1407295753152733188"}"></div></p>
<p>Greens leader Adam Bandt said the disallowance was “a massive blow to this coal and gas-fired government”.</p>
<p>“First the Liberals tried to abolish ARENA and then redirect its funds to coal and gas, but by backing the Greens motion, the Senate has just saved ARENA,” Bandt said. </p>
<p>Labor’s energy spokesman Chris Bowen tweeted: “The LNP keeps attacking ARENA and the CEFC [Clean Energy Finance Corporation] and Labor will continue to defend them”.</p>
<h2>Mark Vaile declines chancellor position after campaign over coal connection</h2>
<p>Education Minister Alan Tudge and outspoken Labor MP Joel Fitzgibbon have condemned the campaign that led former deputy prime minister Mark Vaile to withdrew from becoming University of Newcastle chancellor because of his association with the coal industry.</p>
<p>University staff, alumni and a group of donors to the university reacted strongly at the prospect of Vaile, who is chairman of Whitehaven Coal, taking the position.</p>
<p>The university is committed to becoming carbon neutral by 2025, a policy Vaile had said he supported.</p>
<p>But after the backlash he said, “I’ve just taken the view that it’s in the best interests of the university and the community that it serves if I decline the invitation and withdraw from the process.”</p>
<p>Tudge said it was very concerning Vaile had “been forced to turn down this role because of ideological pressure”.</p>
<p>“At a time when we are trying to promote and enforce free speech and academic freedom on campus, we should not have a very competent person forced out of an important job because of this cancel culture,” Tudge said.</p>
<p>Fitzgibbon, who represents the seat of Hunter, went further. “A new form of McCarthyism has crept into Australian culture and it’s alive and well in the Hunter region, deep in coal economy heartland”, he told parliament on Tuesday night.. </p>
<p>He said “this 21st Century version of the Cold War doctrine has been on display at our local university where a quite extraordinary, misleading, ideological, and shrill campaign” resulted in Vaile declining the offer to be chancellor. </p>
<p>Fitzgibbon said “the crime” Vaile had been “publicly shamed for” was his association with the coal industry.</p>
<p>“It’s a slippery slope. Today the excessive progressives target those associated with the coal industry. No doubt tomorrow it will be anyone associated with the oil, gas, and fuel refining industries. What’s next? The meat processing industry? The steel manufacturing sector?” </p>
<p>Fitzgibbon pointed out that while chairing Whitehaven Coal, Vaile also chaired an investment fund which had $1 billion worth of wind and solar technologies under management. </p>
<p>Vaile was deputy prime minister from 2005 to 2007.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163200/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Senate has disallowed a government regulation that would have allowed the ARENA to invest in technologies such as carbon capture and storage and “blue hydrogen” using fossil fuel.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1482542020-10-20T00:21:54Z2020-10-20T00:21:54ZYou’ve probably heard of the Green New Deal in the US — is it time for one in Australia?<p>After the 2008 global financial crisis, Green New Deals were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/aug/03/economicgrowth.climatechange">proposed</a> in various countries as a way to pick up the pieces of the economy. The general idea is to create jobs while rebuilding societies, by targeting environmental innovation as the key to economic recovery.</p>
<p>We’re in the midst of another global financial crisis that’s infinitely more crippling than in 2008, and the global pandemic that brought it on shows no signs of easing. So is now really the right time to, yet again, advocate for a Green New Deal? </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-it-doesnt-make-economic-sense-to-ignore-climate-change-in-our-recovery-from-the-pandemic-137282">Why it doesn't make economic sense to ignore climate change in our recovery from the pandemic</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In his speech to the National Press Club <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/greens-renew-call-for-green-new-deal-describe-morrisons-climate-policies-as-criminal-90588/">last week</a>, national Greens leader Adam Bandt reiterated his push for the deal. He lambasted the Morrison government’s economic response to COVID-19 in the federal budget, which <a href="https://theconversation.com/backwards-federal-budget-morrison-government-never-fails-to-disappoint-on-climate-action-147659">largely shunned</a> renewable energy investment, calling it “criminal”.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://greens.org.au/campaigns/green-new-deal">Greens’</a> proposal echoes <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/albo-and-the-green-new-deal-great-name-for-a-band-but-is-it-good-policy-27424/">Labor</a>, business, unions and environmental <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/22/australian-government-urged-to-back-sustainable-covid-19-recovery-with-clean-energy-transition">groups</a>, and even <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/enormous-opportunities-nsw-s-green-economic-recovery-from-covid-19-20200906-p55srz.html">some conservatives</a>, who think green policies are vital to strengthen the economy post-pandemic. </p>
<p>And they’re right, the Green New Deal is explicitly designed to assist recovery after a crisis. With many countries already taking on similar ideas, the Coalition government’s steadfast investment in fossil fuels will only hold Australia back. </p>
<h2>What is a Green New Deal?</h2>
<p>The Green New Deal is an environmental version of economic stimulus, modelled upon US President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/20/roosevelts-new-deal">massive public spending</a> to create jobs after the 1930s depression.</p>
<p>It couples climate action with social action, creating jobs while reducing emissions, and reducing energy costs by adopting renewables. It’d come <a href="https://news.stanford.edu/2019/03/28/strengths-weaknesses-green-new-deal/">at a cost</a>, however, to the fossil fuel industry.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-adam-bandt-on-greens-hopes-for-future-power-sharing-131466">Politics with Michelle Grattan: Adam Bandt on Greens' hopes for future power sharing</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://greens.org.au/campaigns/green-new-deal">The Greens want Australia</a> to quit coal by 2030, and have an independent authority, Renew Australia, to manage a just transition for workers, create jobs and see no one left behind in the transition to 100% renewable energy.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/some-say-neoliberals-have-destroyed-the-world-but-now-they-want-to-save-it-is-scott-morrison-listening-148167">Even the International Monetary Fund</a> sees a global green fiscal stimulus, with investment in climate change action and transitioning to a low carbon economy, as the right response to the COVID crisis. </p>
<h2>Green New Deals around the world</h2>
<p>In the socially democratic Scandinavian countries, green-led economic recovery has been the go-to policy response to political, banking, fiscal and resource-based economic crises in recent decades. </p>
<p>Energy taxation, offset by cuts in personal income tax, and social security contributions have driven economic recovery. As a result, Nordic economies <a href="https://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1146911/FULLTEXT05.pdf">have grown</a> by 28% from 2000–17, while carbon emissions have fallen by 18%.</p>
<p>In late 2019, before the onset of COVID, the European Union <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/the-european-green-deal-must-be-at-the-heart-of-the-covid-19-recovery/">announced a</a> Green New Deal worth €1 trillion in public and private investment over the next decade to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/green-deal-seeks-to-make-europe-the-first-climate-neutral-continent-by-2050-128887">'Green Deal' seeks to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, this funding is <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/3-challenges-covid-19-european-green-deal-european-commission/">no longer assured</a>. The COVID crisis has put a hole in EU finances, caused divisions over spending priorities and seen few environmental strings attached to member country bailouts. </p>
<p>In the US, the Green New Deal <a href="https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/what-ever-happened-to-the-green-new-deal">featured strongly</a> in the Obama administration’s grappling with the global financial crisis. Now, during the pandemic, it’s featuring again as a proposal from the Democrats. </p>
<p>Between September 2008 and December 2009, South Korea and China outstripped the post-GFC efforts of the rest of the G20 nations with their astonishing <a href="https://voxeu.org/article/urgently-needed-global-green-new-deal">green stimulus spending</a> of 5% and 3.1%, respectively, of GDP.</p>
<p>Today, South Korea is using its COVID response to trigger environmentally sustainable economic growth, <a href="https://theconversation.com/south-koreas-green-new-deal-shows-the-world-what-a-smart-economic-recovery-looks-like-145032">spending US$61.9 billion</a> to invest in wind, solar, smart grids, renewables, electric vehicles and recycling.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-koreas-green-new-deal-shows-the-world-what-a-smart-economic-recovery-looks-like-145032">South Korea's Green New Deal shows the world what a smart economic recovery looks like</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It’s clear nations around the world have decided a Green New Deal is exactly the right stimulus response to crises, including the current fallout from the global pandemic. So how is Australia tracking? </p>
<h2>Australia risks being left behind</h2>
<p>The lessons for Australia are, firstly, that it risks being left behind in the technological advances that come with shifting to a greener economy, if it neglects the environment in its COVID stimulus planning.</p>
<p>It should embrace the COVID crisis and the climate crisis as dual challenges, given Australia’s <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/CC_MVSA0143-Briefing-Paper-Australias-Rising-Emissions_V8-FA_Low-Res_Single-Pages3.pdf">urgent need</a> to reduce its emissions in electricity, transport, stationary energy, fugitive emissions and industrial processes.</p>
<p>Australia can be confident investment in clean energy that sets it on the path to carbon neutrality by 2050 will not only be rewarded economically, but also diplomatically, as it joins the global, willing climate coalition. </p>
<p>The UN chief economist, Elliott Harris, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australia-must-place-climate-action-at-centre-of-coronavirus-recovery-chief-un-economist-says">has called for</a> Australia and other nations to </p>
<blockquote>
<p>place more ambitious climate action and investment in clean energy at the centre of their COVID-19 recovery plans.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Instead, the Coalition government has given fossil fuels <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/fossil-fuels-get-four-times-more-covid-stimulus-than-renewables-report-says-44849/">four times more</a> stimulus funding than renewables, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/backwards-federal-budget-morrison-government-never-fails-to-disappoint-on-climate-action-147659">has prioritised</a> coal-fired power, carbon capture and storage, and gas industry expansion in its recent federal budget. </p>
