tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/richard-di-natale-8596/articlesRichard di Natale – The Conversation2020-08-25T05:57:11Ztag: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/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/1283032019-12-04T00:41:36Z2019-12-04T00:41:36ZMedevac repealed after government comes to secret arrangement with Jacqui Lambie<p>The government has finally secured the repeal of medevac by coming to an arrangement with crossbencher Jacqui Lambie, the terms of which she refused to disclose to the Senate because of “national security concerns”.</p>
<p>The repeal was carried 37-35 after Lambie – on whose vote the result depended – said she was satisfied with her negotiations with the government.</p>
<p>But Senate leader Mathias Cormann had previously unequivocally denied any deal.</p>
<p>Prime Minister Scott Morrison personally negotiated with Lambie over the repeal, a sign of the government’s determination to quash the medevac law.</p>
<p>Medevac – which facilitated medical transfers of people from Papua New Guinea and Nauru - was passed against the Coalition’s opposition when it was briefly in minority late in the last parliamentary term.</p>
<p>Lambie had indicated previously that her vote for the repeal would be conditional on the government meeting a condition which she would not specify. She suggested security matters were involved.</p>
<p>In an emotional speech Lambie, breaking down in tears, told the Senate: “I’m not being coy or silly when I say I genuinely can’t say what I proposed. I know that’s frustrating to people. And I get that. I don’t like holding things back like this. </p>
<p>"But when I say I can’t discuss it publicly due to national security concerns, I am being 100% honest to you. My hand is on my heart and I can stand here and say that I would be putting at risk Australia’s national security and national interest if I said anything else about this,” she said.</p>
<p>“I put a proposal to the government, and since then we have worked together really hard to advance that proposal. We’ve worked to an outcome I believe we both want, which is an outcome where our borders are secure, the boats have stopped and sick people aren’t dying while waiting for treatment. </p>
<p>"And as a result of that work, I am satisfied, I am more than satisfied, that the conditions are now in place to allow medevac to be repealed.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/peter-dutton-is-whipping-up-fear-on-the-medevac-law-but-it-defies-logic-and-compassion-119297">Peter Dutton is whipping up fear on the medevac law, but it defies logic and compassion</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But Cormann earlier said: “There is no secret deal. There will be no change to our strong border protection arrangements. There will be no change to our strong national security arrangements. And there will be no change in the way we deal with the legacy caseload that Labor left behind.”</p>
<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale demanded to know who was lying. “Who’s lying, minister Cormann? Are you lying? Or is senator Lambie lying?”</p>
<p>He said Cormann had “walked over to senator Lambie and said, ‘Is it OK if I say there’s no deal?’ We heard you say it”.</p>
<p>One Nation’s Pauline Hanson told the Senate she had just had “a quick talk with senator Lambie”. It was “extremely hard for her. … I do trust her judgement”.</p>
<p>When the Senate resumed on Wednesday morning, the government immediately moved to bring on the repeal bill. Labor demanded the terms of the deal, declaring the vote should be delayed until they were revealed.</p>
<p>Labor’s leader in the Senate Penny Wong said: “We have cabinet ministers coming in here like lemmings, voting on a legislation based on a deal you haven’t seen.”</p>
<p>Labor spokeswoman on home affairs Kristina Keneally said the Australian public supported medevac, quoting a poll showing 62% in favour. She said medevac had nothing to do with Operation Sovereign Borders which Labor supported. Repeal would deny people treatment, she said.</p>
<p>Under the offshore arrangements, there are currently just over 200 people in Papua New Guinea and more than 250 on Nauru.</p>
<p>At a joint news conference with Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, Morrison said: “The only undertaking we’ve given is to implement our policies, that is it”.</p>
<p>Amid speculation about some resettlement undertakings, Morrison said the government’s policies sought to resettle people.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128303/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 securing a condition which she cannot disclose “due to national security concerns”, Jacqui Lambie has voted with the government on the repeal of the medevac laws.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1220502019-09-16T20:36:01Z2019-09-16T20:36:01ZGreens’ challenge aptly described by Paddy Manning, but with no solutions in sight<p>Paddy Manning’s excellent account of the Australian Greens will not be the last word on Australia’s most successful third party, but will doubtless remain important and influential for many years to come. </p>
<p>Manning’s exhaustive (but never exhausting) <a href="https://www.blackincbooks.com.au/books/inside-greens">Inside the Greens</a> pulls the reader through almost half a century of battles over development that threatened the natural world. It spans Tasmania’s <a href="https://www.australiangeographic.com.au/topics/science-environment/2019/04/the-fight-to-restore-lake-pedder/">Lake Pedder battle</a> in the 1970s to this year’s Galilee blockade over future coal extraction, including the proposed Adani mine – all while explaining the tensions between pragmatists and idealists.</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><a href="https://www.blackincbooks.com.au/books/inside-greens">Inside the Greens</a> should be read not just by those particularly interested in the issues, and the political tragics who buy all these sorts of books, but by anyone who feels the need to combat what veteran political journalist Laura Tingle calls “political amnesia”.</p>
<h2>A well-informed perspective</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=898&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=898&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=898&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1129&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1129&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/291459/original/file-20190909-109943-gtnf6j.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1129&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"><span class="source">Black Inc.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Manning has been working on this book for several years and some portions of the work have appeared in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/04/whither-the-greens-how-a-reckoning-looms-for-a-party-fighting-to-hang-on">The Guardian</a> and the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/nsw-election-2019/an-unreliable-partner-nsw-greens-are-divided-just-as-the-close-in-20190314-p514co.html">Sydney Morning Herald</a>. He has excellent access to archives and activists, and has interviewed extensively – including Bob Brown, Christine Milne and Richard Di Natale – and referenced sources such as writer Amanda Lohrey’s Quarterly Essay <a href="https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/essay/2002/11/groundswell">Groundswell</a> and journalist Paul Kelly’s book <a href="https://www.mup.com.au/books/triumph-and-demise-paperback-softback">Triumph and Demise</a>.</p>
<p>Manning refers less to the broader academic literature, such as Tim Doyle’s <a href="https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/16065839?selectedversion=NBD24007907">Green Power</a> and Hutton and Connors’ <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/History-Australian-Environment-Movement-Hutton/dp/0521450764">History of the Australian Environment Movement</a>.</p>
<p>Manning is not the only writer to tackle the Greens of late. In the same way Shaun Crowe, author of <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=Whitlam%E2%80%99s+Children%3A+Labor+and+the+Greens+in+Australia&rlz=1C5CHFA_enAU693AU701&oq=Whitlam%E2%80%99s+Children%3A+Labor+and+the+Greens+in+Australia&aqs=chrome..69i57.275j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8">Whitlam’s Children</a> (astutely reviewed in <a href="https://overland.org.au/2018/10/goughs-squabbling-children-will-labor-and-the-greens-learn-to-live-together/">Overland</a>) was clear where his sympathies lay, so is Manning.</p>
<p>However Manning has not traded his critical faculties for access. While his sympathies are clear, both about the Greens party itself and within its ranks, you trust him not to soft-pedal. For example, he is perfectly happy to call out bad behaviour. Discussing the furore around <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/01/former-greens-candidate-alex-bhathal-quits-party-blaming-organisational-bullying">Alex Bhathal</a>, a perennial Greens candidate in Victoria, Manning says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>On a blunt assessment, Bhathal was a high-profile victim of a long-running feud between two Melbourne branches, the Darebin and Moreland Greens. Hardly anyone knows whence it started, or what it’s about. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The main strengths of the book are that Manning resists the temptation to merely handwave at the 1970s and ‘80s before diving into the gory (and much told) dilemmas of the Rudd-Gillard years (anyone looking for new juicy gossip about that period will be disappointed). Nor does he descend into blow-by-blow accounts of the tensions within the New South Wales Greens, and between the NSW and federal parties.</p>
<p>Inevitably in a book of this length and detail (and given that it was only completed after the recent federal election), some ambiguities and errors have slipped through. Among the more obvious, Australia did in fact sign the Kyoto Protocol (in April 1998), but only <em>ratified</em> it in November 2007 under Kevin Rudd. Far less importantly, Ben Oquist was strategic director, not executive director of The Australia Institute in 2014 when the bizarre <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/7.30/al-gore-joins-clive-palmer-to-back-emissions/5550692">Palmer-Gore deal</a> saved the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and ARENA, although he was involved in negotiations (I know, I know, I should get out more).</p>
<p>The first 11 chapters give a chronological account of the political pushes for sustainability in the 1960s and '70s (without perhaps giving enough attention to pro-conservation Liberals and Labour at the time, or the tensions within the Australian Conservation Foundation) all the way through to the recent wars within the NSW Greens and the 2019 election.</p>
<p>The second, shorter half of the book is perhaps not quite as strong. Manning gives a serviceable account of the climate emergency, before an examination of tackling inequality in the “aspirational era”. A better chapter takes on the Greens’ defence and military policies - he approvingly quotes, but doesn’t cite, the defence expert <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ajph.12349">Alan Carris</a>.</p>
<p>Manning finally talks about the challenges ahead for the Greens. Herein lies the book’s greatest shortcoming. On page 398 Manning had already quoted Jonathan Moylan (he of a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-25/jonathan-moylan-judgement-for-fake-anz-press-release/5624542">fake press release</a> that temporarily wiped A$314 million from a coal company’s market value) saying “what we need is a movement powerful enough that it can’t be ignored by any politician”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-australian-greens-at-25-fighting-the-same-battles-but-still-no-breakthrough-83090">The Australian Greens at 25: fighting the same battles but still no breakthrough</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Indeed. And that is the great, largely unexamined, and seemingly unacknowledged failure of the green left, both inside and outside parliament. In the same way Denniss did a very good job of elucidating the <em>problem</em> with <a href="https://theconversation.com/book-review-curing-affluenza-takes-aim-at-our-all-consuming-passions-87150">affluenza</a>, Manning has diagnosed the problems for the capital G and lower-case greens without necessarily putting forward concrete or specific curatives. But nonetheless, this book deserves a very wide readership.</p>
<p><br></p>
<hr>
<p><em>Inside the Greens is published by <a href="https://www.blackincbooks.com.au/books/inside-greens">Black Inc</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>This review was updated on Tuesday September 17. The original version stated Inside the Greens erroneously claimed the 20% greenhouse emissions reduction target was propounded by John Howard. In fact, the book said John Howard’s government renegotiated the 20% target.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/122050/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson 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>Paddy Manning’s new book charts the challenges faced by the Greens (and greenies in general) with admirable clarity and detail.Marc Hudson, Researcher, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1163602019-05-01T05:56:03Z2019-05-01T05:56:03ZShorten distances himself from Green overtures on climate policy<p>Bill Shorten has rebuffed overtures by the Greens leader Richard Di Natale to work closely with a Labor government to promote a strong policy on climate.</p>
<p>Shorten accused the Greens of “trailing their coat and saying, ‘Look at me’”.</p>
<p>“The fact of the matter is that if we get elected we’ll be making decisions in a Labor cabinet and the decisions will be made by members of parliament of the Labor party,” Shorten said, in anticipation of Di Natale’s Wednesday address to the National Press Club.</p>
<p>“What we will do is we will implement the policies we’ve put forward,” Shorten said.</p>
<p>In fact a Labor government, which would be in a minority in the Senate, would probably have to negotiate with the Greens to get its climate policy through the Senate.</p>
<p>After the backlash against the formal Labor-Greens alliance under the Gillard government – in which the two parties worked in conjunction on the carbon pricing scheme – Shorten is anxious to keep maximum distance between the ALP and the minor party.</p>
<p>For its part the government paints Labor and the Greens as “joined at the hip”. Scott Morrison said on Wednesday: “We know who holds the chain – if it’s not the Greens it’s the militant unions”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-major-parties-indigenous-health-election-commitments-stack-up-115714">How the major parties’ Indigenous health election commitments stack up</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In his Press Club appearance Di Natale ran a double line – attacking Labor policies on climate and the environment as inadequate, while stressing the need for co-operation in government.</p>
<p>The Greens were “deeply concerned that Labor has taken a weaker climate policy in 2019 than what they proposed in 2016, which was weaker still than what they took to the 2013 election”.</p>
<p>Di Natale said he was not seeking a formal alliance between the Greens and Labor as in 2010 – rather “we want to work constructively. We want to negotiate”.</p>
<p>He was “not surprised to hear the response from Bill Shorten today […] we hear that time and time again in the lead-up to an election.</p>
<p>"But we need the Greens in the Senate working with the Labor party and other voices to ensure that the policy that’s delivered meets the science and that is up to the challenge of transitioning our economy”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-much-influence-will-independents-and-minor-parties-have-this-election-please-explain-115913">How much influence will independents and minor parties have this election? Please explain</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A Shorten government “will have two pathways open to them after the election, ” he said.</p>
<p>“They can either pursue a climate and energy policy designed to pass through a divided Coalition party room […] or they can negotiate a comprehensive response, based on science, with the Greens.</p>
<p>"My message to Bill Shorten is that you can’t achieve bipartisanship with the Liberals because they can’t even agree among themselves,” he said.</p>
<p>“The decision for Bill Shorten is whether he follows the take-it-or-leave-it approach of Kevin Rudd in 2009, or negotiates with the Greens, just like Julia Gillard did in 2011, to deliver a climate policy that gives future generations a chance”.</p>
<p>Di Natale would not be drawn on what approach the Greens would take if negotiating climate policy with Labor. “The key part of any negotiation is not to conduct it publicly through the media.”</p>