<p>This is a risky investment strategy. The International Energy Agency sees a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-19/coal-outlook-gloomy-says-international-energy-agency/12774130">poor economic future</a> for fossil fuels, with demand for coal on the decline and jobs in renewables expected to increase.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/backwards-federal-budget-morrison-government-never-fails-to-disappoint-on-climate-action-147659">'Backwards' federal budget: Morrison government never fails to disappoint on climate action</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, the government’s COVID advisory commission — led by a former mining executive, and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/13/zali-steggall-increasingly-concerned-about-morrison-governments-covid-commission">criticised by</a> independent MP Zali Steggall for lack of transparency — is recommending a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/11/australias-covid-commission-downplays-green-recovery-and-confirms-gas-push?">gas-led, not green-led, recovery</a>.</p>
<p>If the Coalition were to attempt it, a Green New Deal would ease the shift away from fossil fuels. It would focus, as such deals do elsewhere, on creating jobs by accelerating the transition to a low-carbon economy. It’s time to get on board.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/148254/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Crowley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Many countries have decided a Green New Deal is exactly the right stimulus response to the COVID crisis. Australia’s steadfast investment in fossil fuels will only hold us back.Kate Crowley, Associate Professor, Public and Environmental Policy, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1448692020-08-25T05:57:11Z2020-08-25T05:57:11ZWhere are the Greens? As Di Natale leaves, Bandt must find a spotlight for his party in a pandemic<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354519/original/file-20200825-14-173er5g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=58%2C29%2C4771%2C3052&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Erik Anderson/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Tuesday, former Greens leader Richard Di Natale gave his <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/richard-di-natale-to-give-farewell-speech-to-the-senate/12591998">farewell speech</a> to the Senate. </p>
<p>The party has now had six months to get used to its <a href="https://theconversation.com/adam-bandt-elected-unopposed-as-new-greens-leader-131126">new leader, Adam Bandt</a>. But COVID-19 has made the year far more challenging than the Greens could possibly have expected when they swapped leaders back in February. </p>
<h2>What does Di Natale leave behind?</h2>
<p>Di Natale leaves parliament having been a senator for ten years and the party’s leader for five. </p>
<p>After his <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6892729/mp-leaves-parliament-for-coronavirus-test/?cs=17318">surprise resignation</a> to spend more time with his young family, Di Natale (a medical doctor by background) now leaves parliament at the height of a pandemic. </p>
<p>His legacy can best be seen as a steadying one: he stabilised the party after it suffered a <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-2013-brings-a-mixed-result-for-the-greens-17524">form slump</a> at the 2013 federal election - where the Greens had a swing of more than 3% against them in the lower house. This followed the <a href="https://theconversation.com/government-didnt-walk-away-from-the-greens-but-milne-needed-to-ditch-labor-12308">bad blood</a> and bad publicity of the power-sharing agreement with the Gillard Labor government. </p>
<p>In 2015, when <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-greens-leader-wants-to-send-a-message-to-those-with-mainstream-values-41370">Di Natale became leader</a>, the party was also riven by <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/nsw-greens-branches-call-on-lee-rhiannon-to-hand-over-reins-20180410-p4z8oi.html">infighting in NSW</a> and <a href="https://www.themonthly.com.au/today/paddy-manning/2018/22/2018/1529646013/green-tensions-build">Victoria</a>, with Queensland recovering from earlier <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/founding-fathers-turn-on-urban-greens/news-story/9b5aae8c62a6b9b316083e090d98ee44">internal divisions</a>. </p>
<p>Yet by 2019, these tensions were largely resolved, with Di Natale successfully taking a hands-off approach, in contrast to his more <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/29/greens-acrimony-bob-brown-unloads-on-lee-rhiannon-and-nsw-party">interventionist predecessors</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-bob-brown-taught-australians-to-talk-about-and-care-for-the-wilderness-131559">How Bob Brown taught Australians to talk about, and care for, the 'wilderness'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And while the party has still <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/mixed-greens-result-disappoints-but-could-deliver-senate-balance-of-power-20190519-p51oyd.html">not managed</a> to increase its lower house representation (from one), the Greens retained all six of its senators up for re-election at the 2019 federal election. </p>
<p>So when Bandt <a href="https://theconversation.com/adam-bandt-elected-unopposed-as-new-greens-leader-131126">took over as leader</a>, he started on the front foot.</p>
<h2>The change to Bandt</h2>
<p>Back in February, the Greens were sad about Di Natale’s departure (who was for the most part well-liked), but genuinely <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/a-leader-for-the-times-will-voters-get-on-the-bandtwagon-20200206-p53yiy.html">excited about their future</a> with Bandt at the helm. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Adam Bandt and Richard Di Natale standing against a Melbourne city skyline." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354508/original/file-20200825-14-14ds3lj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Adam Bandt took over from Richard Di Natale as Greens leader in February.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Erik Anderson/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The summer’s massive bushfires had driven climate change to the forefront of the Australian political agenda and Bandt, having taken over from Di Natale in a swift transition, was riding a wave of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/adam-bandt-elected-new-leader-of-the-greens-20200204-p53xgj.html">media attention</a>. </p>
<p>As a former industrial lawyer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/adam-bandt-will-be-a-tougher-leader-but-the-challenge-will-be-in-broadening-the-greens-appeal-131145">his more combative style</a> was seen to be perfectly suited to fights over energy, environment and direction of the economy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/adam-bandt-will-be-a-tougher-leader-but-the-challenge-will-be-in-broadening-the-greens-appeal-131145">Adam Bandt will be a tougher leader, but the challenge will be in broadening the Greens' appeal</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the time, Bandt was enthusiastically spruiking his plans for a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/04/adam-bandt-pledges-to-push-for-australian-green-new-deal-after-being-elected-greens-leader">Green New Deal</a> as a way to take the climate debate forward and his party to the next federal election. </p>
<p>But fast forward to Di Natale‘s valedictory speech and we also fast forward to the question: where are the Greens? </p>
<h2>The COVID challenge for the Greens</h2>
<p>This year has of course been overshadowed by COVID-19. There is no escaping the global pandemic. And this presents a big challenge for Bandt and the Greens. </p>
<p>The media’s hyper-attention on COVID has meant that unless you are the prime minister, a senior minister, state premier or chief health officer, there is little public airtime available for other people or issues. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Woman and man wearing masks, while walking a dog down suburban street." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354514/original/file-20200825-16-12kkm4t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">COVID-19 has seen the media and public’s attention focus on the pandemic at the expense of other issues.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">James Ross/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So, it’s no surprise Bandt has struggled to break through with the Greens’ big priorities: discussion of climate change, environmental degradation (<a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-is-a-wake-up-call-our-war-with-the-environment-is-leading-to-pandemics-135023">itself a risk</a> when it comes to new diseases), or a federal <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/greens-continue-push-for-federal-icac/12358756">anti-corruption commission</a>.</p>
<h2>There are opportunities for the Greens</h2>
<p>However, there is light on the horizon. The glow around Prime Minister Scott Morrison over the initial containment of COVID-19 <a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-scott-morrison-hypes-vaccine-hopes-but-there-is-a-long-road-ahead-144801">has faded</a> as a second wave has bitten hard in Victoria. Anger grows over the <a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-aged-care-royal-commissioners-say-sector-needs-independent-performance-reporting-144964">handling of aged care</a> during the pandemic. </p>
<p>There are also concerns around <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-been-stigmatising-unemployed-people-for-almost-100-years-covid-19-is-our-big-chance-to-change-this-143349">upcoming cuts</a> to COVID-related payments, which opens up space for the Greens’ <a href="https://greens.org.au/policies/social-services">social welfare agenda</a>. Debates about <a href="https://theconversation.com/forget-jobseeker-in-our-post-covid-economy-australia-needs-a-liveable-income-guarantee-instead-141535">how to structure</a> our post-COVID economy and society also present opportunities for the party. </p>
<p>With the ALP <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-20/labor-party-could-split-in-20-years-warns-fitzgibbon/12576842">continuing to appear divided</a> on energy and climate issues, the Greens have a further opening to pursue their signature policies.</p>
<p>So, there will be renewed scope and space for Bandt to make interventions on issues that directly affect individuals’ lives. </p>
<h2>State elections and power-sharing questions</h2>
<p>At the state/ territory level, watch out for two electoral tests for the Greens (and by proxy, Bandt’s leadership) in October. </p>
<p>In Queensland, the party will be looking to add one to two seats in central Brisbane to its currently held seat of Maiwar. In the ACT, the Greens will want to see a return of their <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1617/ACTElection2016">power-sharing deal</a> with Labor, which <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6868378/labor-on-track-to-win-2020-act-election-despite-losing-votes-poll/">available polling</a> suggests is likely.</p>