<p>The Greens leader defended his party against criticism over its refusal to support the Rudd government’s scheme, saying Rudd’s policy “would have locked in failure”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-matter-of-mis-trust-why-this-election-is-posing-problems-for-the-media-116142">A matter of (mis)trust: why this election is posing problems for the media</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Meanwhile a number of independent MPs and candidates have signed a statement initiated by the Australian Conservation Foundation committing, if elected, to work with each other and other parliamentarians to promote initiatives on climate.</p>
<p>“We recognise that to be a true servant of our communities and our national parliament, we must demonstrate and deliver strong leadership on climate change,” they say.</p>
<p>Among the objectives they commit to are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>opposing the development of the Adani mine</p></li>
<li><p>ensuring Kyoto Protocol carryover credits are not used to meet Australia’s 2030 emissions education target</p></li>
<li><p>developing a roadmap to power Australia from 100% renewable energy, aiming to achieve at least 50% by 2030</p></li>
<li><p>opposing attempts to commit public money to new or existing coal or other fossil fuel operations, including any government underwriting of coal or gas power plants.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Those signing the statement are Andrew Wilkie, member for Clark; Kerryn Phelps, member for Wentworth; Julia Banks, member for Chisholm who is running as an independent candidate in Flinders; Dr Helen Haines, independent candidate for Indi; Zali Steggall, independent candidate for Warringah; Rob Oakeshott, independent candidate for Cowper, and Oliver Yates, independent candidate for Kooyong.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/116360/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 the backlash against the formal Labor-Greens alliance under the Gillard government, Shorten is anxious to keep maximum distance between the ALP and the minor party.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/936652018-03-20T10:16:16Z2018-03-20T10:16:16ZPolitics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on the Greens’ Batman setback<p>Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young has strongly backed party leader Richard Di Natale’s push to purge those who leaked against candidate Alex Bhathal in the Batman byelection. </p>
<p>Hanson-Young told The Conversation it was clear that party infighting played on voters’ minds. “I don’t think there’s a place for people who want to undermine our party like that. This selfish act by a small number of people in Victoria has ramifications for all of us … because of that these individuals need to face the consequences.”</p>
<p>On the future of the Greens, Hanson-Young admitted that while nobody could match Bob Brown’s legacy, it was important the party get behind Di Natale’s leadership – which has been criticised by some Greens figures outside parliament.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93665/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>Sarah Hanson-Young has strongly backed Richard Di Natale's push to purge those who leaked against Alex Bhathal in the Batman byelection.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/921732018-02-28T08:26:08Z2018-02-28T08:26:08ZFactCheck: do women in Tasmania have access to safe abortions?<blockquote>
<p>People are absolutely appalled that in one of our states women are not getting access to safe terminations, and what I know is that in any decent society we ensure that all women have access to those choices and right now people in Tasmania are being deprived of that.</p>
<p><strong>– Australian Greens leader Richard Di Natale, speaking at the Tasmanian Greens election launch in Hobart, February 21, 2018</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Access to elective abortions has become a key point of policy difference between the Tasmanian Liberal and Labor parties in the state election to be held this Saturday.</p>
<p>Abortion was decriminalised in Tasmania in 2013, but elective surgical and medical abortions remain unavailable through the state’s public health system, and Tasmania’s last dedicated surgical abortion clinic <a href="http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/why-tasmanian-woman-have-lost-abortion-access-in-the-state/news-story/ba08e3a36b570456a54f8405b39d1293">recently closed</a>. </p>
<p>The incumbent Tasmanian Liberal government is <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-31/tas-abortion-policies-revealed/9378756">offering financial assistance</a> to women who travel to the mainland to have a surgical abortion, but has ruled out funding elective abortions through the public system.</p>
<p>The opposition Labor party has <a href="http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/5202149/public-health-abortions-under-tas-labor/">pledged</a> to make surgical abortions available through Tasmania’s public health system, if elected.</p>
<p>At the launch of the Tasmanian Greens state election campaign in Hobart, Australian Greens leader Richard Di Natale said that “in one of our states women are not getting access to safe terminations”.</p>
<p>Was Di Natale correct?</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>The Conversation contacted Richard Di Natale’s office to request sources, but a spokesperson for the Australian Greens leader declined to comment.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>At the launch of the Tasmanian Greens state election campaign in Hobart, Australian Greens leader Richard Di Natale said that “in one of our states women are not getting access to safe terminations”. With reference to Tasmania, this statement is incorrect. </p>
<p>However, Di Natale added that “in any decent society we ensure that all women have access to those choices, and right now people in Tasmania are being deprived of that”. This is a fair statement. </p>
<p>Elective medical and surgical abortions are legal and available in Tasmania. </p>
<p>However, not all women may be able to access these services.</p>
<p>Abortions are only provided in the Tasmanian public health system in extraordinary circumstances – for example, in cases of foetal abnormality or to save the life of a pregnant woman or to prevent her serious physical injury.</p>
<p>Otherwise, women must access these services through the private sector. There are very few health professionals providing these services in Tasmania. Women may face challenges in locating, travelling to and paying for abortion services. </p>
<p>Young women, those living in rural areas and women of low socioeconomic status may be most disadvantaged.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Access to safe abortions in Tasmania</h2>
<p>There are two safe ways for a woman to terminate a pregnancy – by surgical abortion, or by medical abortion. Both surgical and medical abortions are available and legal in Tasmania.</p>
<p>However, abortions by request are only offered in the private sector, and for a fee. </p>
<p>Tasmania’s public health system does not accept referrals for abortion by <a href="http://outpatients.tas.gov.au/clinics/obstetrics">request</a>. In the public system, abortions can be provided in cases of <a href="https://www.primaryhealthtas.com.au/sites/default/files/POP_WAC_RES_140728_V1%20a_Updated%20AC%20for%20General%20Practice%20Info%20Kit%202015.pdf">foetal abnormality</a> or to <a href="https://www.legislation.tas.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2013-072#HP2@EN">save the life</a> of a pregnant woman or to prevent her serious physical injury.</p>
<h2>Accessing surgical abortions in Tasmania</h2>
<p>In Tasmania, surgical abortions can be provided <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/tas/consol_act/rhtta2013435/s4.html">up to 16 weeks gestation</a>.</p>
<p>A surgical abortion involves the use of a local or general anaesthetic, and is performed by a medical practitioner, such as a gynaecologist or surgeon, in a day clinic or a hospital theatre in line with National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards, which are set by the <a href="https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/">Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care</a> . </p>
<p>The woman must find a private gynaecologist willing to perform the procedure. </p>
<p>There are 39 gynaecologists accredited by the <a href="https://www.ranzcog.edu.au/">Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Fellows</a> in Tasmania. But the not-for-profit organisation <a href="http://www.fpt.asn.au/">Family Planning Tasmania</a> told The Conversation they were aware of only two accredited gynaecologists who offer surgical abortion services.</p>
<p>These services come at a cost. Family Planning Tasmania told The Conversation that one surgical abortion health professional in the south of the state offers elective surgical abortions at a cost of A$2,500 per procedure.</p>
<p>Medicare will cover <a href="http://www9.health.gov.au/mbs/search.cfm?q=35643&sopt=I">some of the costs</a> of the procedure, including the cost of the anaesthetic and the clinician fees. However, women will have out of pocket costs.</p>
<p>For example, a <a href="https://www.clinic66.com.au/f-terminate-surgical-medical.asp">clinic in Sydney</a> has a fee of A$750 for a surgical abortion, with the Medicare rebate covering A$400 of this.</p>
<p>Given that there appears to be only two providers offering elective surgical terminations in Tasmania, some women may need to travel within the state, or to other states, to access a surgical abortion. This could incur additional travel and accommodation costs.</p>
<p>If a woman suffers complications after the procedure, she would need to return to the private clinic (which may incur additional costs) or go to her local emergency department. </p>
<p>To access an elective surgical abortion <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/tas/consol_act/rhtta2013435/s5.html">beyond 16 weeks</a> gestation in Tasmania two medical practitioners must be involved – at least one of whom needs to be a specialist in obstetrics or gynaecology. They must both agree that the continuation of the pregnancy would involve greater risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman, than if the pregnancy were terminated.</p>
<h2>Accessing medical abortions in Tasmania</h2>
<p>For medical abortions in Australia, the registered medication MS-2 Step is <a href="https://www.ebs.tga.gov.au/ebs/picmi/picmirepository.nsf/pdf?OpenAgent&id=CP-2014-PI-01965-1&d=2018022816114622483">recommended</a> for use up to nine weeks gestation. </p>
<p>A medical abortion involves the use of two <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/behind-news/registration-mifepristone-linepharma-ru-486-and-gymiso-misoprostol">oral medications</a>: mifepristone linepharma (also known as RU 486) and misoprostol (also known as GyMiso).</p>
<p>Early medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol is <a href="http://www.contraceptionjournal.org/article/S0010-7824(12)00643-9/abstract">highly effective and safe</a> and can be safely used in a woman’s <a href="https://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S0042-96862011000500012&script=sci_abstract&tlng=ar">own home</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/behind-news/registration-mifepristone-linepharma-ru-486-and-gymiso-misoprostol">Specifically trained</a> medical practitioners, including general practitioners (GPs), can prescribe these medications to women during a face-to-face appointment, or over the phone.</p>
<p><strong>Face-to-face appointments</strong></p>
<p>A woman must find a GP or private gynaecologist who has undergone the <a href="https://www.ms2step.com.au/">accredited training</a> required to prescribe the medications. Family Planning Tasmania told The Conversation that while 43 GPs are trained to offer medical abortion services, they are only aware of three who currently offer the service.</p>
<p>These services also come at a cost. A consultation for medical abortion may be covered by Medicare, but some GPs or gynaecologists may charge a gap payment, requiring women to pay the difference as an out-of-pocket expense. </p>
<p>Women seeking these services are required to have an ultrasound to confirm the pregnancy is less than nine weeks gestation, and have a blood test. This may incur additional out-of-pocket costs associated with ultrasounds and other tests where Medicare does not cover the providers’ fees. Women from rural areas where ultrasound services may not be available may need to travel to access these services.</p>
<p>The medical provider <a href="https://www.ranzcog.edu.au/RANZCOG_SITE/media/RANZCOG-MEDIA/Women%27s%20Health/Statement%20and%20guidelines/Clinical%20-%20Gynaecology/Use-of-mifepristone-for-medical-termination-of-pregnancy-(C-Gyn-21)-Amended-February-2016_1.pdf?ext=.pdf">must</a> also locate a hospital willing to provide specialist support in the case of complications. This can be difficult. </p>
<p>GPs in New South Wales <a href="https://reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12978-017-0303-8">have reported</a> that health professionals in public hospitals are often reluctant or unwilling to be involved in providing care associated with abortions.</p>
<p>The medical abortion drugs are listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and cost <a href="http://www.pbs.gov.au/medicine/item/10211K">approximately A$39.50</a>, or less if women have a health card. Most women will have their prescription for medical abortion drugs filled by a pharmacist <a href="https://www.ms2step.com.au/register.html">registered with MS Health</a>. </p>
<p>However, according to <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/pharmacy/about/people/profiles/betty.chaar.php">Dr Betty Chaar</a> at the University of Sydney, pharmacists registered with MSHealth may, in special circumstances and in consultation with the doctor, send medications via post or courier.</p>
<p><strong>Telephone prescriptions</strong> </p>
<p>Tasmanian women can also request medical abortion medication over the telephone from two private providers: the <a href="https://www.tabbot.com.au/">Tabott Foundation</a> and <a href="https://www.mariestopes.org.au/abortion/home-abortion/">Marie Stopes Australia</a>.</p>
<p>Women must call one of the private service providers to have a consultation with a doctor over the phone. They will also be required to have an ultrasound to confirm the pregnancy is less than nine weeks gestation, and have a blood test. </p>
<p>Again, this may incur additional out-of-pocket costs, and present challenges for women from rural areas in particular.</p>
<p>Where appropriate, the providers will mail or courier the medication to the women. Women receive over the phone 24-hour nurse aftercare following their abortion.</p>
<p>Women who suffer complications must travel to their nearest emergency department.</p>
<p>The Tabbot Foundation <a href="https://www.tabbot.com.au/medical-abortion/abortion-cost.html">offers this service</a> for A$250 to women with a valid Medicare card, and A$600 to those without. However, this does not include the cost of additional services, including the necessary ultrasound and blood test, or any costs associated with complications.</p>
<p>Tabott Foundation medical director Dr Paul Hyland told me that since February 2017, 313 women had been prescribed medical abortion medication via the Tabbot tele-medicine service.</p>
<p>The reproductive health company Marie Stopes Australia has no clinics in Tasmania, but does <a href="https://www.mariestopes.org.au/bookings/prices/">offer</a> home abortion by phone. This service starts from a cost of A$290, though this varies depending on Medicare card availability and excludes the cost of the medication, the required medical tests and emergency care. </p>
<p>It’s worth restating that medical abortions are only available to women up to nine weeks gestation. After nine weeks gestation, a woman would need to seek a surgical abortion. As outlined above, there are very few medical professionals who provide this service in Tasmania. </p>
<h2>Finding information about abortion services in Tasmania isn’t always easy</h2>
<p>Women in Tasmania can find information about terminations from not-for-profit organisations like Family Planning Tasmania or other <a href="http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/151725/Terminations_Act_Postcard_v4.pdf">community health services</a>.</p>
<p>However, this information is generally not publicly available.</p>
<p>This lack of information, as well as the costs that women must incur, constitute significant barriers to accessing abortion in Tasmania.</p>
<p>Tasmanian women may face further barriers to abortion, as noted in other Australian <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13625187.2016.1276162">research</a>. This can include conscientious objection from health professionals, unwanted counselling, harassment from protesters and gestational limits requiring the approval of more than one health provider. </p>
<p>International <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673616303804">research</a> has found that places where abortion is difficult to access are associated with higher maternal mortality and unsafe abortion rates.</p>
<p>Barriers to abortion access in Australia particularly affect <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-842X.2006.tb00844.x/full">young women</a>, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajr.12096/full">those in rural areas</a> and women of low socioeconomic status. <strong>– Angela Dawson</strong></p>
<h2>Blind review</h2>
<p>This article presents a comprehensive overview of the availability of abortion services in Tasmania. </p>
<p>It’s worth clarifying that <a href="http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/bills/pdf/19_of_2016.pdf">children under the age of 16</a> have access to abortion in Tasmania, but they need to be deemed capable of consenting to the procedure. </p>
<p>This decision is made by a GP and is based on several factors, such as the age and maturity of the individual. People under the age of 16 need not obtain parental consent to have an abortion.</p>
<p>Another area of relevance is the issue of conscientious objection. Doctors and nurses have the right to conscientiously object to participation in terminations under the <a href="http://www7.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/tas/num_act/rhtta201372o2013481/">Tasmanian Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Act 2013</a>. The only exception to the rule is when a woman is at risk of death or serious injury.</p>
<p>Doctors, however, are required to provide women with a full list of prescribed health services if they become “aware that the woman is seeking a termination or advice regarding the full range of pregnancy options”. They have an obligation to refer patients to abortion services where this is requested. <strong>– Xavier Symons</strong></p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>The Conversation’s FactCheck unit is the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversations-factcheck-granted-accreditation-by-international-fact-checking-network-at-poynter-74363">Read more here</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Have you 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 <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">checkit@theconversation.edu.au</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92173/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Angela Dawson receives funding from the NHMRC, ARC, The Federal Department of Health and the WHO. She is affiliated with the Public Health Association of Australia and the Inter-agency Working Group for Reproductive Health in Crisis.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Xavier Symons 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 Hobart supporting the Tasmanian Greens ahead of the state election, Greens leader Richard Di Natale said ‘in one of our states, women are not getting access to safe terminations’. Is that correct?Angela Dawson, Associate Professor of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology SydneyLicensed 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/807472017-07-10T06:27:12Z2017-07-10T06:27:12ZDisagreement within the Greens shows the price of doing politics differently<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177466/original/file-20170710-6227-48vkc5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Lee Rhiannon and every other federal Greens MP have the right to dissent on matters of policy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Over the weekend, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jul/09/nsw-greens-demand-lee-rhiannon-be-fully-reinstated-to-party-room">Greens New South Wales</a> declared that the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-greens-set-for-lee-rhiannon-lovein-following-suspension-20170707-gx6l3s.html">partial suspension</a> of senator Lee Rhiannon from certain federal partyroom discussions was “unconstitutional”. The state party requested Rhiannon be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jul/09/nsw-greens-demand-lee-rhiannon-be-fully-reinstated-to-party-room">“fully reinstated without restriction”</a>.</p>
<p>Federal Greens MPs were ultimately discomforted by their decision to exclude Rhiannon, and were at pains to point out that the action was designed to tackle <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/lee-rhiannon-suspended-from-greens-party-room-pending-reform-in-nsw-20170628-gx05zq">“a structural issue”</a> and ensure the partyroom had <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/lee-rhiannon-suspended-from-greens-party-room-pending-reform-in-nsw-20170628-gx05zq">“faith and trust”</a> in party processes. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://greens.org.au/news/national/statement-party-room">other resolution</a> passed by the partyroom in that same session implored the National Council – the party’s highest decision-making body – to work with Greens NSW to end the practice of binding its MPs, even if its vote was against that of the federal partyroom.</p>
<p>Rhiannon expressed her disappointment with the outcome, and went further <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-party-room-greens-have-a-bigger-agenda-im-just-road-kill-20170702-gx2zx0.html">to suggest</a> that the partyroom’s decision masked a more insidious agenda, which was to:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… reduce the democratic power of members in the Greens NSW. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>For all concerned, this matter turns on a fundamental disagreement over process and principle.</p>
<h2>Debates over decision-making</h2>
<p>For the Greens’ federal parliamentary leader, Richard Di Natale, the NSW practice of binding its MPs restricts the work of the national party room. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/temporary-party-room-meetings-ban-unconstitutional-rhiannon/8662968">He said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If each state binds their senator we won’t have an Australian Greens party room, we’d have a collection of independent states arriving at independent decisions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In contrast, the NSW party rejects the idea that <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/totally-unaccountable-leaked-greens-emails-shine-light-on-faceless-powerbrokers-20170701-gx2jm4.html">“all wisdom lies with MPs”</a>. Its view is that policies adopted by members following a process of consensus decision-making should dictate the voting behaviour of the party’s elected MPs in parliament.</p>
<p>Putting aside the matter of personalities and the ethics surrounding the conduct of those involved, to what extent does this incident reflect deep-seated ideological difference over the practice of binding MPs?</p>
<p>The practice of binding elected officials under the <a href="https://nsw.greens.org.au/structure-constitution">Greens NSW Constitution</a> can be located in three main sections:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Section 12.1: The actions, activities and public statements of all members of The Greens NSW who are elected to public office shall be consistent with the charter, constitutions, policies and decisions of the party.</p>
<p>Section 12.6: Elected representatives shall consult with the delegates council regarding positions to be taken in their legislative activity. </p>
<p>Section 13.6: … elected representatives … shall express public opinions and vote in public fora in accordance with the charter of the Australian Greens and ratified policies of the Australian Greens and The Greens NSW, where a party policy exists. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Greens NSW Constitution does not appear to include a reference to MPs having the right to exercise a conscience vote.</p>
<p>By contrast, other members of the Greens’ national partyroom are not bound by similar requirements under their state party constitutions. MPs are permitted to exercise a conscience vote. Otherwise, the partyroom operates according to the principles of consensus decision-making. </p>
<p>This process requires participants to reach common agreement on matters. If such agreement cannot be reached, a vote may be taken to determine the outcome. </p>
<h2>Intra-party difference</h2>
<p>Consensus decision-making is fundamental to the decision-making practices of the Greens, including the NSW branch and the federal partyroom. In this regard, the two bodies are identical. However, the difference over process turns on three matters:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>To whom or what are MPs ultimately accountable: the federal partyroom or their state organisation?</p></li>
<li><p>Which level of decision-making should be allocated priority over matters of policy: the partyroom or the state organisation?</p></li>
<li><p>Is party unity more important than the persistence of diversity in state organisational decision-making practices?</p></li>
</ul>
<p>These are not inconsequential points of difference – and they should not be dismissed lightly. But would disagreement over schools funding – the policy issue that ostensibly ignited this affair – have been avoided if Greens NSW did not bind Rhiannon? The answer is probably no. </p>
<p>The federal partyroom rules allow MPs to exercise a conscience vote. Rhiannon – and every other member of the partyroom, for that matter – have the right to dissent on matters of policy. </p>
<p>To what extent would Rhiannon’s position have been viewed differently had she exercised a conscience vote, instead of invoking a constitutionally mandated obligation to dissent?</p>
<p>The current situation owes as much to politics as it does any deep unworkable ideological schism within the Greens. While binding might well complicate the partyroom’s efforts to present a united front in relation to legislative negotiations some of the time, the NSW practice seems to do so rarely. </p>
<p>And when it does, this might just be the price of doing politics differently.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80747/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>For all concerned, the imbroglio surrounding Lee Rhiannon and her Greens colleagues turns on a fundamental disagreement over process and principle.Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/798712017-06-21T14:04:29Z2017-06-21T14:04:29ZA Labor government would boost schools’ money but how much would it unpick Gonski 2.0?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/174995/original/file-20170621-4662-87f132.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Labor has been steadfast in its opposition to the government's school funding plan.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Malcolm Turnbull is on the brink of a major policy victory after the government mustered 10 of the 12 non-Green crossbenchers behind its Gonski 2.0 policy.</p>
<p>The outcome of a week of intense negotiation by Education minister Simon Birmingham means, barring mishap, the government is set to end this parliamentary sitting on a strong note, at least in policy terms. The Coalition remains in a bad place in the polls.</p>
<p>The new model for schools funding will be much closer to the original needs-based one recommended by the Gonski review, the implementation of which was compromised by a plethora of special deals.</p>
<p>In electoral terms, Turnbull hopes the schools policy will at least partly offset Labor’s usual strong advantage in education but the fight over schools will still be on because Labor will be promising a big extra boost to funding.</p>
<p>To get its legislation through, the government has shortened the time frame for delivering funding targets from 10 to six years; boosted by $A4.9 billion to $23.5 billion the amount of money that will be spent over a decade (including $1.4 billion over the next four years); agreed to establish an independent body to oversee the funding; and endorsed a tight arrangement to prevent states lowering their share of school funding.</p>
<p>In a gesture to a deeply-agitated Catholic sector, the government will provide transitional money for it next year, while a review is undertaken of the basis for calculating how much parents should be expected to contribute. Some money will also be available for schools that are part of systems in the independent sector.</p>
<p>This is being couched as transition money so that all systems will come under the new model from the 2018 start. The transition money will amount to $46 million, $38 million for the Catholics.</p>
<p>But the Catholics, who benefited from the previous special arrangements, remain angry. The future political implications of this is yet to be seen.</p>
<p>On Wednesday night National Catholic Education Commission executive director Christian Zahra said that commission representatives had just met with Birmingham who “set out the minor changes” he proposed in response to the Catholics’ “very serious concerns”. But the commission’s position hadn’t changed: the bill “still poses an unacceptable risk to the 1737 Catholic schools across the country” and should be defeated.</p>
<p>The outcome has left the Greens caught badly short, exposed as under the thumb of the powerful teachers union, the Australian Education Union (AEU).</p>
<p>The government negotiated simultaneously with the Greens and the other crossbenchers. But the Greens were split, unable to finalise a deal even though they did most of the heavy lifting in extracting some major changes and additions.</p>
<p>The result is they’re in the worst of positions. They are unable to claim victory in delivering the more needs-based system. But they have raised the ire of some of their supporters for attempting to reach agreement with the government.</p>
<p>As soon as it knew it had the numbers with the other crossbenchers, the government – unsurprisingly - brought on the second reading vote on the legislation in the Senate.</p>
<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale said he was disappointed the government had stitched up the deal with the other crossbenchers. The Greens had still been negotiating when the second reading vote was called. “We thought those talks were progressing really well when out of the blue, the bells rang,” he told reporters.</p>
<p>He said the Greens were proud that what they did through their negotiations “was to raise the bar”. But they could not support the “special deal” for the Catholic sector, and had wanted more money for disabled children.</p>
<p>The government is relying on getting the votes of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, the Nick Xenophon Team, Jacqui Lambie, Derryn Hinch and Lucy Gichuhi.</p>
<p>Labor has trenchantly opposed the government’s package, saying the $18.6 billion is $22 billion short of what schools would have received under the ALP’s policy.</p>
<p>The opposition’s schools spokeswoman, Tanya Plibersek, says a Labor government would keep the parts of the package that “are practical, like an independent schooling resource body”. It would also retain the cuts to elite private schools.</p>
<p>But Labor has not spelled out how a Shorten government would alter the new model it would inherit and fund more generously.</p>
<p>It says Gonski 2.0 is flawed because it entrenches a skew in federal funding towards non-government schools (traditionally funded by the federal government, which is only the minor funder, compared to the states, of government schools). But that doesn’t deal with the issue of how a Labor government would handle the Catholics.</p>
<p>Labor has taken advantage of the Catholic rebellion. The Catholic sector, having lost the old special deals, would be anxious to extract some new ones from an ALP government that had extra dollars to put around.</p>
<p>So will Labor give the Catholics any undertakings that in power it would rectify the wrongs it alleges the government will do to the Catholic system? If it won’t, what will be the response of the Catholics?</p>
<p>If, after the dust settles from the Turnbull government making the tough changes, Labor broadly accepts the new model as a basis for its own planned funding, it will have a sound policy position but questions to answer about disingenuous claims we have heard from it in this debate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79871/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
The Catholic sector, having lost the old special deals, would be anxious to extract some new ones from an ALP government that had extra dollars to put around.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/796452017-06-18T11:58:29Z2017-06-18T11:58:29ZWill the Greens let the teachers’ union bully them over schools funding?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/174293/original/file-20170618-10505-i1ooyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sarah Hanson-Young has come up against the pressure of the Australian Education Union.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some Liberals love to deride Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young. In the past, the government’s immigration minister and attack dog, Peter Dutton, was particularly insulting when she was spokeswoman in his area.</p>
<p>Now it’s Hanson-Young, handling the education area for the Greens, who is battling to get her party to pass the schools package that, in political terms, Malcolm Turnbull desperately needs.</p>
<p>The package is a truer version of the original Gonski needs-based system, and so would benefit deserving government schools, which are Hanson-Young’s priority. She’s gone out on a limb within her own ranks to attempt to promote a deal.</p>