<p>Bandt has recently been talking up the potential of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/21/australian-greens-want-power-sharing-agreement-with-labor-if-theres-a-hung-parliament">another power-sharing arrangement</a> at the federal level with Labor. </p>
<p>While the ALP is <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/richard-di-natale-pleads-with-labor-to-end-fractious-relationship-with-the-greens-20191212-p53jao.html">dismissive</a> of these overtures, they may not have that luxury if it comes down to a choice between government or opposition. The ongoing Labor-Greens <a href="http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/1013792/Parliamentary-Agreement-for-the-9th-Legislative-Assembly.pdf">arrangement</a> in the ACT remains a clear sign the parties can - and perhaps should - work together. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-adam-bandt-on-greens-hopes-for-future-power-sharing-131466">Politics with Michelle Grattan: Adam Bandt on Greens' hopes for future power sharing</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Can the Greens afford to relax?</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, we also need to consider that there is probably <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1920/NextElection">more than a year</a> until the next federal election. It might be argued the party can coast for now - at least at the federal level.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/newspoll">Newspoll</a>, the party’s lower house primary vote is sitting at about 11%. This is down from 13% in February, but <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1920/2019FederalElection#_Toc44333994">around the 10.4%</a> the party polled in the lower house on election day in May 2019.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Greens candidate and volunteer, standing next to a Greens placard at a voting booth." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/354511/original/file-20200825-22-q5pkkt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">According to the latest Newspoll, the Greens are sitting on a primary vote of 11%.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bianca De Marchi/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Bandt’s focus now could be more on building up his <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2020/04/11/the-greens-new-deal/15865272009676">Green New Deal</a> plans - to come out with a bang when the best opportunity presents. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the Greens need to keep trying to find ways to be seen and heard. Otherwise, if Bandt and his party are out of the headlines for too long in the middle of a crisis, there is the risk voters may see the Greens as irrelevant.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144869/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stewart Jackson has received funding from The Australian Greens International Development Committee for research on Asia Pacific Greens parties. He was National Convenor for the Australian Greens 2003-2005, and remains a member of the party. </span></em></p>Back in February, the Greens were riding a fresh wave of momentum when they changed leaders. But COVID-19 has made it tough for the party to be seen and heard.Stewart Jackson, Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1314662020-02-10T06:13:23Z2020-02-10T06:13:23ZPolitics with Michelle Grattan: Adam Bandt on Greens’ hopes for future power sharing<p>Adam Bandt began his political journey in the Labor party, but the issue of climate change drew him to the Greens. Last week he became their leader, elected unopposed.</p>
<p>Asked about his ambitions for the party, Bandt aspires to a power-sharing situation with a Labor government, akin to the Gillard era. </p>
<p>“Ultimately Labor’s got to decide where it stands, and if Labor decides that it does want to go down the path of working with us on a plan to phase out coal and look after workers in communities, then great.</p>
<p>"If Labor prefers to work with the Liberals, maybe we’re going to see a situation like we do in Germany at the moment where there’s a grand coalition between the equivalent of the Labor and Liberal parties because they find that they’ve got more in common with each other than with us.”</p>
<h2>Transcript (edited for clarity)</h2>
<p><strong>Michelle Grattan:</strong> The Greens last week changed their leader in what was a very smooth transition. There was no hint of arm twisting, let alone a challenge. Richard Di Natale’s explanation of family reasons for stepping down seemed convincing. Adam Bandt, the party’s sole lower house member, took the job without any opposition. </p>
<p>Adam Bandt is generally considered more radical than Di Natale, and he faces the challenging task of managing a senate party from the lower house. He joins us today to talk about how he’ll approach the job. </p>
<p>Adam Bandt, let’s start with your own political background, can you tell us something of your journey to the Greens? </p>
<p><strong>Adam Bandt:</strong> When I was at high school, I actually joined the Labor Party in part because of my family history. Dad was the first one in his family to go to university. And we have always had a very sort of social justice focus at home. And so I joined the Labor Party. I left early on in university when I got involved in the education campaigns right in the thick of Labor’s, I guess, embrace of neo-liberalism and putting up the cost of education. And that wasn’t attractive to me. So I left. </p>
<p>For a number of years, I worked as an employment lawyer, industrial relations lawyer, representing low paid workers and their unions. And it was really climate change that for me prompted me to…I’d been handing out how to vote cards for Greens candidates and doing that for a number of years. But it was really the climate crisis and sort of that initial dawning of how little time we’ve got left to turn the ship around that prompted me to join the Greens back in the mid 2000s and I have been with them ever since. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now you’re seen as more radical than Richard Di Natale, do you see yourself that way? And in general, what differences will you bring to the leadership? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> I’ll let others make the comparisons. I’ve been very public and continue to be public that I think Richard did a great job and led us to our second best ever election result. And I think that’s quite a feather in his cap. </p>
<p>In terms of what I stand for, like I said before, in terms of my history, the two things that matter most for me are tackling inequality in Australia and tackling the climate crisis. And for me, they’re the two values that have underpinned my adult life. And I’ll keep pushing those. I mean, some have made that comment. I’m not quite sure what it means. I won’t say anything that I can’t back up with the science. </p>
<p>And I think on the climate front, for example, we attracted some criticism before the Christmas holidays for saying that Scott Morrison had played a role in increasing the risk of catastrophic fires like the ones we were seeing and that he had to take some responsibility for it. And I stand by that because objectively he has. And I think those who say perhaps there’s a bit too much strong language, I think fail to understand how angry and anxious people are feeling at the moment and especially a lot of young people in this country. And so I think the time for kind of soft pedalling and not telling the truth about how severe the climate emergency is, is now over.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Just to take you up on this point about young people, while not downplaying the whole threat of climate change, do you feel some responsibility not to alarm people who are very young, 13, 14 year olds? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> I would say that they are already alarmed and anxious. And part of my responsibility is to say we hear that alarm and anxiety and a part of our role is to provide hope that there’s an exit strategy from it. And when, for example, last week I spoke to a student striker who’d come up to Canberra and she was 17 and she said, I can’t bring myself to think more than a year in advance about my future now. I used to be able to, but now I can’t. When I think five or 10 years ahead and think about what the climate emergency will do to me in my life, it all gets too much and I can’t think more than a year ahead. </p>
<p>Now, Scott Morrison might say that’s needless anxiety, but actually at one level, it’s a rational reaction to the things that people are learning about the state of the science. And I speak to a lot of school groups and school children about the state of climate change. And it is a difficult balancing act because on the one hand, you don’t want to tell people things that aren’t true. But on the other hand, we’ve got to provide a bit of hope. And that’s what I see my role as. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But you are more alarmed than the average person, probably about climate change and yet you think obviously five or 10 years ahead. So isn’t there some responsibility to say to that young person, well, I can think a decade ahead and of course, you can think a decade ahead. </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yes. And that’s why I’m pushing for a Green New Deal. Part of the motivation for outlining a green new deal is to say, look, there’s a different way of thinking about Australia. We could become a renewable energy superpower and tackle the climate crisis and tackle the anxiety that people are legitimately feeling about that. And so part of a Green New Deal is about dealing with the economic challenges that we face. But part of it is also about having an exit strategy from what I see as the climate crisis, a jobs crisis and an inequality crisis all coming in together at the moment in a way that could be quite paralysing for some people. So we need an exit strategy. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> We’ll come to the Green New Deal in a moment. But let me first take you to some of the Greens internal issues. You’ve had problems within the party, for example, claims of sexual harassment and the like. Are you concerned about the party’s culture and do you have some plan to deal with it? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Look, I’m not concerned about where the party’s culture is at the moment. But I think in the past - and I think you’ve found Richard Di Natale is saying exactly the same thing - probably things weren’t dealt with as well as they could have been. And it’s a challenge for us as a volunteer based organisation where we’re wanting to bring people in and be active supporters in our campaign knowing that we don’t have the money that the others have got and so we’re much more reliant on people and… </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> They’re not problems of money are they, really? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well no it’s problems of not having paid attention to having the right processes in place and putting in place the right culture and I think in the past we didn’t do as well as we could have for the women who came forward with those complaints. I think we have to accept that. And since then, I know certainly in my office we put in place structures to make sure that if anyone ever felt uncomfortable, they’d have a way to raise it and they’d be believed. And I know that in the national organisation, they’ve put in place some of those changes as well. So I feel that we’ve got to admit that in the past, we didn’t do it as well as we could, and I think the changes that have been made at the national organisation will stand us in good stead. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now, some Greens in your rank and file would like to have a say in the choice of leader. What do you think about that? Should future leaders be chosen, at least in part by the rank and file, as happens with the Labor Party? Or do you think the decision should rest with the parliamentary party? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yes so at the moment it rests with the parliamentary party. Some have been pushing for a change to say it should be solely selected by the members. My personal view is that I favour a mixed model where the party room continues to have a say but members also get to have a say via a vote. Now we’ve got a process in place in the party to resolve that at the May national conference, which we’ve got coming up. And so I hope that process is on track and I’ve got no reason to think it won’t be. And we’ll probably have a resolution of it by then on on the current timetable. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> It seems slightly indecent to talk about your successor but you’re saying your successor you think will be chosen by a mixed system? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well, I don’t know. It’s gonna be up to the party. But if I get a ballot paper, within the Greens, I as one individual member, will be taking the mixed model box. But I also think as a leader, it’s probably not my role to use my position now to influence things one way or the other. That’s got to be something the members decide. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Let’s turn to the Green New Deal. Firstly, why did you choose that term, New Deal? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> We’ve been talking about that in the Greens for some time. We held a conference back in 2009 to promote a Green New Deal in Australia. And it’s a term that is gaining global currency as well. And I think increasingly… </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And has historical context of course from America. </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> That’s right. And one of the things that it raises the question of because of its historical associations is what is the role of government? What is the role of government in the context of the current crises that we have at the moment? And I wanted to send a very clear message that for me, the Green New Deal is a government led plan of action and investment to grow new jobs and industries and create a clean economy in a caring society. And I think we are facing a number of crises and are at an impasse in Australia, in part because government has been unwilling to step in and deal with the challenges that we’ve got. </p>
<p>So this is about saying, well, what are the settings in place to grow new jobs and industries so that Australia becomes a renewable energy superpower, as we tackle some of these other jobs and inequality crises that we’re facing at the moment? So it’s a different way of thinking about government as helping usher in a new clean economy. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So is it putting more emphasis on the economic side rather than the environmental side of climate change issues of energy transition? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> It’s about acknowledging that some of the big challenges that we’ve got are a mix of moral and economic, if you want to use those terms. So we’ve got a climate crisis that is being felt now very acutely in Australia. We’ve got a jobs crisis where it’s being particularly played out amongst young people where one in three young people either doesn’t have a job or doesn’t have enough hours of work. They’re underemployed. And we’ve got an inequality crisis where we’ve got inequality at a 70 year high and people still living in poverty. </p>
<p>What I’m arguing is that the solution to all of these is government stepping in and saying, right, we’ve got some problems and we’re going to fix them. And that then addresses both the economic questions and the moral questions. </p>
<p>I think also on one other note, I’ve been in the house of representatives and I’ve got a seat where we’ve got more public housing than any other seat in Victoria but we’ve also got more women in paid work than any other state in Victoria. And it’s consistent with my history, too, of representing a lot of working people over many years is that I firmly believe that you have to take people’s material concerns seriously and you have to listen to where people are at and what is important to them in their lives. And part of the reason we’ve been successful in Melbourne is that we’ve been able to say, yes, we want to talk about climate change as the Greens, but we also have a plan to deal with a lot of your material concerns. And in fact, if you elected us, you’d find that you’d be better off than under the other parties. And we’ve successfully grown our audiences by getting that message out. </p>
<p>So for me, it’s also part of the Green New Deal. It’s about saying issues of jobs, issues of growing a clean economy are important issues. And we’ve got a plan to deal with that as part of tackling the climate crisis. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Of course, that’s all about environment as part of the wider issue. But nevertheless, you’re less from an environment background than, say, Christine Milne or Bob Brown, aren’t you?</p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Look, the first demonstration that I went on was in high school in Western Australia, and it was against a nuclear powered warship that had pulled into port. And having done high school and university in Western Australia…it was in the milieu of the Greens in Western Australia - the anti-nuclear campaign which was quite a campaign then. My dad’s side of the family is that much more labor-ist side and mum’s was, I guess you would say, very practical environmentalist side and we were always getting from her mum Wilderness Society calendars for Christmas and they lived in Tasmania and had a very keen understanding that we’ve only got one planet. So those two things for me have always been sort of driving forces. </p>
<p>Yes, I went off and before coming to this job, spent time working, I guess you might say, on that social side of it. But it was the climate crisis that prompted me to chuck that all in and say, I’m going to throw my hat in the ring and start running in politics. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You haven’t tried to intercept a bulldozer?</p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> No, I haven’t. But I’ve been at other demonstrations. But no I haven’t been arrested. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So can we turn to your ambition for the Greens? What is your most optimistic scenario while keeping within the bounds of reality? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> I think one unassailable fact in recent history is that the only time pollution came down in this country in a sustained way was when the Greens, independents and Labor worked together and we introduced a carbon price. And when there was an understanding that we had to share power, but in accordance with the composition of the parliament that had been elected. I could see that happening again. </p>
<p>I think we’re in a very finely balanced parliament, and you know Scott Morrison is still only holding on effectively by one seat. And it wouldn’t take the dial shifting that much to be back in a situation akin to the 2010 parliament… </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now are you talking post election? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yes, post-election. It may happen sooner. All it takes is one. In every term of parliament, there’s almost always a by-election. Someone resigns. And if it’s someone in the right seat who resigns and theie seat then changes to the independents or Greens or Labor, then we could be in a very interesting situation before the next election. But certainly at and after the next election, to summarise it, my goals would be to turf the government out, put Greens in balance of power and implement a Green New Deal. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So you would see at your most optimistic a power sharing situation with a Labor government, with an Albanese government?</p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> I think that is a path to achieving change in this country. And I think it’s a realistic path. We elected a senator in every state at the last election. So it shows that we can do that. Of course, the dynamics in the house of representatives, there’s probably a few more moving parts there with independents running. But the good thing about the current house of representatives is that, with the exception of Bob Katter, there is a great willingness amongst the independents to act on climate change. And we’ve worked very closely together on things like the medivac bill, but also on the climate emergency motion that I moved and Zali Steggall seconded. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And now she’s got private members bill… </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> And now she’s got a private member’s bill as well. So we might have different views about the best policy mechanism to do it. But I think there is now a broad based desire amongst sections of the crossbench to take action on climate. And you’ve got government members losing seats to people like Zali Steggall on the basis of an ambitious climate policy. And so after the next election, if it ended up in a situation similar to 2010, I think there’d be a lot of scope for climate ambition and the ability for Greens, Labor and independents to work together. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Mind you, Labor’s rhetoric isn’t very nice to the Greens. They say some extremely unpleasant things about you.</p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yea, and I think Labor’s got to decide whether they want to help us take on the government over climate change or not. I’ve been disappointed that Labor has chosen to adopt exactly the same rhetoric on coal that Tony Abbott did and that the government did. That’s not hyperbole. Like they actually are now using the same language of our coal apparently being cleaner and we can continue to we to open up new coal mines and they won’t rule out building new coal fired power stations either. That makes our job of holding Morrison to account harder. </p>