<p>The government hopes to have the legislation through this last week before the winter break. “We’ll make sure we land this,” Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce said on Sunday. The question is: who can it get to be its dancing partners? The Greens, or other crossbenchers?</p>
<p>Negotiations between Hanson-Young and Education Minister Simon Birmingham – one of the better ministers, with an admirably low-key style – have seen the government showing a good deal of flexibility.</p>
<p>Hanson-Young says what the government has put on the table moves the package closer to what the Greens have been advocating.</p>
<p>It involves setting up the independent body to oversee funding that was recommended originally by Gonski, and legislation to tie the states into pulling their weight on money. The negotiations have also canvassed shortening the timeframe of the government’s A$18.6 billion plan from ten years to possibly six years, which could cost the government an extra $4.5 billion-$5 billion over a decade.</p>
<p>The government is coy about the details of concessions it would make to the Greens. But if a deal with those sorts of changes could be done, you’d think the Greens would be trying to clinch it as quickly as possible. It would represent a major win for them.</p>
<p>There is, however, an internal battle – the party is divided. </p>
<p>This is an issue on which one would think Greens leader Richard Di Natale could adopt the more pragmatic style he seemed to promise when he became leader.</p>
<p>Yet on Sunday he showed he was conflicted when he appeared on Sky. Rather than displaying leadership and saying he will urge his party room to accept a deal if it is favourable – which would allow him to claim credit for delivering a better system – he stressed not being hurried and speaking to “all the key stakeholders”, who have in fact already been consulted.</p>
<p>So what’s going on here?</p>
<p>This is going on: the Australian Education Union (AEU) is standing on the Greens’ neck. The AEU wants this as an issue at the election. And the Greens are frightened of the union, especially what it could do to the party’s aspirations in inner city seats. </p>
<p>The teachers’ union has a lot of political clout and there is extensive overlap between its membership and the support base of the Greens. The New South Wales branch of the Greens is strongly identified with the union line.</p>
<p>On Sunday the union position was simply that the Greens must block the legislation this week. It will be lobbying them hard in Canberra over the next few days.</p>
<p>It’s a sordid tale of the power of politics over policy – and it leaves the Greens exposed in their periodic bids to present themselves as the party of principle.</p>
<p>Just as they are responsible for Australia not having a better climate change policy, because they refused to accept the Rudd government’s efforts to put one in place, so too if they don’t cut a schools deal, they will be open to the criticism of trying to stymie the introduction of a more needs-based schools policy.</p>
<p>But if they opt for staying pure – or indeed even if they don’t – the government might get its way via the rest of the crossbench.</p>
<p>These players have demands of their own. But it’s possible a deal with the non-Green crossbench could come at a cheaper price than one with the Greens. If that was the case, the Greens would likely find themselves sidelined.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Labor’s performance has been hypocritical. It has said all along that because the government’s schools plan fell $22 billion short of the ALP’s original proposals, it wouldn’t even bother negotiating.</p>
<p>As far as one can see, Labor has three motives. </p>
<p>First, it wants to reap the advantage of the discontent in the Catholic system, which loses out in relative terms when there’s a more needs-based system, because it has been feather-bedded with special arrangements by successive governments.</p>
<p>Second, it doesn’t want to allow the Coalition any win on schools policy.</p>
<p>Third, like the Greens it is unwilling to get the teachers’ union offside.</p>
<p>If the ALP really cared as much as it claims about state schools, it would not oppose the government’s policy but promise at the election that a Labor government would top up the money.</p>
<p>But that would be putting policy ahead of politics.</p>
<p><strong>POSTSCRIPT</strong></p>
<p>The Coalition trails Labor 47-53% on the two-party vote for the third consecutive <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll/newspoll-turnbull-fails-to-turn-corner-with-power-battle/news-story/79ce414773ab471673e3cf1e1935f1f6">Newspoll</a> – the 14th consecutive one in which it has been behind.</p>
<p>Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten both lost ground on net satisfaction – they are tied in deeply negative territory on minus 23. Turnbull’s satisfaction rating fell from 35% three weeks ago to 32%.</p>
<p>Turnbull has a 13-point margin over Shorten as better prime minister, 44-31%, compared with a 12-point lead in the last Newspoll.</p>
<p>The ALP primary vote is up one point to 37%. The Coalition vote is steady on 36%, for the fifth consecutive time. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation is up from 9% to 11%; the Greens are down from 10% to 9%. </p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/teu9e-6be86f?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79645/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Some Liberals love to deride Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young. In the past, the government’s immigration minister and attack dog, Peter Dutton, was particularly insulting when she was spokeswoman in his…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/775932017-05-23T13:15:01Z2017-05-23T13:15:01Z‘Giving a Gonski’ will be torrid test for the Greens<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/170582/original/file-20170523-5752-7x892g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Richard Di Natale is publicly perched on the barbed-wire fence over the government's Gonski legislation.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Labor has formally decided to try to thwart the government’s Gonski schools legislation, while the Greens are looking over their shoulder at what their base would think if they opt to back it.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Catholics continue to baulk because they would not get the special treatment they’ve enjoyed under previous deals.</p>
<p>Political expediency and self-interest are well to the fore as parliament starts to debate the plan, which is closer to the original Gonski model than present arrangements and would inject an extra A$18.6 billion in federal funding across the government, Catholic and independent school sectors over a decade.</p>
<p>Former Labor minister Craig Emerson, writing in Tuesday’s Australian Financial Review, <a href="http://www.afr.com/news/politics/craig-emerson-criticises-bill-shorten-over-populist-budget-response-20170521-gw9y1w">condemned the ALP’s stance</a>.</p>
<p>“While the Turnbull government’s needs-based funding allocation is manifestly inadequate, Labor has a wonderful opportunity to lock the formula into place and promise to increase it if elected,” he wrote.</p>
<p>“Now is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to lock in a school-funding system that can give every disadvantaged child a chance of a good education, and Labor has pledged to block it. It’s heartbreaking.”</p>
<p>It’s hard to fault the logic of Emerson, a policy wonk who has the background to judge. Surely it is sensible for an opposition to seize the chance when it comes for a structural improvement, and then undertake to build on it?</p>
<p>Well, except for the politics. Together with health, education is Labor ground. It wants to stop the government gaining any foothold there. It is hand-in-glove with the Australian Education Union, which opposes the government’s plan, running advertisements saying that it would cut money. The union is using as its baseline what Labor would have done if it had won the election.</p>
<p>Importantly, Labor sees the Catholic revolt as manna to exploit. Some states are also unhappy – they wanted funding continued along the lines of the generous deals they won as the ALP government threw everything at getting schools funding arrangements into place.</p>
<p>While Labor’s position is set, the Greens have a lot of agonising ahead.</p>
<p>When Malcolm Turnbull announced the policy, the Greens indicated they were attracted to it. Their education spokeswoman, Sarah Hanson-Young, liked the boost it would give government schools and its hit list cutting back money for wealthy schools. The ALP would support the latter, suggesting it be excised and voted on separately – but there’s no chance of that.</p>
<p>But the Greens have not yet made a decision. They are waiting for the short Senate inquiry into the legislation.</p>
<p>In the House of Representatives vote on the legislation this week, Greens member Adam Bandt will likely vote against, as on other controversial measures when the party is in a holding position.</p>
<p>This is a big test for the Greens. They can deliver an improved position for government schools and a fairer model, but it could be at some political cost to themselves.</p>
<p>The Greens know that among their base many detest the idea of dealing with the Liberals on anything. Former leader Christine Milne hated giving then-prime minister Tony Abbott a win. Current leader Richard Di Natale is more pragmatic but still has to take account of the followers. At the moment he is publicly perched on the barbed-wire fence.</p>
<p>He told the media on Tuesday the Greens supported the “original Gonski”. “We want a genuine needs-based funding model. We want more money going to the schools that need it and we want to ensure that there’s a transparent process for doing that,” he said.</p>
<p>Labor had debased the original Gonski plan, so that “the wealthiest private schools continued to see huge cash pouring in and our neediest public schools weren’t getting the funding that they needed”.</p>
<p>“The government’s proposal seeks to address some of those issues but it creates a whole new set of problems and so we’re being forced to choose between two models, neither of which were proposed by David Gonski originally and that is the great tragedy here,” he said. </p>
<p>Labor is applying maximum pressure to the Greens. Opposition education spokeswoman Tanya Plibersek told caucus on Tuesday: “This is an attack on public education, make no mistake. If the Greens support this it just shows how moronic they are.”</p>
<p>If the government can get the Greens on side it only needs one more Senate vote. If it can’t, it must win ten of the 12 non-Green crossbenchers.</p>
<p>Either way, there is going to have to be haggling.</p>
<p>There are arguments about what the government calculator says particular schools would get under the proposed system, and questions about what schools would receive if the new legislation went down and the status quo remained.</p>
<p>There will be demands for changes in the funding quantum and the timetable and assistance for transition to the new model. Another potential demand would be to establish the National Schools Resourcing Body that Gonski recommended, to oversee the funding model and remove the politics – although that would need a tick off by the states.</p>
<p>The issue may become to the extent to which the government is willing to make compromises. It insists it would not agree to special deals to assist one sector, which would distort the model and generate new difficulties. But it will be very anxious to secure the legislation, to put the Coalition on the playing field in the education battle at the election.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/jj7pe-6b2773?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/jj7pe-6b2773?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77593/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Labor has formally decided to try to thwart the government’s Gonski schools legislation, while the Greens are looking over their shoulder at what their base would think if they opt to back it. Meanwhile…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/746202017-03-15T10:30:32Z2017-03-15T10:30:32ZPolitics podcast: Richard Di Natale on the future of work<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale is calling for a reimagining of the way Australians approach work. “What we’re saying is: let’s have a look at some of the models around the world,” he says.</p>
<p>“It’s absolutely possible, as we’ve seen in places like Sweden, where in the aged-care sector people are working a six-hour day rather than an eight-hour day, but they’re actually delivering a productivity dividend. They’re happier. They’re healthier at work. They’re actually producing just as much as they would be doing in an eight-hour day.”</p>
<p>With the future likely to see many jobs lost to automation, the Greens are keeping an open mind to the notion of “guaranteed adequate incomes”. </p>
<p>“It’s a system that gives people a wage, irrespective of income. It’s not actually means-tested. </p>
<p>"It makes sure that everybody’s got enough to live on. There are a whole range of benefits to the economy. There are few overheads in administering it. So we’re looking … at the trials. We’re watching them very closely in Canada, in Scotland, in France and so on.”</p>
<p>In the wake of an energy crisis, both the federal and South Australian governments are placing a renewed focus on gas in Australia’s energy mix. But Di Natale says we’re having a debate that “belongs in the last century”.</p>
<p>“We shouldn’t be spending a cent on new gas infrastructure. We’ve got some legacy issues with existing gas plants and obviously existing coal-fired power plants. We’ve got to have a transition plan to make sure we can transition away from old, polluting energy generation to new renewable, clean-green generation. That’s the plan that needs to be put in place.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74620/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 Richard Di Natale is calling for a reimagining of the way Australians approach work.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/710702017-01-10T01:41:25Z2017-01-10T01:41:25ZStamping out political rorts requires a cultural change, not more bodies to police it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152203/original/image-20170109-7201-1tispz0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Greens have renewed calls for a federal body to investigate corruption in politics.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Calls for a federal Independent Commission against Corruption-like body <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/entitlements-scandal-shows-need-for-federal-corruption-watchdog/8171712">are growing</a> following Health Minister Sussan Ley standing aside while several of her <a href="https://theconversation.com/sussan-ley-and-the-gold-coast-apartment-murky-rules-mean-age-of-entitlement-isnt-over-for-mps-70993">travel entitlement claims</a> are investigated. </p>
<p>However, a federal ICAC will not solve the sorts of problems Australian politicians have recently embroiled themselves in: wasting money <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-among-so-many-issues-bronwyn-bishops-helicopter-trip-gets-our-attention-45287">riding in helicopters</a> to a party function when they could have driven; <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-heads-roll-ministerial-standards-and-stuart-robert-54479">meeting with business contacts</a> while impartially representing the government; or claiming travel allowances for trips that do not on the surface <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/this-is-not-the-time-of-year-to-submit-to-the-pub-test-minister-20170106-gtn57v.html">meet the “pub test”</a>.</p>
<h2>Why a federal ICAC won’t help</h2>
<p>A federal ICAC won’t solve problems of greed within the current set of rules for MPs. Instead, we need to foster a culture of integrity rather than entitlement. </p>
<p>Australians can pride themselves that they are <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-bribes-please-were-corrupt-australians-59657">not afflicted</a> on a regular basis by corrupt politicians and officials gouging what they can from a hapless public. Australia does not have a culture of corruption, though it does have <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-15/eddie-obeid-sentenced-five-years-jail-misconduct-public-office/8122720">transgressions from time to time</a>. </p>
<p>Australia has processes for good administration and good procurement, solid administrative law and regulatory agencies that generally are not captured by the interests they regulate.</p>
<p>Notwithstanding this, Australia has been slipping in Transparency International’s respected <a href="http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview">Corruption Perception Index</a>. Australia was <a href="http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015">ranked 13th</a> out of nearly 170 countries in 2015, having fallen from <a href="http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results">eighth in 2010</a>. </p>