<p>So ultimately Labor’s got to decide where it stands and if Labor decides that it does want to go down the path of working with us on a plan to phase out coal and look after workers in communities, then great. If not, if Labor prefers to work with the Liberals, maybe we’re going to see a situation like we do in Germany at the moment where there’s a grand coalition between the equivalent of the Labor and Liberal parties because they find that they’ve got more in common with each other than with us. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So are you more disappointed in Anthony Albanese than you were with Bill Shorten on this coal question? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well, I think that Labor risks fighting the last election again rather than the next one. And there’s this move from Labor and Liberals to embrace coal. I think it misreads the election result. I think especially after the summer that we’re we’ve had at the moment, I don’t think people want to see an embrace to coal. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And you think Albanese is embracing coal? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yes. And he would say he is. And he’s using the same, as I say, the same rhetoric as Tony Abbott. They’re both saying, well, we’ve got to sell it otherwise, they’ll buy it from somewhere else… </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Tony Abbott or Scott Morrison?</p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> That’s what Tony Abbott said. It’s what Scott Morrison says and it’s what Anthony Albanese is now saying as well…</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So they’re in a pro coal alliance, Morrison and Albanese, would you say that? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well, I don’t know if they’re in… I mean, take a step back and look at the Queensland results at the last election. There’s this sense that somehow coal won the election and that therefore everyone has to be pro coal now. I think it completely misreads the results. </p>
<p>If you look at what happens in some of those coal seats, the Liberal Party vote or the LNP vote, the change you know, barely troubled the scorer like they got a very small change. Some went slightly down, I think - I stand to be corrected, some might have gone up slightly. What happened was that a lot of Labor voters, women voted for One Nation and then the preferences came back to the Liberals. </p>
<p>And what I think that speaks of is that on this question of a transition out of coal, people see through you when you try and have it both ways. And what is needed in those coal communities is a transition plan where we’re not trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes. And if Labor thinks it can continue to walk both sides of the fence, then I think they’re going to stay in opposition for a very long time, because the script that we saw playing out at the last election will just play itself out at the next election. Last election, it was the Adani coal mine. Next election, it could be the new mine that Clive Palmer or Gina Rinehart wants to open up. </p>
<p>So I think that there’s a risk of misreading what the electoral result actually meant on the question of coal. And also forgetting, I think, that Clive Palmer helped buy the election. I understand that Labor has gone through the process of working out where they think they went wrong but I think a lot of weight needs to be put on that. So I think electoral donations reform is an essential component if we’re to ever have a change of government. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now, you’ve been very critical of Labor, but you’re also saying that your aspiration would be to work with the Labor government. What sort of personal contact, if any, do you have with the Labor leadership? I mean, do you have a beer or a cup of coffee with Anthony Albanese or do you not talk to them at all? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well, during the power sharing parliament, Anthony Albanese was leader in the house and we met regularly. We would meet at least once or twice a week to discuss the business of the place. And I think ultimately history is going to be a lot kinder to that period of parliament than perhaps some currently think about it because I mean, Julia Gillard can hold her head high. And Anthony Albanese played a part of helping put in place laws that brought down pollution. In terms of ongoing contact, even during this parliament, things like coming within a vote of getting a no confidence motion progressed with respect to Peter Dutton and things like the medivac legislation, I’ve worked closely with Labor and the crossbenchers in the business of Parliament to actually try to make things happen. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So how’s your relationship with Albanese. Do you have a sort of personal rapport or is it just a matter of convenience when it’s needed to talk? </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Well look so far it’s been a good working relationship but I think the the question for them now is what approach they want to take and if they want to be backing in Scott Morrison more and appearing more like him then perhaps they’ll want to work with with us. Ball’s in their court really.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now you hold an inner city seat, but the Greens have not been able to capture other federal house of representatives seats. There was one way back, but that special circumstances. Do you think that you do have any prospect in the future or have you sort of missed the opportunity? There was speculation, for example, during the Batman by election. </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> Yea I would hope to see us grow in the house of representatives, as well as the senate and I think we have to. Where those opportunities are, for me, that’s gonna be driven by where we’re at closer to the next election. I took some heart from how close we came in states like Higgins and Kooyong at the last election and I feel a main reason we didn’t break through in those seats was that the government came to town and spent millions of dollars to hold them. And those millions of dollars were spent convincing people that the government all of a sudden cared about climate change. </p>
<p>Now people say, oh well, it’s the climate election but look at the result. Well, you know, Scott Morrison got that result by telling people he cared about climate change. I could see that in Higgins and in Kooyong. Those are seats near mine and I could see it happening every day. The question will be whether having seen the summer that we’ve had and seeing what happens over the next couple of years, whether Morrison is successful in that greenwashing and continuing to say it’s okay I’ve climate crisis under control. When you’ve got Melbourne and Sydney and Canberra ranking amongst the world’s most polluted cities over a course of a couple of months, he might not be that successful in doing it, but they’re places that we will be continuing to spend a bit of time in. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Just finally you’re in the house of representatives. But you’re managing essentially a Senate party. How’s that going to work out in practice? I know you’ve said that there’ll be a bit of power sharing and so on, but it’s quite difficult to follow what is often quite fast play in the upper house if you’re not actually sitting on one of those red seats. </p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> We’ll now have a position of leader in the senate that Larissa Waters will hold and she’ll be supported by a deputy, Nick McKim, and a team that knows how to read the play in the Senate and deal with it as it happens. And look, the other parties have their leaders in the house and have a senate team that’s ably led and is able to deal with things as they arise in the senate. But also, look in this period of parliament, where the government’s got people like One Nation that they can work with to get their agenda through the senate, part of what we’ve got to do is work with those social movements that are building up at the moment to put some pressure on the government. </p>
<p>And so we’ll be spending a bit of our time in the community talking to the people who are going on the school strikes for climate and so on. And I feel that if we do it right, it could be reminiscent of the Franklin Dam campaign where we have that interaction between the social movement of what’s happening in politics. Where if the voices from the people are strong enough, we can use that in parliament to push for change. And so that approach is probably not so much about which house you’re in. It’s about having as much an outward facing approach as focusing on the business of parliament. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Adam Bandt, thank you very much for talking with The Conversation today.</p>
<h2>New to podcasts?</h2>
<p>Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click <a href="http://pca.st/BVa3#t=3m34s">here</a> to listen to Politics with Michelle Grattan on Pocket Casts).</p>
<p>You can also hear it on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Politics with Michelle Grattan.</p>
<p><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/politics-with-michelle-grattan/id703425900?mt=2"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233721/original/file-20180827-75984-1gfuvlr.png" alt="Listen on Apple Podcasts" width="268" height="68"></a> <a href="https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly90aGVjb252ZXJzYXRpb24uY29tL2F1L3BvZGNhc3RzL3BvbGl0aWNzLXdpdGgtbWljaGVsbGUtZ3JhdHRhbi5yc3M"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233720/original/file-20180827-75978-3mdxcf.png" alt="" width="268" height="68"></a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-conversation-4/politics-with-michelle-grattan"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233716/original/file-20180827-75981-pdp50i.png" alt="Stitcher" width="300" height="88"></a> <a href="https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/Politics-with-Michelle-Grattan-p227852/"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233723/original/file-20180827-75984-f0y2gb.png" alt="Listen on TuneIn" width="318" height="125"></a></p>
<p><a href="https://radiopublic.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-WRElBZ"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-152" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233717/original/file-20180827-75990-86y5tg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=268&fit=clip" alt="Listen on RadioPublic" width="268" height="87"></a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/5NkaSQoUERalaLBQAqUOcC"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237984/original/file-20180925-149976-1ks72uy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=268&fit=clip" width="268" height="82"></a> </p>
<h2>Additional audio</h2>
<p><a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/The_Big_Loop_-_FML_original_podcast_score/Lee_Rosevere_-_The_Big_Loop_-_FML_original_podcast_score_-_10_A_List_of_Ways_to_Die">A List of Ways to Die</a>, Lee Rosevere, from Free Music Archive.</p>
<p><strong>Image:</strong></p>
<p>AAP/Mick Tsikas</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131466/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Adam Bandt expresses his disappointment with Labor's coal rhetoric. He says they have a decision to make: work with the Greens, or determine whether they have more in common with the Liberals.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1311452020-02-04T06:29:48Z2020-02-04T06:29:48ZAdam Bandt will be a tougher leader, but the challenge will be in broadening the Greens’ appeal<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/313458/original/file-20200204-41532-au4i22.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Mad Monday usually describes sports teams “on the tear” at the end of season, not embattled governments embarking on a new parliamentary year.</p>