<p>There are many explanations for this fall. One is not that opportunities for corruption were ever-present, but that people took advantage of these opportunities – and even created them.</p>
<p>An ICAC can only point the finger after the event. Humiliation is a common outcome, but a conviction is rare.</p>
<p>Of the 12 countries that currently rank above Australia on the Corruption Perception Index, only one has a national anti-corruption agency. Singapore, ranked eighth, has a long-standing hardline law-enforcement body. </p>
<p>Australia could never hope to have an agency of similar stature at the federal level. Not only would the resourcing have to be substantial, but it would create a massive turf war with other agencies – and all of this without understanding the problem we are trying to solve.</p>
<p>If the problem is an ingrained culture of corruption, then an ICAC might be considered. If it is arrogant and greedy MPs rorting their allowances, then there are other avenues to fix it.</p>
<h2>What can be done?</h2>
<p>What Australia needs is a stronger culture of integrity. There needs to be a clear understanding that public office is for public benefit and not personal gain. </p>
<p>Yes, people need to be recompensed for doing their jobs. That comes through a salary and allowances for expenses. At the federal level the allowances are generous, and no formal body is going to be able to stop an MP <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/sussan-ley-billed-taxpayers-to-attend-new-years-eve-party-with-job-queen-and-party-donor-sarina-russo-20170109-gtoea3.html">going to a New Year’s Eve party</a> in another state and claiming they conducted business because they met with an important person at the party. </p>
<p>Anybody on the make will always be able to contrive any situation; an ICAC won’t stop these situations. What will stop them is honestly understanding the nature of public service, that they are public property and their behaviour is on the public record.</p>
<p>Contriving travel allowances is not necessarily fraud, but it is certainly waste – waste driven by greed. It is not possible to make a rule for every possible situation, so those who skate on thin ice will always be able to say they have not broken any rules. </p>
<p>However, that is not the solution. The solution is a culture of integrity that is driven from the top. Leaders must lead, be above suspicion themselves and show they have a zero-tolerance approach to the manipulation of the system. Unethical is not necessarily illegal.</p>
<p>A federal ICAC would be expensive, inefficient and divisive. Instead, Australia should opt for an Independent Anti-Corruption Council that would work independently, feel the pulse and refer cases for investigation to appropriate authorities such as the Australian Federal Police, the Public Service Commissioner, the Australian Taxation Office and the Ombudsman. These in turn would take matters to the Director of Public Prosecutions as appropriate. </p>
<p>People are always going to be on the make, but leadership and integrity are a better way to solve the problem rather than another executive agency.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71070/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adam Graycar has received funding from the Australian Research Council and from the Victorian Independent Broad Based anti-Corruption Commission to conduct research on corruption and integrity.</span></em></p>A federal ICAC will not solve the sorts of problems Australian politicians have recently embroiled themselves in.Adam Graycar, Professor of Social and Policy Studies, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/616772016-06-30T01:42:32Z2016-06-30T01:42:32ZElection FactCheck: Does the government spend $3 billion each year on the offshore asylum seeker detention system?<blockquote>
<p>The Greens will reinvest the $3 billion the government spends each year on its cruel offshore detention centre regime. <strong>– The Greens’ leader, Senator Richard Di Natale, <a href="http://greens.org.au/news/vic/beyond-two-party-system">speaking</a> at the National Press Club, June 23, 2016.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale used his National Press Club speech to highlight a key area of policy difference between the Greens and the major parties, describing as “cruel” the offshore asylum seeker detention system supported by the Labor and Liberal parties.</p>
<p>Di Natale said the government spends $3 billion each year on the “offshore detention centre regime”. </p>
<p>Is that right?</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>When asked for a source to support Di Natale’s figure of $3 billion, a spokesperson for The Greens readily admitted it was an error. She said Di Natale meant to say offshore detention cost about $3 billion over the forward estimates (the next four years).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A good catch by The Conversation. We’ve had a look and that was a genuine error in the speech. It should read “over the forward estimates” not “each year”. We’ll be correcting it online, to reflect our other materials <a href="http://greens.org.au/sites/greens.org.au/files/20160607_A%20Better%20Way%20for%20People%20Seeking%20Asylum_1.pdf">here</a> and <a href="http://greens.org.au/sites/greens.org.au/files/A%20Better%20Way.pdf">here</a>, which have the correct figure.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What are the real numbers on the cost of offshore detention each year?</p>
<h2>How much does offshore detention cost?</h2>
<p>For every federal budget, each government department produces a portfolio budget statement outlining its costs and spending plans. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2016-17-pbs-full.pdf">Portfolio Budget Statements 2016-17 for the Immigration and Border Protection Portfolio</a>, shown in the table below, put estimated actual spending for offshore management of IMAs (illegal maritime arrivals, which is what the government calls asylum seekers who arrive by boat) at $1.078 billion for the 2015-16 financial year.</p>
<p>It is expected to fall to about $880 million in the 2016-17 financial year, the document says.</p>
<p>This table shows how much the department intends to spend (on an accrual basis) on some of the programs involved in achieving what it calls Outcome 1.</p>
<p>Outcome 1 is defined as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Protect Australia’s sovereignty, security and safety by managing its border, including through managing the stay and departure of all noncitizens.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=795&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=795&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=795&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=999&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=999&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128450/original/image-20160628-7857-1rlkc9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=999&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some of the budgeted expenses for Outcome 1.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2016-17-pbs-full.pdf">Department of Immigration and Border Protection Portfolio Budget Statements 2016-17.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Please note that the above table is just a portion of budgeted expenses for achieving Outcome 1. You can see the full table on page 27 of <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2016-17-pbs-full.pdf">the report</a>. Total expenses for Outcome 1 for the year 2015-16 are budgeted to be about $4.15 billion.</p>
<p>Adding together the projected cost of offshore detention for the years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 gets you a figure of about $3 billion for the forward estimates. </p>
<p>That is the figure of “$3 billion” Di Natale’s speech referred to, but as his spokesperson points out, he erroneously described it as an annual figure instead of the cost over the forward estimates. </p>
<p>So the real annual cost of offshore detention is currently about $1.078 billion.</p>
<p>That estimate is supported by this Parliamentary Library <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReview201617/Immigration">document</a>, which shows a figure of around $1.1 billion for offshore management of IMAs.</p>
<p>The latest annual <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/annual-reports/DIBP-Annual-Report-2014-15.pdf">report</a> for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection puts the actual spending for offshore management of IMAs at $1.034 billion in 2014-15.</p>
<h2>Onshore management</h2>
<p>As outlined in the table above, the department also estimates that for the year 2015-16 it will spend about $1.24 billion on <em>onshore</em> management of asylum seekers who arrive by boat.</p>
<p>It’s worth noting that from July 2016 onwards, it will be harder to see at a glance how much the government spends on onshore management of asylum seekers. That’s due to budget restructuring, meaning there will no longer be a separate budget item called “onshore management of IMAs”. As the figure below shows, that funding will now be reported, together with some other costs, under the broader “Program 1.3 Onshore Compliance and Detention”. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=676&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=676&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128791/original/image-20160630-15282-l498l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=676&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How the Immigration and Border Protection Portfolio will report slightly differently in the 2016-2017 budget, compared to 2015-2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2016-17-pbs-full.pdf">Portfolio Budget Statements 2016-17, Budget Related Paper No. 1.11 Immigration and Border Protection Portfolio, page 25</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>You can read more about that change on pages 24-25 of the <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2016-17-pbs-full.pdf">Portfolio Budget Statement</a>.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>As his spokesperson readily admitted, Richard Di Natale was wrong to say that the government spends $3 billion each year on the offshore detention centre scheme. The figure is closer to $1.078 billion for the year 2015-16. </p>
<p>Spending on offshore management of boat arrivals is estimated to be close to $3 billion over the forward estimates. <strong>– Fabrizio Carmignani</strong></p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a sound analysis of the budget for processing and management of asylum seekers and refugees in Nauru and Papua New Guinea. It is important to note that the government is also spending large amounts of money on other operations falling within <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/about/operation-sovereign-borders">Operation Sovereign Borders</a> such as disruption of people smuggling operations, border patrols, interceptions and boat turnbacks.</p>
<p>Australia also <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/56715cb79.html">contributes</a> <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/575e74567.pdf">to</a> the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which has said it is <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2015/12/56711bf96/donors-promise-initial-6872-million-unhcr-operations-2016-highest-amount.html">struggling to cover the cost of assisting</a> high numbers of displaced people. <strong>– Mary Anne Kenny.</strong></p>
<p><em>*Correction and Editor’s note: This article was corrected on July 1 to replace the figure of “$880,509” for offshore detention of IMAs for 2016-17 with the real figure of “$880 million”. We also corrected the figure of offshore cost of offshore management of IMAs in 2014-15 from “$1.034” to at “$1.034 billion”. The Conversation apologises for these editing errors and thanks reader Glenn Wilson for alerting us to them. The verdict remains unchanged. This story was updated on June 30 at 1:20pm to add additional information about how onshore management costs will be reported differently in the federal budget from July 2016 onwards (the section beginning with “It’s worth noting…”).</em></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/61677/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fabrizio Carmignani receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project on the estimation of the piecewise continuous linear model and its macroeconomic applications.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Anne Kenny receives sitting fees from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. She has received grant funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Was Greens leader Richard Di Natale right to say the government spends $3 billion each year on the “offshore detention centre regime”?Fabrizio Carmignani, Professor, Griffith Business School, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/605332016-06-29T03:36:30Z2016-06-29T03:36:30ZA fringe group no more, the Greens put the frighteners on the two major parties<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128451/original/image-20160628-7825-7431np.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Greens leader Richard Di Natale will be hoping to snatch seats from the major parties in Saturday's election.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Julian Smith</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the Greens campaign launch in Melbourne last Sunday, Richard Di Natale made it clear to the major parties that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://greens.org.au/news/vic/greens-formally-launch-2016-election-campaign">We’re here to stay. Get used to it.</a> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Di Natale’s defiant declaration reflects the party’s exasperation at the difficulty of asserting their relevance in what is essentially a two-party system.</p>
<p>A range of factors limit the Greens’ ability to maintain a high profile during the campaign. The Greens lack the resources to compete against the major parties on equal terms. Also, the media’s gaze – the source of free publicity – is largely fixed on the major parties. </p>
<p>These factors, and others, make election contests squarely about the major parties. As a result, the Greens have only small windows of opportunity to seize nationwide attention during the campaign. Such opportunities are typically fleeting and unpredictable, and tend to contract as the campaign proceeds. </p>
<p>Yet there is one moment during the campaign when the Greens can be assured that they will be in the spotlight, and this will be thanks to the major parties. </p>
<p>Since the 1990s particularly, the major parties have addressed the presence of minor parties at elections. This moment tends to occur in the final week of the campaign: it is brief, and it is not what could be called a positive experience for the Greens (and other minor parties). It takes the form of an urgent plea by one or both major party leaders to voters to resist against <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/26/malcolm-turnbull-warns-marginal-seat-voters-against-supporting-independents">“a roll of the dice on independents or minor parties”</a>.</p>
<p>This election is proving to be no exception. The polls have the non-major-party primary vote at <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/24/more-than-20-of-australian-voters-will-go-for-minority-parties-poll-shows">around 20%</a>, of which the Greens are likely to attract somewhere in the vicinity of 10%, and perhaps <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016-opinion/fairfaxipsos-poll-labor-still-in-itbut-dig-deeper-and-there-are-big-problems-20160617-gplymr.html">as much as 14%</a> of the first-preference vote. The minor parties, and the Greens particularly, pose both a real and existential threat to the major parties. </p>
<p>However, what is a little different about this election is that the Greens are no longer viewed solely as Labor’s curse. There is a growing perception that the Greens have the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-shock-poll-result-for-kelly-odwyer-higgins-looms-as-indi-of-2016-20160613-gphv3z.html">potential to inconvenience</a> the Liberals in a number of their inner-metropolitan electorates as well.</p>
<h2>Ganging up on the Greens</h2>
<p>In the initial weeks of the campaign, the major parties waxed between indifference and bullish restraint towards the Greens.</p>
<p>Victorian Liberal Party president Michael Kroger gave the Greens something of a back-handed compliment when he declared that the party <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/theyre-not-the-nutters-they-used-to-be-liberal-party-open-to-greens-arrangement-20160310-gnfy0q.html">“was not the nutters that they used to be”</a>. </p>
<p>Also, the Liberals were slow to rule out preferencing the Greens ahead of Labor in key lower house seats on the grounds that such decisions are made <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016-opinion/no-deals-major-parties-rule-out-return-to-gillardera-coalition-government-20160510-goqst4.html#ixzz4CZV387iK">“consistent with the electoral interests of the party”</a>. </p>
<p>Labor also displayed a modicum of self-discipline in its approach towards the Greens, even when forced to divert resources to sandbag otherwise safe seats. </p>
<p>For example, when in early May the Greens made the case for a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016-opinion/the-case-for-a-labor-and-greens-coalition-20160510-goqol7">formalised legislative arrangement</a> with Labor in the event of minority government, Bill Shorten was quite contained in his admonishment that <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-tell-him-hes-dreaming-bill-shorten-rules-out-laborgreens-coalition-20160509-goqdjj.html#ixzz4CZXihWld">“Labor will not be going into coalition with any party”</a>. </p>
<p>With the exception of Anthony Albanese, Labor MPs were careful in their rebuke of the Greens, a condition most likely brought on by the realisation that an aggressive response might alienate the progressive base.</p>
<p>But by the third week of the campaign, both major parties began to harden in their resolve against the Greens. </p>
<p>In late May, it was officially kicked off when the two big parties, at the invitation of the Daily Telegraph, <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/federal-election-2016-turnbull-shorten-pledge-to-never-repeat-gillardgreens-experiment/news-story/c62ed14911e5c4b4933934586416adb6">signed a solemn pledge</a> that neither would enter into an alliance with the Greens in the event that neither major party secures an outright majority in the lower house.</p>
<p>Thereafter, exchanges between the Greens and Labor became less civil. It reached a high watermark when former Labor prime minister Paul Keating <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/paul-keating-launches-withering-attack-on-pathetic-greens-20160625-gprqr1.html#ixzz4CYlhWeiS">referred to</a> the Greens as a “bunch of opportunistic Trots hiding behind a gum tree trying to pretend they’re Labor”.</p>
<p>Similarly, the Liberals finally declared their position on Green preferences. Malcolm Turnbull <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/12/liberals-to-get-labor-preferences-in-three-rural-seats-as-part-of-deal">announced</a> that the party would not move forward on the Kroger plan on the grounds that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… we would end up with an unstable, chaotic, minority Labor-Green-independent government as we have seen before.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>From the perspective of the major parties, the preference agreement is a pragmatic bargain that delivers for both parties in equal measure. </p>
<p>The Liberals will benefit from a Labor how-to-vote card that will help them against the Nationals in three rural seats – <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/murr/">Murray</a> in Victoria, and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/ocon/">O’Connor</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/dura/">Durack</a> in Western Australia. In exchange, the Liberals will issue a how-to-vote card that will assist Labor in four seats – <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/gray/">Grayndler</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/sydn/">Sydney</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/batm/">Batman</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/will/">Wills</a> – where Labor was feeling particularly vulnerable to a potential Green surge.</p>
<h2>The Greens’ response</h2>
<p>While it is difficult to quibble with the strategic merits of the preference agreement for the major parties, the decision was frustrating for the Greens.</p>
<p>But the reality is that the Greens’ prospects in the lower house seat was always more hopeful than certain – something <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/26/tide-turning-greens-launch-campaign-eye-future-polls">Di Natale has always recognised</a>.</p>
<p>Similarly, the Greens have been able to salvage something from the major parties’ preference announcement. It has provided the Greens with further ammunition in support of its narrative that the major parties are the <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2016/06/18/inside-the-greens-federal-election-preference-deal/14661720003386">“Coles and Woolworths of politics”</a>, an allusion many voters are likely to understand. </p>
<p>Nor can it be said that every major party decision has necessarily worked against the Greens’ interests. In the Senate contest, at least, Labor’s how-to-vote card recommendations overwhelmingly continue to favour the Greens. Labor has placed the Greens in number two position in every state and territory, except Victoria where the Greens have been placed in the number five spot on Labor’s how-to-vote ticket (but still ahead of the Liberals). </p>
<p>It is true to say that the Greens, like most other parties, have reason to feel maligned, ganged-up against and misunderstood at one time or another during this campaign. But they can take some comfort from Oscar Wilde’s famous quip that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60533/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>With this election likely to produce a high number of non-major-party primary votes, the Greens have emerged as a strong third option and a headache for both Labor and the Coalition.Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/602562016-06-06T04:39:21Z2016-06-06T04:39:21ZElection FactCheck: could a vote among under 30s in Australia possibly deliver a Greens prime minister?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124708/original/image-20160601-1425-141hay7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Was Richard Di Natale right about voting intentions among under 30s?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Q&A</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>The Conversation is fact-checking claims made on Q&A, broadcast Mondays on the ABC at 9:35pm. Thank you to everyone who sent us quotes for checking via <a href="http://www.twitter.com/conversationEDU">Twitter</a> using hashtags #FactCheck and #QandA, on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/conversationEDU">Facebook</a> or by <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">email</a>.</strong></p>
<hr>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Y9fXRjzhzg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Excerpt from Q&A, May 30, 2016. Watch from 2:24 for the statement being fact checked.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<blockquote>
<p>If there was a vote amongst people who are under 30 in Australia, there’d possibly be a Greens prime minister. – Greens leader Richard Di Natale, speaking on Q&A, May 30, 2016.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale told Q&A that if there was a vote among people aged under 30 in Australia, there would possibly be a Greens prime minister.</p>
<p>Is he right?</p>
<h2>Checking the poll data</h2>
<p>Asked for a source to back up Di Natale’s statement on Q&A, a spokeswoman said</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Published Ipsos polling regularly shows our vote matching it with the other parties amongst young voters.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The spokeswoman pointed to two Fairfax Ipsos polls released over the past few months: one <a href="http://ipsos.com.au/fairfax/turnbull-continues-to-haemorrhage-support/">from April</a> and another <a href="http://ipsos.com.au/fairfax/the-turnbull-honeymoon-fades-but-shorten-makes-little-progress/">from February</a>.</p>
<p>(You can view the Greens’ spokeswoman’s <a href="http://theconversation.com/full-response-from-a-spokeswoman-for-richard-di-natale-60544">full response to The Conversation here</a>.)</p>
<p>Those April and February poll results are shown below in tweets from poll-watcher <a href="https://twitter.com/GhostWhoVotes">Ghost Who Votes</a>.</p>
<p>The April poll did show the Greens doing well among 18-24 year olds, scoring 32% of the vote in this age group. Labor, in this poll, had 33%.</p>
<p>However, these polls have a total sample of about 1,400, and the 18-24 subset is very small. In any case, Di Natale’s claim was about those <em>under 30</em>, not under 25. </p>
<p>In the 25-39 year old range in the April poll cited by Di Natale’s spokeswoman, the Greens vote is 17%.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"721833060640038912"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"698980485880373248"}"></div></p>
<p>However, subsequent poll data from both Fairfax-Ipsos and Newspoll (some of which was released before and some just after this episode of Q&A aired) indicates that Di Natale has exaggerated the level of support for the Greens among younger voters. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ci8BhyYUgAEp9LI.jpg">May 17-19 Fairfax-Ipsos</a> poll has a high Greens vote (14%) relative to other polls, but Labor is clearly in first place among young voters, with the Coalition second and the Greens a distant third. </p>
<p>Even among 18-24 year olds, the Greens have only 25% in the May 17-19 Fairfax-Ipsos poll (below), with Labor on 36% and the Coalition 32%.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"733806945904140288"}"></div></p>
<p>April-May <a href="http://resources.news.com.au/files/2016/05/30/1227888/172704-160531analysis.pdf">Newspoll breakdowns</a> show the same thing; the Greens in Newspoll are at only 16% among 18-34 year olds, with Labor on 38% and the Coalition 33%.</p>
<p>A June poll by Fairfax Ipsos (released <em>after</em> Di Natale made the statement on Q&A) puts support for the Greens among 18-24 year olds at 27%.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"738867732968443904"}"></div></p>
<p>For the Greens to be in an election-winning position among the under 30s, they would need to be ahead of Labor. But both Ipsos and Newspoll have Labor ahead of the Greens among young voters.</p>
<h2>Using Newspoll data to calculate Greens support among under 30s</h2>
<p>The Ipsos breakdowns are for only one poll, with a total sample of 1,500. The Newspoll breakdowns have a much larger total sample of over 6,800. Newspoll has the Greens at 16% for the 18–34 age group.</p>
<p>However, Di Natale’s claim relates to those below 30 (that is, the 18–29 group). We cannot directly calculate the Greens percentage for 18–29 year olds, but we can assume a Greens percentage for 30–34 year olds, and calculate the 18–29 vote from
that assumption.</p>
<p>There are 17 total years in the 18–34 range. I have assumed that any age is as
likely to be interviewed as any other within that group. There are then 12
years in the 18–29 group, and 5 in the 30–34 group.</p>
<p>Let <em>x</em> be the Greens percent among 18–29 year olds, and <em>y</em> be the Greens
percent among 30–34 year olds. We know that the overall figure must sum to
16%.</p>
<p><em>x</em> is multiplied by (12/17), and <em>y</em> by (5/17) to get the correct weights
of these percentages.</p>
<p>We have:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=356&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=356&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124910/original/image-20160602-1951-11kpebx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=356&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>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Rearranging to make <em>x</em> the subject gives:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124911/original/image-20160602-9732-159wtso.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=452&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>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the highly unrealistic case that the Greens have zero support among those
aged 30–34, their support among 18–29 year olds would still only be 23%. </p>
<p>A more realistic figure is that the Greens have 10% support among those aged
30–34. If that is used, they have 19% among those aged 18–29.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Given the data above on the latest poll numbers, Richard Di Natale’s claim that “if there was a vote amongst people who are under 30 in Australia, there’d possibly be a Greens prime minister” is exaggerated. <strong>– Adrian Beaumont</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Editor’s note to readers:</strong> The Conversation’s <a href="http://www.poynter.org/2016/should-journalists-outsource-fact-checking-to-academics/391230/">standard FactCheck process</a> is to ask an academic expert to test claims, and then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. But this FactCheck involved both political and mathematical calculations. So in the interests of fairness and accuracy, we sought two blind reviews of this verdict: one from a political lecturer, the other from a mathematician.</em></p>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>Senator Di Natale has a highly idiosyncratic reading of the polls, to say the least.</p>
<p>If going by the numbers supplied by the Greens spokesperson, the Greens sit on 32% behind Labor on 33% for the 18-24. </p>
<p>Senator Di Natale’s must assume either (1) the Greens were in a 1% range of beating Labor in a first-past-the-post (or plurality) fight; or (2) that Liberals of this age group would tend to send their preferences to the Greens rather than to Labor. We don’t have a first-past-the-post system (which Di Natale knows).</p>
<p>So presumably, he was thinking Liberal preferences would break his way. But many Liberals are very antagonistic to preferencing the Greens over Labor. </p>
<p>The Greens have <a href="http://greens.org.au/no-deal">denied</a> existence of a preference deal with the Liberals and there’s no hard evidence of a Liberal decision across the nation to preference the Greens over Labor.</p>
<p>ABC election analyst Antony Green has <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/05/liberal-preferences-and-green-prospects-at-the-2016-election.html">shown</a> that Liberal preferences went 67% to Labor and only 33% to the Greens at the 2013 election. </p>
<p>Overall, my argument concurs with that of the fact checker. Di Natale’s statement is unrealistic. <strong>– Mark Rolfe</strong></p>
<hr>
<p>I have reviewed the article and I find the author’s conclusions to be reasonably supported by available evidence. The calculations assume equal voter population for each year of age. I have performed my own calculations using Australian Bureau of Statistics population data and this assumption seems reasonable. </p>
<p>Even if we do not assume equal population size for each year of age, the calculations change very little. I would also add the statement cannot be fully confirmed or refuted as there is no data solely for 18-29 year old voters, although this analysis suggests confirmation is unlikely. <strong>– Jake Olivier</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/60256/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale told Q&A that if there was a vote among people who are under 30 in Australia, there’d possibly be a Greens prime minister. What do the polls say?Adrian Beaumont, PhD Student, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/605322016-06-06T00:48:21Z2016-06-06T00:48:21ZSo far so good for the Greens as the campaign passes the halfway mark<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/125257/original/image-20160606-11620-122k979.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Greens leader Richard Di Natale has his eyes on a number of Senate and House of Representatives seats.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Rebecca Le May</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Greens are making surprisingly good strides at this election.</p>
<p>In the early weeks of the campaign, the Greens had Labor on the run, squeezing the ALP on <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/16/greens-vow-to-change-law-to-prevent-penalty-rate-cuts-adam-bandt">penalty rates</a> and the Safe Schools program. It even unsettled senior Labor MPs such as <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/09/battle-for-grayndler-greens-take-on-anthony-albanese-on-his-own-turf">Anthony Albanese</a>. </p>
<p>The Greens’ confident advance forced Labor to expend its energy on talking about the things that it will not do if elected, such as enter a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/09/battle-for-grayndler-greens-take-on-anthony-albanese-on-his-own-turf">coalition government</a> with the Greens in the event of a hung parliament. </p>
<p>Labor has also been under pressure to make some important concessions in key policy areas, such as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/election-2016:-why-asylum-policy-will-become-campaign-hot-topic/7403512">increasing the humanitarian intake</a> of refugees in an attempt to limit the defection of its supporters to the Greens in key inner-city electorates. </p>
<p>But, as the University of Sydney’s Stewart Jackson has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-richard-di-natales-greens-muscling-their-way-into-the-main-game-20160519-goz510.html">observed</a>, the Greens typically start strongly in an election campaign before running out of puff. </p>
<h2>Challenges and controversies</h2>
<p>There have been challenges for the Greens. Some of these challenges are the inevitable consequence of their minor party status. </p>