<p>But Monday, February 3, had that devil-may-care feeling when the two second-tier parties of the Australian parliament, the Nationals on the right and the Greens on the left, dropped depth charges into their respective electoral bases by putting their leaderships up for grabs.</p>
<p>For the junior Coalition partner, this occurred via an unsuccessful raid by Barnaby Joyce on the leadership of Michael McCormack.</p>
<p>That marked a woeful start to the parliamentary year for a Coalition already being hammered through its own policy indolence and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-bridget-mckenzie-falls-but-for-the-lesser-of-her-political-sins-131011">scandalous manipulation of public funds</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-sports-rorts-affair-shows-the-need-for-a-proper-federal-icac-with-teeth-122800">The 'sports rorts' affair shows the need for a proper federal ICAC – with teeth</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Things went more smoothly for the Greens, where “mad” Monday brought the unheralded resignation of the party’s well-liked leader, Richard Di Natale. The Victorian senator was swiftly replaced in an uncontested ballot by the party’s sole lower house federal MP, Adam Bandt, the member for Melbourne.</p>
<p>But the interest factor in the power transfer will not necessarily end there. Bandt’s selection raises important questions for the cross-bench party, ideologically, presentationally and functionally. And it may also prove to be a blessing for Labor, which has long bled green on its left flank, particularly in the inner cities.</p>
<p>Like his predecessors Bob Brown and Christine Milne, the outgoing Di Natale confidently predicted the Greens party was on the cusp of a significant expansion as voters opted for the only party not compromised by the fossil fuel industry, particularly coal.</p>
<p>Yet the imminent Green revolution never seems to come, suggesting there may be a natural ceiling on the party’s share of the non-conservative vote, almost all of which flows back to Labor as preferences anyway.</p>
<p>A large measure of the Greens’ electoral optimism derives from the view that, in trying to appeal to both inner-city progressives and blue-collar regional workers, Labor offers weak policies and confusing messages. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/12/adani-coalmine-can-labor-get-away-with-choosing-ambiguity-over-integrity">each-way bet on the Adani Carmichael coal mine</a> at the 2019 election is most frequently cited.</p>
<p>But it is also possible there is effectively a cap on the Greens party expansion. This is because of its role as a party of progressive conscience rather than one that must appeal to a broad range of voters and offer policies that can be funded if elected.</p>
<p>As one Labor insider noted: “The Greens don’t need to talk to anyone outside the inner cities, and mostly they don’t try to.”</p>
<p>As a moderate type of Greens senator, Di Natale may have already maximised the party’s appeal among people who might otherwise find their natural home within Labor.</p>
<p>How Bandt performs remains to be seen, but he is widely regarded as more aggressive – purer in his orientation to, and reflection of, the party’s base, yet correspondingly “scarier” for mainstream voters. </p>
<p>“He’s a jump to the left, that’s for sure,” said the Labor functionary, who claimed Bandt is less disciplined and measured in his communication style than was Di Natale.</p>
<p>“He forgets who he is talking to – his base is not the same as the electorate and where Di Natale was ‘reassuring’, Bandt can be just plain scary,” the observer said.</p>
<p>When the young WA Greens senator Jordan Steele-John accused the major parties of being virtual arsonists during the bushfire crisis last November, Bandt leapt to his defence amid the furore. Bandt told ABC’s Insiders program:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think he’s the youngest member of parliament, he’s part of a generation that is terrified and aghast with what they’re seeing with the climate crisis.</p>
<p>Scott Morrison has been put on notice, and his government has been put on notice for many years now, that if we keep digging up coal at the rate of knots that we’re doing at the moment, it is going to contribute to making global warming worse, and that is going to make bushfires like this more likely and more intense when they happen.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If Bandt’s angularity is to be tempered by the responsibilities of leadership, it was not evident in his first press conference, where he railed against climate inaction and inequality. He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I refuse to adapt to kids wearing gas masks.</p>
<p>Summer is going from being a time to relax to a time to fear for your life and health.
People are angry and anxious because the government clearly doesn’t have the climate emergency under control and has no plan to get it under control. But people are also angry and anxious because the basics of life are no longer guaranteed … even if you do everything they ask, people are no longer guaranteed a good life. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Finally, Bandt’s leadership has a structural peculiarity built in.</p>
<p>Like the short-lived Palmer United Party after the 2013 election, Bandt leads the Greens from the lower house while every one of his other party members is in the Senate.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/remembrance-of-rorts-past-why-the-mckenzie-scandal-might-not-count-for-a-hill-of-beans-130793">Remembrance of rorts past: why the McKenzie scandal might not count for a hill of beans</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There were many reasons why that structure was disastrous for Clive Palmer, not least that his party had no clear idea of what it stood for, and Palmer himself was both mercurial and absent.</p>
<p>But having the members – on whose loyalty one’s leadership relies – located together in one chamber and the leader in another seems risky, especially in these times when mad Monday is a 365-day possibility.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131145/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Kenny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Greens’ new leader has his work cut out to make sure the party is not just viable, but grows.Mark Kenny, Senior Fellow, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1311262020-02-03T23:22:04Z2020-02-03T23:22:04ZAdam Bandt elected unopposed as new Greens leader<p>The Greens’ only House of Representatives member, Adam Bandt, is the party’s new leader, elected unanimously after Richard Di Natale’s decision to leave parliament.</p>
<p>Bandt, 47, has held the inner city seat of Melbourne since 2010, and most recently served as co-deputy of the parliamentary party. He is the Greens’ spokesman on climate change.</p>
<p>Queensland senator Larissa Waters was elected co-deputy leader and Senate leader. Tasmania’s Nick McKim was elected co-deputy leader and deputy Senate leader.</p>
<p>Senators Mehreen Faruqi and Sarah Hanson-Young also ran for the co-deputy position.</p>
<p>Rachel Siewert was elected whip and Janet Rice was elected to the new position of deputy whip.</p>
<p>Bandt’s challenge will be to manage from the lower house what is essentially a Senate party – the Greens have nine senators. Previous leaders Bob Brown, Christine Milne and Di Natale were senators. </p>
<p>Given the fact the government is in a minority in the upper house, tactics are important there and the play can move quickly.</p>
<p>Bandt said before the ballot he would talk to his colleagues “about how we share leadership across the House and the Senate as we fight the climate emergency and inequality”.</p>
<p>Di Natale defeated Bandt in 2015 when the leadership last came up. </p>
<p>Bandt, a former lawyer, lives in Melbourne with wife Claudia and daughters Wren and Elke. He was the first Greens MP elected to the lower house at a general election.</p>
<p>Di Natale announced his resignation on Monday, citing family reasons.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/richard-di-natale-quits-greens-leadership-as-barnaby-joyce-seeks-a-tilt-at-michael-mccormack-131029">Richard Di Natale quits Greens leadership, as Barnaby Joyce seeks a tilt at Michael McCormack</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Bandt, outlining his priorities, told a news conference Australia needed “a Green New Deal”. This involved the government taking the lead to create new jobs and industries, and universal services to ensure no one was left behind. </p>
<p>He would be fighting for three things as part of a “Green New Deal” - dental health being fully included in Medicare, education to be made totally free, and a manufacturing renaissance.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131126/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Greens’ only House of Representatives member, Adam Bandt, is the party’s new leader, elected unanimously after Richard Di Natale’s decision to leave parliament. Bandt, 47, has held the inner city seat…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1310292020-02-03T02:20:24Z2020-02-03T02:20:24ZRichard Di Natale quits Greens leadership, as Barnaby Joyce seeks a tilt at Michael McCormack<p>Richard Di Natale has quit the leadership of the Greens, telling his party room on Monday he will also leave the Senate.</p>
<p>Citing in particular family reasons for his shock departure, Di Natale said: “It’s a tough and demanding job and my boys are nine and 11, and I want to be present in their lives. My wife has been a huge support for me in my career and I want to be able to support her in her career.”</p>
<p>He also said he’d had major surgery at the end of last year which “took a bit out of me”.</p>
<p>The shock resignation comes as former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce announced he would challenge Nationals leader Michael McCormack if there was a move for a leadership spill at Tuesday’s party meeting.</p>
<p>The Greens will elect their new leader on Tuesday morning. The party’s sole lower house member, Adam Bandt, immediately announced he would stand.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/greens-on-track-for-stability-rather-than-growth-this-election-116295">Greens on track for stability, rather than growth, this election</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Di Natale was elected to the Senate at the 2010 election and became leader in 2015 after Christine Milne quit. He was hailed as likely to broaden the appeal of the party, potentially picking up more centrist voters and expanding its electoral footprint. That promise has not materialised. </p>
<p>The party maintained its Senate representation of nine in last year’s election, as well as holding Bandt’s seat of Melbourne.</p>
<p>Di Natale said he left the party in good shape, with its second best result at last year’s election. “If we just repeat that result we will elect three new senators and have a shot at the balance of power. I think we’ll do better than that,” he said.</p>
<p>He knew his decision would shock members and supporters but the time was right – for him and for the Greens. “We are bigger than one person.” He did not know what would come next for him, but he would remain involved in Green issues.</p>
<p>He highlighted the Greens’ role in elevating the climate debate. “We Greens put climate action on the agenda at the last election and that was just the beginning. Every election from now on will have the climate emergency front and centre.” </p>
<p>He believed former leaders should not hang around in parliament. He would resign from the Senate when his replacement was chosen. He anticipated that would be about mid-year.</p>
<p>The Nationals are also dealing with leadership changes. Barnaby Joyce, who resigned the party’s leadership amid a furore over his personal life in early 2018 and has long wanted to reclaim the post, told Seven: “If there is a spill then I will put my hand up.” He noted he had always said that if there was a vacancy for the leadership he would stand.</p>
<p>The Nationals have been destabilised by Bridget McKenzie being forced to resign from cabinet for breaching ministerial standards in the sports rorts affair, over failing to declare her memberships of gun organisations. She said on Monday she accepted she should have declared the memberships in a more timely fashion but she did not believe they had constituted a conflict of interest.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/remembrance-of-rorts-past-why-the-mckenzie-scandal-might-not-count-for-a-hill-of-beans-130793">Remembrance of rorts past: why the McKenzie scandal might not count for a hill of beans</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Nationals will elect a new deputy leader to replace McKenzie on Tuesday.</p>
<p>To get a spill for the leader’s position needs only a mover and seconder.</p>
<p>McCormack said: “The fact is there is no vacancy for the leader of the National party. We have a vacancy for the deputy of the National party.”</p>
<p>Victorian National Damian Drum said he did not think Joyce had the numbers, so he did not believe it would come to a vote on McCormack’s position. </p>
<p>Party sources believe McCormack has the support to keep his position, despite considerable internal and external criticism of his performance. But if Joyce ran and got a substantial vote, that would put McCormack under severe pressure. The last thing Scott Morrison wants would be for Joyce to make a comeback.</p>
<p>Water Resources minister David Littleproud, a Queenslander, is considered frontrunner for the deputy leadership. David Gillespie, from NSW, has said he will run for deputy. </p>
<p>Frontbencher Darren Chester ruled himself out as a candidate for deputy. In the reshuffle he is tipped to be returned to cabinet. </p>
<p>Chester told Sky McCormack was “absolutely” safe; “there is no vacancy”, he said, adding the Nationals did not try to roll leaders halfway through a term.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131029/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Natale’s shock resignation comes as former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce announced he would challenge Nationals leader Michael McCormack if there was a move for a leadership spill on Tuesday.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/830902017-08-29T23:59:18Z2017-08-29T23:59:18ZThe Australian Greens at 25: fighting the same battles but still no breakthrough<p>On August 30, 1992 in Sydney, media were invited to a press conference to launch a new national political party: The Australian Greens. It was a Sunday, and no television crews bothered to turn up. One journo who did was Robert Garran from the Australian Financial Review, who reported that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Greens Party, representing green political groups in Tasmania, NSW and Queensland, has agreed to a constitution, and aims to contest Senate and House of Representative seats in the next federal election. The high-profile Tasmanian Green MP, Dr Bob Brown, said the party offered the electorate the choice of abandoning the two-party system, which had failed to address the nation’s problems.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Brown, who first rose to fame for his environmental campaign against Tasmania’s Franklin Dam, said his party was “more than a one-issue group”, describing its values as being “about social justice, enhancing democracy (particularly grassroots democracy), solving our problems in a peaceful and non-violent way, and about looking after our environment”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-greens-grow-up-59545">The Greens grow up</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The launch was also reported by a rather interesting (and useful if you’re an historian/geek like me) publication called GreenWeek. Its editor Philip Luker was sceptical of the nascent Green movement’s momentum (rightly, as it turned out), offering this verdict:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Drew Hutton of the Queensland Greens is talking through his hat when he predicts green governments all over Australia in the next decade.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Almost 20 years later, during the battle over the fate of Julia Gillard’s carbon price, Brown was interviewed by The Australian. He <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/greens-will-supersede-alp-bob-brown/news-story/006bbe67782d010d384b9d8998545313">pushed the timeframe back</a>, predicting that “within 50 years we will supplant one of the major parties in Australia”.</p>
<p>Therein lies the main problem for the Greens. Many of the things they’ve been warning about have come to pass (deforestation, the climate crisis, human rights meltdowns), yet still they haven’t managed to break through with their calls for change. This is even more alarming given that the real history of the Greens precedes their August 1992 launch by more than two decades.</p>
<h2>1971 and all that</h2>
<p>There was something in the air in the early 1970s. Readers of a certain vintage will remember songs like Neil Young’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3m_T-NMOs">After the Gold Rush</a> (“<em>Look at mother nature on the run, in the 1970s</em>”), Marvin Gaye’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkYx--x9wa0">Mercy Mercy Me (The Ecology)</a>, and
Joni Mitchell’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94bdMSCdw20">Big Yellow Taxi</a>.</p>
<p>Even the Liberal government of the day could hear the mood music, as the new Prime Minister Billy McMahon created the short-lived <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_the_Environment,_Aborigines_and_the_Arts">Department of the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts</a>. (Not everyone was quite so enlightened; the new department’s minister Peter Howson <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/05/peter-howson-minister-for-trees-boongs-and-poofters/">complained to a colleague</a> about his new portfolio of “trees, boongs and poofters”.)</p>
<p>Meanwhile, a battle was raging in Tasmania over the plan to build three hydroelectric dams that would flood <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Pedder">Lake Pedder</a> National Park. In his fascinating and inspiring memoir, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22845285-optimism">Optimism</a>, Bob Brown wrote: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In 1971, Dr Richard Jones, his foot on a Central Plateau boulder, had seen the pointlessness of pursuing ecological wisdom with the old parties and proposed to his companions that a new party based on ecological principles be formed.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Tasmania_Group">United Tasmania Group</a>, now seen as the first incarnation of the Green Party, contested the 1972 state election, and Jones came within a whisker of being elected. </p>
<p>Lake Pedder was lost, but other battles were still to be fought: <a href="https://newmatilda.com/2011/07/19/green-bans-saved-sydney/">green bans</a>, <a href="https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/remembering-the-battle-at-terania-creek/275633/">Terania Creek</a>, campaigns against <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Australia">nuclear power</a> and <a href="https://thelastwhale.wordpress.com/">whaling</a>. </p>
<p>In Tasmania the next big skirmish was the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Dam_controversy">Franklin Dam</a>. Green activists mobilised, agitated and trained in non-violent direct action. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Lohrey">Amanda Lohrey</a>, in her excellent Quarterly Essay <a href="https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/essay/2002/11/groundswell">Groundswell</a>, recalls:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>An acquaintance of mine in the Labor Party lasted half a day in his group before packing up and driving back to Hobart. “It was all that touchy-feely stuff,” he told me, grimacing with distaste. Touchy-feely was a long way from what young apparatchiks in the ALP were accustomed to.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Those culture clashes between Labor and Greens have continued, despite a brief love-in engineered by Bob Hawke’s environment minister Graham ‘<a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Whatever_it_Takes.html?id=FLdUAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y">whatever it takes</a>’ Richardson. To the chagrin of Labor rightwingers, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_1990">1990 election</a> was won on preferences from green-minded voters. But by 1991 it was clear that the Liberals <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-climate-denial-gained-a-foothold-in-the-liberal-party-and-why-it-still-wont-go-away-56013">would not compete for those voters</a>, and Labor gradually lost interest in courting them. </p>
<p>So in 1992 the Greens went national, and so began the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions">long march through the institutions</a>, with gradually growing Senate success. In 2002, thanks to the Liberals not standing, they <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunningham_by-election,_2002">won the Lower House seat of Cunningham, NSW</a> in a by-election, but couldn’t hold onto it.</p>
<p>In 2010, after receiving the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/web-millionaire-bankrolled-greens-20110107-19iw9.html">largest single political donation in Australian history</a> (A$1.68 million) from internet entrepreneur Graeme Wood, the Greens’ candidate <a href="http://www.adambandt.com/">Adam Bandt</a> wrested inner Melbourne from Labor, and has increased his majority in 2013 and 2016.</p>
<h2>Critics, problems and the future</h2>
<p>Doubtless the comments under this article will be full of condemnations of the Greens for not having supported Kevin Rudd’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Pollution_Reduction_Scheme">Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme</a> in December 2009. Despite Green Party protestations to the contrary, Gillard’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/obituary-australias-carbon-price-29217">ill-fated carbon price</a> wasn’t <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512006465">that much better at reducing emissions</a> (though it did have additional support for renewable energy). </p>