<p>There is the persistent difficulty for the party in inserting themselves into the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/01/the-third-man-greens-leader-richard-di-natale-campaigns-his-own-way">main election debates</a>. For example, the major parties’ refusal to make room for Greens leader Richard Di Natale at the leaders’ debates serves to reinforce the dominance of the two main political groupings.</p>
<p>There is also the spectre of major party collusion, which might frustrate the Greens’ lower house ambitions. </p>
<p>The most recent turn of events is talk of the Liberals and Labor <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-bandt-alleges-pact-to-bar-greens/news-story/5133d16f8f5815d17369bd54f73c42e5">swapping preferences</a> in order to protect their respective interests in key lower house seats. </p>
<p>Quite apart from those matters outside of the Greens’ control, there have been setbacks that are entirely self-inflicted. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-battleground-grayndler--greens-jim-casey-feels-bad-for-anthony-albanese-over-telegraph-endorsement-20160522-gp0yi3.html">Footage from 2014</a> of the party’s high-profile candidate for Grayndler, Jim Casey, suggesting that an Abbott Coalition government was preferable to a Shorten Labor government jarred with Di Natale’s efforts to reposition the Greens as a progressive mainstream party.</p>
<p>And then Di Natale made headlines for dragging his feet in declaring the family farm in Victoria as a <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-greenss-richard-di-natale-paid-nanny-6-an-hour/news-story/8db8e034b37da64d31bd27a43e508f78?memtype=anonymous">real estate interest</a>, and for allegedly underpaying three <em>au pairs</em>.</p>
<p>These revelations caused the party some embarrassment, particularly given its condemnation of Labor’s refusal to legislate to protect penalty rates, and on the back of their calls for Labor MP David Feeney to be disciplined for <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3595927/David-Feeney-answer-questions-2-3m-house-failed-declare.html">failing to declare an investment property</a> in his electorate of Batman. </p>
<h2>Where does this leave the Greens electorally?</h2>
<p>Before I weigh in on this, I am obliged to state the bleeding obvious: I can only speculate as to probable outcomes. </p>
<p>Having made my excuses, I do think the Greens’ Senate prospects are healthy, notwithstanding the uncertainties the new Senate voting system might generate in terms of possible increases in informal votes and the impact of exhausted voter preferences. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6836-morgan-poll-state-voting-intention-june-2016-201606010708">Roy Morgan</a> polling data indicates the Greens can win two Senate seats in Tasmania and up to two seats in Victoria and New South Wales. The party is also tracking comfortably to win one seat in Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland. A conservative estimate would be that the Greens will claim somewhere between six to nine of the available Senate vacancies.</p>
<p>In the House of Representatives, the party’s prospects are far more limited. In order for their candidates to gain election to the lower house, a number of things have to go the Greens’ way. </p>
<p>A Greens candidate must poll in either first or second place, preferably the former. A Greens candidate that polls in number-two position must hope that the difference between them and the highest-ranked candidate is <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/05/liberal-preferences-and-green-prospects-at-the-2016-election.html#more">less than 10%</a>. The final hurdle is that the preferences from excluded candidates, specifically those from the Liberals, flow in their general direction.</p>
<p>Given this, the Greens are on track to pick up two Victorian seats: Melbourne and Batman. </p>
<p>Adam Bandt is very likely to retain his seat of Melbourne. <a href="http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-228.htm">In 2013</a>, his primary vote increased by more than 7% to 42.62%, as compared to the second-placed Labor candidate, who attracted 26.6% of the first-preference vote. And according to The Australian’s Troy Bramston, Labor is <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/troy-bramston/labor-could-turn-innercity-greens-from-foe-to-friend/news-story/0c8f92c048f0a49db4a6e1002e9c17dc?memtype=anonymous">“not even targeting Melbourne at this election”</a>.</p>
<p>The other seat that is looking very promising for the Greens is <a href="http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-199.htm">Batman</a>, held by David Feeney. </p>
<p>Feeney has made headlines in this campaign not only for failing to disclose an investment property but also for leaving highly sensitive Labor briefing documents at a Sky News studio after a disastrous media interview. </p>
<p>The negative publicity that has engulfed Feeney is of a magnitude that his seat is now firmly in the Greens’ sights. Privately, <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/stay-out-of-the-limelight-labor-mp-told/news-story/c16decf6b0021ab214002da793e18c36">Labor has conceded</a> the seat. The Greens are in a particularly strong position to take advantage of Feeney’s woes because its candidate, Alex Bhathal, has a high profile in the electorate, having contested the seat in 2010 and 2013.</p>
<p>Having said this, it is hard to know where the chips will ultimately fall for the Greens at this election. The party has been known to defy the expectations of commentators, such as it did at the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-election-2015-greens-celebrate-strong-inner-west-showing-against-labor-20150328-1ma2j5.html">2015 NSW state election</a>. But it is equally true is that the party can stumble spectacularly, as it did at the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/tasmania-election-greens-labor-poor-election-results">2014 Tasmanian state election</a>. </p>
<p>For now, at least, the Greens’ campaign has been steady, strategic and adaptive.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60532/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>With four weeks to go there is still much uncertainty in this election campaign. But, so far, the Greens would be pleased with their performance.Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/603402016-06-02T06:52:29Z2016-06-02T06:52:29ZElection podcast: the Greens’ fight for Batman and Wills<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124929/original/image-20160602-7618-w2a2f7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C834%2C3130%2C2099&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Greens candidate for Batman, Alex Bhathal, on the campaign trail at Preston Market.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Pat Hutchens/TC</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Greens, who already hold the seat of Melbourne, are making a big play for two nearby Labor-held seats – Batman, held by David Feeney, and Wills, where the popular Kelvin Thomson is retiring. Labor is especially worried about Batman, where Feeney’s failure to declare his A$2.3 million house added to his already embattled position. </p>
<p>This week The Conversation spoke to Greens leader Richard Di Natale about the Greens’ campaign and ambitions generally, including these two seats.</p>
<p>Di Natale said that if there were a minority Labor government and the Greens were in a balance-of-power situation, he would still hope for an agreement, despite Labor ruling out such an alliance. He indicated the Greens would press for concessions on policy rather than seeking a ministry.</p>
<p>The Conversation also interviewed the Greens candidate in Wills, Samantha Ratnam, and the Labor candidate Peter Khalil, as well as the Greens candidate for Batman Alex Bhathal. David Feeney declined an interview.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60340/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, who already hold the seat of Melbourne, are making a big play for two nearby Labor-held seats – Batman and Wills.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/600112016-05-25T13:54:32Z2016-05-25T13:54:32ZBarnaby Joyce missteps, linking live cattle suspension and boat arrivals<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123961/original/image-20160525-25205-1jr36hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C74%2C960%2C571&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Richard Di Natale, Barnaby Joyce and Joel Fitzgibbon walk together ahead of the regional leader's debate in Goulburn. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Twitter/Richard Di Natale</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The election campaign’s day 17 notably belonged to Barnaby Joyce, and not just for the package of concessional loans he announced for struggling dairy farmers.</p>
<p>For light relief, the day delivered another episode of the Depp-Joyce show. Appearing on American TV Johnny Depp described Joyce as looking like he was “inbred with a tomato”. “It’s not a criticism. I was a little worried … Just he might explode,” the actor quipped to an appreciative audience.</p>
<p>Derision from Depp is instantly returned in mockery from Joyce, who reached for a horror character and shot back: “I think I’m turning into Johnny Depp’s Hannibal Lecter”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VlJkgXQhqso?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Depp’s reflections on Joyce won’t do Joyce any harm with the voters of New England, where he’s under challenge from former independent member Tony Windsor.</p>
<p>It’s another story with this week’s poll reflections on Malcolm Turnbull’s attributes.</p>
<p>Essential and Newspoll have documented a cooling on Turnbull’s qualities, providing some context for his falling approval ratings.</p>
<p>Tuesday’s Essential found that over the last three weeks there has been a seven-point rise in those saying he is out of touch with ordinary people (to 63%) and a five-point increase in the proportion who find him arrogant (to 51%). Those who said he understands the problems facing Australia fell five points to 47%. Turnbull is well ahead of Shorten on a number of attributes – it’s the movements that are interesting. Shorten’s numbers didn’t change significantly.</p>
<p>In Wednesday’s Newspoll the figures on Turnbull’s attributes were mostly going in the wrong direction, while Shorten’s were moving the right way. For example, since February those who see Turnbull as arrogant has risen from 55% to 60%; the proportion who think he is in touch with voters has fallen from 54% to 51%, while those rating him as trustworthy went from 59% to 56%.</p>
<p>Shorten’s score on trustworthiness rose from 44% to 49%; he has had a substantial jump, from 48% to 60%, in those who describe him as in touch with voters. In February, Turnbull led Shorten 54-48% on being in touch with voters; now, Shorten is ahead of Turnbull 60-51%.</p>
<p>Turnbull is much more disciplined than he used to be, but he might have found the campaign trail character-forming on Wednesday.</p>
<p>It started with the ever so mutually polite encounter with Alan Jones. It was their first broadcast since their recent rapprochement-of-convenience and their egos were on strong leashes. Turnbull will be back with Jones during the campaign, but who knows what will happen after, if Turnbull is re-elected and Jones returns to his aggressive self?</p>
<p>The Liberals, who’d been scoring off Labor’s senator Nova Peris pulling the pin on Tuesday, lost a candidate of their own on Wednesday. Carolyn Currie, in the new notionally Labor regional NSW seat of Whitlam, was a small fish. But any drop out is unhelpful, especially when she suggests the area could be best represented by an independent or a Green.</p>
<p>More seriously, Turnbull had to deal with the aftermath of Tuesday’s fiasco, when the claim by Treasurer Scott Morrison and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann of a A$67 billion black hole in Labor’s numbers spectacularly fell apart.</p>
<p>Turnbull dug in. Pushed to say whether he stood by the $67 billion figure, he said: “Well $67 billion is the list of the measures that they have either blocked or proposed or said they want us to roll back. Now if they are changing their position or they have new promises and want to abandon old promises they are entitled to do that. But they should spell it out.”</p>
<p>Pointing to Friday’s debate between Morrison and Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen, Turnbull challenged Bowen to “spell out exactly what his alternative budget looks like”.</p>
<p>For the government to produce a shonky number and then say it is up to Labor to discredit it is outrageous, but we’re already well into the say-anything-and-hope-it-hurts stage of this campaign.</p>
<p>The Morrison-Bowen debate, which precedes Sunday’s Turnbull-Shorten debate, has taken on extra significance after Tuesday’s embarrassing performance. Morrison won’t want a loss.</p>
<p>Avoiding pitfalls is a major test in election debates – one that Joyce failed in Wednesday night’s regional leaders face-off in Goulburn when he was pitted against Labor’s agriculture spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon and Greens leader Richard Di Natale.</p>
<p>As exchanges heated up, Joyce linked Labor’s suspension of the live export trade to Indonesia and asylum seeker boats from there. “Might I remind you that when we closed down the live animal export industry, it was around about the same time that we started seeing a lot of people arriving in boats in Australia,” he said.</p>
<p>It was dangerous ground, implying causality and involvement by the Indonesian government. Joyce had indeed exploded.</p>
<p>Moderator Chris Uhlmann asked Joyce: “Do you realise you are suggesting the Indonesian Government then unleashed the boats in response?”</p>
<p>Joyce replied: “I think it’s absolutely the case that we created extreme bad will with Indonesia when we closed down the live animal export industry.”</p>
<p>Later, he said: “I believe that the independents and the Greens and the Labor Party, when they closed down the live animal export industry, created immense bad will, and our capacity to manage other problems which became present were affected.”</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/5be85-5f8751?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/5be85-5f8751?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60011/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
The election campaign’s day 17 notably belonged to Barnaby Joyce, and not just for the package of concessional loans he announced for struggling dairy farmers. For light relief, the day delivered another…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/596662016-05-20T02:16:39Z2016-05-20T02:16:39ZPolicyCheck: the Greens’ Harm Reduction Innovation Fund drug policy<p><em>Welcome to PolicyCheck, a new form of political coverage that aims to make better sense of policies launched by the major parties in the lead up to the 2016 election. Here, The Conversation’s academic experts look at the history of policies, whether they have been tried in Australia before, and how likely they are to succeed.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>The Greens’ leader Richard Di Natale used the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy <a href="http://www.issdp2016.com/">conference</a> in Sydney to announce a $10 million <a href="http://greens.org.au/harm-reduction">Harm Reduction Innovation Fund</a>. </p>
<p>While there are few details of how the fund will operate, it is designed to invest in new approaches to reducing harms and deaths associated with alcohol and other drug use.</p>
<h2>What is harm reduction?</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.harmreductionaustralia.org.au/what-is-harm-reduction/">Harm reduction</a> aims to reduce the negative consequences of alcohol, tobacco and other drug use for the user and the community by encouraging safer behaviours and creating environments that make use less risky. Examples include <a href="theconversation.com/what-is-drug-checking-and-why-do-we-need-it-in-australia-51578">drug checking</a> and <a href="theconversation.com/why-australia-needs-drug-consumption-rooms-53215">safe consumption facilities</a>.</p>
<p>Harm reduction accepts, without judging, that drug use is part of society and works to reduce the harms associated with drug use rather than focusing on trying to eliminate it.</p>
<p>Harm reduction is one of the three “pillars” of Australia’s current <a href="http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au">National Drug Strategy</a>, which guides Australia’s policy response to alcohol and other drugs.</p>
<p>The other two pillars are demand reduction (designed to prevent the uptake, and reduce the use, of alcohol, tobacco and other drugs in the community) and supply reduction (intended to disrupt the manufacture and supply of illicit drugs and regulate the supply of legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco).</p>
<p>Together, the three pillars form our harm minimisation policy. This has been the long-standing approach to alcohol, tobacco and other drugs in Australia dating back to 1985.</p>