<p>However, we should remember three things. First, Rudd made no effort to keep the Greens onside (quite the opposite). Second, hindsight is 20/20 – who could honestly have predicted the all-out culture war that would erupt over climate policy? Finally, critics rarely mention that in January 2010 the Greens <a href="https://marchudson.net/academia/phd-2014-to-2017/australia/2010-greens-proposal-for-carbon-tax/">proposed an interim carbon tax</a> until policy certainty could be achieved, but could not get Labor to pay attention.</p>
<p>The bigger problem for the Greens – indeed, for anyone contemplating sentencing themselves <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTC_fD598A">to 20 years of boredom, for trying to change the system from within</a> – is the problem of balancing <a href="https://www.briangwilliams.us/green-politics-3/realos-and-fundis-the-german-greens-as-a-model-for-understanding-party-development-and-change.html">realism with fundamentalism</a>. How many compromises do you make before you are fatally compromised, before you become the thing you previously denounced? How long a spoon, when supping with the devil?</p>
<p>You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. Focus too hard on environmental issues (imagining for a moment that they really are divorced from economic and social ones) and you can be dismissed as a single-issue party for latte-sippers. Pursue a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Greens#Political_ideology">broader agenda</a>, as current leader Richard Di Natale has sought to do, and you stand accused of forgetting your roots. </p>
<p>Can the circle of environmental protection and economic growth ever be squared? How do you say “we warned you about all this” without coming across as smug?</p>
<p>As if those ideological grapples weren’t enough, the party is also dealing with <a href="https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2017/august/1501509600/paddy-manning/crashing-party">infighting</a> between the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2017/08/10/4716390.htm">federal and NSW branches</a>, not to mention the body-blow of senators <a href="https://theconversation.com/greens-senator-scott-ludlam-forced-to-quit-because-of-dual-citizenship-81036">Scott Ludlam</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/greens-senator-larissa-waters-forced-out-of-parliament-81192">Larissa Waters</a> becoming the first casualties of the ongoing constitutional crisis over dual nationality.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-high-court-decides-against-ministers-with-dual-citizenship-could-their-decisions-in-office-be-challenged-82688">If High Court decides against ministers with dual citizenship, could their decisions in office be challenged?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The much-anticipated breakthrough at the polling booth <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/03/greens-ponder-australian-election-vote-which-will-probably-not-lead-to-gains">failed to materialise in 2016</a>. Green-tinged local councils <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/moreland-council-launches-hydrogen-powered-garbage-truck-scheme-35203/">work on emissions reductions</a>, but the federal party remains electorally becalmed.</p>
<p>The dystopian novel <a href="http://www.connorcourt.com/catalog1/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=289#.WaL8NyvF-ig">This Tattooed Land</a> describes an Australia in which “an authoritarian Green government takes power and bans fossil fuel use”… in 2022. It still sounds like a distant fantasy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83090/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
The environmental issues we face are ideal recruiting for green parties, but the breakthroughs aren’t happening, and after 25 years as a federal party the Greens are still fighting on the same fronts.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/595312016-05-19T03:14:20Z2016-05-19T03:14:20ZElection FactCheck: did the Coalition cut $105 million from Australia Council funding?<blockquote>
<p>The real effects of the Liberals’ devastating $105 million cuts to the Australia Council are now becoming apparent as arts organisations across the country have learnt that they’ve lost funding and will have to cut projects, jobs and potentially even close their doors. – Greens MP Adam Bandt, <a href="http://greens.org.au/news/vic/greens-will-reverse-cuts-australia-council-arts">media release</a>, May 13, 2016.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Arts funding is back in the headlines, as grant lists published by the federal government and the Australia Council emerge just as political parties are throwing themselves headlong into election campaign mode.</p>
<p>The Greens MP Adam Bandt has promised his party would push to reverse cuts to Australia Council and the arts, saying the Coalition made $105 million worth of cuts to the Australia Council.</p>
<p>Is that right?</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>When asked to provide sources to support that assertion, a spokesman for Bandt told The Conversation:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The $105 million was cut from the Australia Council in the <a href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/bp2/download/BP2_consolidated.pdf">2015 budget</a>, which is what the statement was referring to. Funding cuts to any organisation will have impacts on its forward planning. Having $105 million cut from the Australia Council would have had real effects both on its own operations, but also the expectations and planning of the artists and organisations that depend on the Australia Council for grants to fund their work, projects and staffing. Returning only $32 million to the Australia Council after six months may lessen these effects somewhat, but it hasn’t negated them.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As this clarification shows, Bandt’s original statement skips an important point: $32 million was later returned to the Australia Council in November 2015.</p>
<p>It’s true that the 2015-16 budget included a plan to cut <a href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/bp2/download/BP2_consolidated.pdf">$104.7 million</a> over four years from Australia Council funding to pay for the creation of the National Programme for Excellence in the Arts (later renamed <a href="http://arts.gov.au/catalyst">Catalyst</a>). This was a separate structure to deliver arts funding. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122803/original/image-20160517-15899-edfvvn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/bp2/download/BP2_consolidated.pdf">Budget Papers 2015-16</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, the situation changed slightly after Malcolm Turnbull became prime minister in late 2015. In the ensuing cabinet reshuffle, George Brandis was replaced as arts minister by Mitch Fifield.</p>
<h2>Some money was put back</h2>
<p>In November 2015, incoming arts minister Mitch Fifield <a href="http://www.minister.communications.gov.au/mitch_fifield/news/guidelines_released_for_new_arts_fund#.Vzq9pKN96i4">announced that</a> $32 million would be put back into the Australia Council over four years. He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As a result of consultations and feedback on the draft guidelines for the proposed National Program of Excellence (which Catalyst will be in the place of), the government has decided to return $32 million over the forward estimates to the Australia Council. This will take the total Australia Council funding to $783 million over the four years.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In addition to the funding amount changes, the government has placed restrictions on the Australia Council on how they should deal with this cut. Under the restrictions, any organisation funded under the Australia Council’s major performing arts companies board (such as the Australian Ballet and the Australian Opera Company) would <a href="https://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2015/SecondQuarter/12-May-2015-Attorney-General%27s-Portfolio-Budget-measures-2015-16.aspx">not be affected by the Council’s own reduction in funding</a>.</p>
<p>This meant that any subsequent cuts the Australia Council might have to make would be borne solely by the small to medium arts sector and individual artists. </p>
<p>On May 13, 2016, the Australia Council <a href="http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/news/media-centre/media-releases/australia-council-announces-112m-investment-over-four-years-in-small-to-medium-arts-organisations/">announced</a> that of 262 small to medium arts organisations’ applications for four-year funding, 128 were successful. In other words, fewer than half of the applicants were funded. </p>
<p>It also emerged that <a href="http://www.artshub.com.au/news-article/news/grants-and-funding/deborah-stone/62-arts-organisations-lose-funding-from-australia-council-251271">more than 60</a> already existing small to medium arts organisations had not been successful in getting ongoing funding. A loss of existing arts organisations of this scale has never occurred previously in the Australian arts sector. </p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Bandt’s original statement was not accurate. It didn’t accurately convey the fact that while $105 million was identified in the 2015-16 budget for cuts over four years from Australia Council funding, the government later put back about $32 million of that money.</p>
<p>It’s true, though, that the overall level of Australia Council funding has been reduced. Small to medium arts sector players have <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/australia-council-slashes-funding-as-110m-budget-cuts-bite/news-story/160bfe71126257ca605965215f3e1202">said</a> and the government decision to take the funding from the Australia Council and set up a separate ministerial arts fund has caused major problems for them. <strong>– Jo Caust</strong></p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a sound article. The FactCheck author correctly points out that even though $105 million was taken out of the Australia Council funding in the 2015 budget, $32 million was later put back with the change in leadership from Abbott to Turnbull and with the new minister for the arts, Mitch Fifield. </p>
<p>However, as the author points out, it is also correct to say that small to medium arts organisations will be most affected. Some will be losing funding for the first time in decades. </p>
<p>Australia Council CEO Tony Grybowski has said that some of the unfunded companies could be successful in project funding rounds with the Australia Council later, as well as from other sources like <a href="http://arts.gov.au/catalyst">Catalyst</a>. However, project funding is one-off and is not the same as organisational funding, which allows a company or organisation to plan ahead. Thus, small to medium organisations feel very uncertain about their future.<strong>– Maria Miranda</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59531/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jo Caust has consulted to the Australia Council. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is affiliated with the Arts Industry Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maria Miranda receives funding from The Australian Research Council to research artist run initiatives in Australia.</span></em></p>Was Greens MP Adam Bandt right to say that the Liberals made $105 million worth of cuts to the Australia Council?Jo Caust, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow (Hon), The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.