<p>However, the National Drug Strategy does not guide the allocation of funding to the three “pillars”. <a href="theconversation.com/spending-down-on-harm-reduction-for-illicit-drugs-report-15346">In practice</a>, supply reduction receives about two thirds of the funding available for drug responses, demand reduction receives around <a href="http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/news/law-enforcement-takes-lion%E2%80%99s-share-illicit-drug-spend">30%</a> and harm reduction receives just <a href="http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/news/law-enforcement-takes-lion%E2%80%99s-share-illicit-drug-spend">2%</a>.</p>
<h2>The Harm Reduction Innovation Fund</h2>
<p>The proposed fund is a separate investment specifically for harm reduction initiatives, including research and evaluation. Some of the initial ideas put forward by Di Natale (<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/02/richard-di-natale-we-need-to-reclaim-our-courage-and-vision-on-drugs-policy">a former drug and alcohol clinician</a>) include drug checking and safe consumption facilities.</p>
<h3>Drug checking</h3>
<p><a href="http://www.unharm.org/drug_checking">Drug checking</a>, sometimes called pill testing, tests the pharmacological contents of a person’s drugs to allow them to make more informed choices.</p>
<p>Despite the controversy in Australia around drug checking, is not a new idea. Many countries around the world including France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, routinely have drug checking facilities available at festivals. In those countries <a href="https://theconversation.com/six-reasons-australia-should-pilot-pill-testing-party-drugs-34073">it has been shown</a> to change the black market, improve the content of illicit drugs and affect people’s choice about whether to use drugs.</p>
<p>There is a lot of support among young people for this policy. Many drug treatment and law enforcement professionals have spoken out <a href="http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/why-deaths-wont-stop-the-party-drug-test-kits-gain-popularity-as-festival-overdoses-soar/news-story/a25d6eaf98c2781c327de51bf55aa534">in favour</a> of drug checking as one way to prevent deaths at festivals and dance parties.</p>
<h3>Safe consumption facilities</h3>
<p>Safe consumption rooms allow people to use drugs under the supervision of medical staff. They provide space and some equipment like clean needles but do not provide drugs. Australia only has one safe injecting facility, located in Kings Cross, which has been in operation since 2001.</p>
<p>Evaluation of these facilities in <a href="http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/mhdao/Documents/msic-fr.pdf">Australia</a> and internationally has shown <a href="theconversation.com/safe-injection-facilities-more-than-just-a-place-to-shoot-drugs-36386">significant benefits</a> in reducing overdose deaths and increasing access to treatment.</p>
<p>Again, it is not a radical idea. The <a href="theconversation.com/why-australia-needs-drug-consumption-rooms-53215">first supervised injecting facility</a> opened in Switzerland in 1986 and there are at least 88 established centres across the world.</p>
<p>These facilities have growing <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/north/richmond-traders-change-tune-on-support-for-safe-injecting-room-to-combat-drug-use-on-victoria-st/news-story/b1dc86d6c5cee59ff04dc436e57d88df">support in the community,</a> despite initial reservations from the general public when the first one was opened in Australia 15 years ago.</p>
<h2>What’s the provenance of this policy?</h2>
<p>Historically, Australia has been a world innovator and leader in harm reduction. We were among the first in the world to establish <a href="http://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-programming/prevention/needle-syringe-programmes">needle and syringe programs</a> in the mid 1980s, a safe injecting facility, random breath testing, and opioid pharmacotherapies like methadone. As a result of the rapid expansion of needle and syringe programs in the 1980s, we have one of the <a href="en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate">lowest rates</a> of HIV in the world.</p>
<p>But we are now lagging behind other countries, with limited investment in harm reduction activities. A specific allocation of funds to develop innovative harm reduction strategies is a welcome proposal.</p>
<p>The proposed strategies from the Greens, however, are not new. There is ample international evidence that they are effective in reducing harms. Some might argue that they are well established and well evaluated enough across the world to implement now.</p>
<h2>Is it good policy?</h2>
<p>The fund is relatively small. The Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre <a href="theconversation.com/why-australia-needs-drug-consumption-rooms-53215">costs</a> around $3 million a year to run, so the fund is unlikely to be able to fully fund many additional centres.</p>
<p>But a targeted fund like this could provide support for research into new strategies to prevent harms and death among people who use alcohol and other drugs, the largest group of which is young people.</p>
<p>We know that most people who <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/ndshs/">use illicit drugs</a> do so infrequently, for a relatively short period of time and then quit. Keeping them safe and alive until they stop should be a high policy priority. </p>
<p>We also know that some of the greatest harms are from the legal drugs, alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals. Policymakers also need to come up with innovative ways to reduce harms for these drugs as well.</p>
<p><em>Is there a policy you want us to check? Contact us at <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">checkit@theconversation.edu.au</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59666/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Lee works as a consultant to health services to support best practice treatment and policy. She has previously been awarded grants by the Australian Government, NHMRC and other public funding bodies for drug research.</span></em></p>PolicyCheck unpacks the details and history of the Greens’ proposed $10 million Harm Reduction Innovation Fund drug policy.Nicole Lee, Associate Professor at the National Drug Research Institute, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/595832016-05-18T01:02:14Z2016-05-18T01:02:14Z‘Newbie’ leaders are yet to make their mark with voters<p>This is the first Federal election campaign in which the leaders of all three major parties, Turnbull, Shorten and Di Natale, have fought a national campaign as leaders, so this will be the first opportunity for most of the electorate to get to know and to assess them.</p>
<p>Even Turnbull, the better known and recognised of all three, has already had to endure being unknown, when an elderly passenger failed to recognise him as he pretended to be a train conductor.</p>
<p>Turnbull also has to deal with the fact that those who felt they knew him, and held certain expectations as to how he would perform, have become confused, if not disappointed, that he no longer seems to stand for what he used to, nor to be as strong a leader, or as decisive, as they had hoped.</p>
<p>Indeed, one of the challengers in his seat of Wentworth is running on the platform that he wants the “Old Malcolm” back – the Malcolm who used to believe in marriage equality, climate change, and substantive tax reform, and so on.</p>
<p>Shorten’s career seemed to have peaked with his constructive and empathetic role as a union leader at the time of the Beaconsfield mine disaster, and having almost faded out of sight with the ascension of Turnbull, so it would only be natural for the electorate to assess him now in a broader leadership role and, in particular, whether he had been able to shed the tag as just an ex-union leader.</p>
<p>The public forum last Friday evening was the first opportunity, with the exception of their roles in Parliament, for most to see them go head-to-head, before a mixed audience of reportedly “swinging voters”.</p>
<p>Recognising that the questions from the audience were somewhat slanted in favour of Shorten, the result was a victory to Shorten, 42-29, but with 29 still undecided. However, more importantly, perhaps, the electorate could start to see some of their personality traits appear.</p>
<p>It was clear that Turnbull doesn’t like to share his sandpit with anyone; he clearly likes to be the center of attention; to dominate the play; he certainly doesn’t like to have to wait his turn, while the other kids have a chance to play.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Shorten is not the sort of kid that you would like to have to share your sandpit; he’d want to hog the bulldozer, and keep all the shovels.</p>
<p>On the whole, it was a very respectful encounter, but with both sides were struggling to achieve just the right pitch for their messages.</p>
<p>Turnbull has difficulty explaining himself in “plain English”, rather he comes across more as a “banker”, constrained by jargon, and as somewhat “elitist”. So, it is easier for the ALP to tag him as being “out of touch”, and his policies as “unfair”, and designed to ‘favour the top end of town".</p>
<p>By comparison, Shorten relates more easily to “Joe average”, seeming to speak “his” language, and perhaps to even better understand “his” circumstances and challenges, But, he carries the legacy of the bad Rudd/Gillard/Rudd experience, and his roles therein, and a sense that, despite his “transition” (probably the key word of this campaign) from his days leading the AWU and as a member of the ACTU Executive, he is still beholden, and union dominated.</p>
<p>In policy terms, both sides lack adequate detail, passion, and conviction; they are much more reliant on slogans, than substance. So, it’s very difficult for the electorate to believe that either side will actually deliver on what they commit, even if they do come to believe them.</p>
<p>My sense is that the electorate, having mostly lost respect for, and trust in, both major parties, simply feels compelled to have to vote for the lesser of two evils; and when they have cast their vote, then having to live with the evil of two lessers.</p>
<p>So, enter the Greens, as a third alternative, perhaps to hold the balance of power (perhaps along with the “X Factor” Nick Xenophon) in both Houses in a hung Parliament – surely the worst outcome!</p>
<p>Clearly, Di Natalie is no Brown or Milne! He is decidedly much more political, and pragmatic, and much more inclined to “deal” to ensure power, than to die for “principle”.</p>
<p>He is knocking off the extremes and excesses of past Green positions. He has been pushing both major parties to respond to the possibility of a “deal” in the event of a hung Parliament. As such, he can’t be underestimated in terms of his electoral appeal, either as a protest vote, or because he can strike a chord.</p>
<p>Obviously, we still have a long way to go. It will be most instructive as to how these leaders actually perform in coming weeks an particularly, just how much they let their skills, attitudes, values and personalities become determinant in the electoral outcome.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59583/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Hewson is chair of the Asset Owners Disclosure Project, and was federal leader of the Liberal Party from 1990 to 1994.</span></em></p>All three leaders are yet to reveal their skills, attitudes, values and personalities to the electorate.John Hewson, Professor and Chair, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/595452016-05-17T13:10:33Z2016-05-17T13:10:33ZThe Greens grow up<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122860/original/image-20160517-17030-slik87.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/David Moir</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Richard Di Natale’s address to the Lowy Institute was something of a landmark in the evolution of the Australian Greens’ policy agenda. For too long the Greens have been preoccupied with the touchy-feely end of the policy spectrum, and unwilling to dirty their hands in the polluted waters of traditional security issues. </p>
<p>The position outlined by Di Natale on foreign policy and defence may not have been entirely unproblematic, but it compares favourably with anything on offer from the major parties. The central message from his talk – that Australia needs a serious and extensive debate on the rationale for, and basis of, defence policy – looks irrefutable, even if it’s unlikely to be acted on.</p>
<p>If there’s one thing the Greens are right about, however, it’s that climate change is ultimately the biggest threat to security this country or any other will face in the long term. That, unfortunately, is the problem for parties like the Greens. Even though the consequences of climate change are becoming all too apparent, they unfold relatively slowly. </p>
<p>Put simply, the management of environmental problems is fundamentally at odds with democratic processes where the focus of attention is almost exclusively on the immediate and the ephemeral. One of the reasons that a serious debate about the nature of security is so difficult is that the problems are complex and unlikely to come to a head within Australia’s ludicrously truncated electoral cycle.</p>
<p>An added and exclusively Australian reason for the lack of debate about security is the sacrosanct nature of the alliance with the US. Even raising this as an issue not only invites accusations of strategic illiteracy, but also risks confirming the Greens’ reputation as limp-wristed liberals with no understanding of the nature of geopolitics.</p>
<p>The remarkably high levels of support within the Australian public for the ANZUS alliance mean this is what Sir Humphrey Appleby might have called a “very brave” policy. But given that the whole thrust of Di Natale’s address was to highlight the need for leadership and original thought on such issues, such political risks rather go with the territory he is staking out.</p>
<p>There is little doubt that the major parties will not respond positively to the Greens’ call for debate. It is not simply the rather brutal, point-scoring context of electoral politics that ensures this, however. Even in less politically charged times the conventional wisdom is so entrenched on defence issues that an uncritical consensus carries the day. Little wonder the general public goes along.</p>
<p>Predictably – and rightly – Di Natale was pressed on some suitably hot-button defence issues. What do we do about an increasingly aggressive China, came the inevitable question. The answer was not entirely convincing. Pointing out that nobody else has a good answer either was not an unreasonable observation, but one that will undoubtedly be taken out of context. </p>
<p>Let’s hope that Bill Shorten and Malcolm Turnbull are encouraged to answer the same sorts of questions about the rationale for, and expense of, the alliance, the way we might deal with China’s expansionist ambitions and – most importantly, perhaps – the significance of climate change as the principal threat to long-term global security.</p>
<p>Here the Greens are undoubtedly on surer ground, even if it is difficult to get the electorate to take it seriously as a potential vote-changer – or not until it’s too late, at least.</p>
<p>The other problem with this issue is that the benefits of serious policy innovation are likely to flow to people outside Australia first. Not what you would describe as a surefire vote winner.</p>
<p>This also applies to the Greens’ other great foreign policy weakness as far as the majority of the population seems to be concerned: asylum seekers. </p>
<p>There does seem to be a belated recognition among the Greens’ leadership that outside of their committed supporter base, many in Australia do not share their admirably humanitarian principles. This was true before the migration crisis in Europe forced even the civilised Swedes to abandon their generous policy stance. It is doubly so now.</p>
<p>The reality is that making policies that are actually likely to be implemented is difficult and always involves compromises. This is the essence of the political process, after all. Perhaps the much-decried period of power-sharing with the Gillard government actually did some good after all. The Greens know from direct experience what is involved in negotiating policy development and implementation. </p>
<p>Clearly the Greens are a work-in-progress, but they have developed a degree of professionalism and indeed realism that makes them as credible as their opponents, who generally seem bereft of original policies and determined to relive the debates of the last century. </p>
<p>To judge by the apparent thirst for alternative and creative ideas around the world, the Greens moment may have finally arrived.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59545/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Richard Di Natale’s address to the Lowy Institute was something of a landmark in the evolution of the Australian Greens’ policy agenda.Mark Beeson, Professor of International Politics, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.