Archive for the ‘Greens’ Category

Tanner on the Greens

Friday, March 26th, 2010

Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner authored quite an interesting column in The Age yesterday, dredging up one of the most excruciating and ultimately inconclusive debates in Australian leftist politics. What does a vote for the Greens actually achieve? If the Australian Labor Party fails to deliver on the progressive policies hoped for by the broader left, is a vote for the Greens the most sensible option for the modern progressive voter?

Arguably, Tanner’s contribution to the debate is prejudiced; he obviously has some concerns about what an upsurge in support for the Greens would mean for his own federal electorate of Melbourne. If the recent state election results in Tasmania are anything to go by, traditionally Labor-held seats in the inner-city like Melbourne, Sydney and Grayndler may be under increased threat at the next federal election due to the increasing support that the Greens stand to attract, particularly in affluent, inner-city areas. He nevertheless raises some fair points. Would it have been better for the environment, overall, if the Greens provided the support necessary to pass the government’s ETS? Even if it is true that the Rudd Government’s scheme as it currently stands is inadequate for reducing emissions to the extent necessary, surely it would have been better to get some well-meaning scheme over the line and then lobby to improve it, than to have no scheme at all?

While I think that Tanner over-eggs his point of view in his article, I think my own point of view, exemplified by membership of the Labor Party, speaks for itself. As Gough Whitlam once intoned, only the impotent are pure. It will be interesting to observe what happens in Tasmania over the coming weeks, but I can only hope for the sake of the environment that the Greens come to their senses and actively seek an alliance with one of the major parties. It is well past time that the Greens started engaging more with its opponents with the aim of producing the best possible compromise result for its supporters, rather than holding out for some impossible, uber-green solution that will never, ever, ever come about.

Exit Peter Costello, enter … Clive Hamilton?

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

The Greens look set to do something in Peter Costello’s old seat of Higgins that they have often been unable to do: field a high-profile candidate with genuine crossover appeal. Clive Hamilton is certainly not everybody’s cup of tea, but he does have a certain amount of street cred amongst the broader left and the environmental movement. He will also be running against a party in the doldrums both federally and in Victoria, and a Federal Opposition that has a self-destructively schizophrenic position on climate change. The candidate selected by the Liberal Party, former staffer Kelly O’Dwyer, is arguably a sufficiently bland a candidate as to encourage an upset result. One would think that all of these circumstances could conceivably create a situation where even a safe seat like Higgins could become something of a contest. If I were a betting man, I would predict that the result will be closer than the Liberal Party would like, but that they will get over the line.

Federal Labor have elected to do the pragmatic tactical thing and not field a candidate in Higgins – a practice I don’t agree with, but admit makes a certain amount of brutal sense. With another federal election due late next year anyway, and the likelihood of a Labor win relatively low, the potential benefits that might flow from Labor contesting the seat are outweighed by the costs, particularly with a strong Greens candidate now in the mix. Labor have never won the seat of Higgins since its creation sixty years ago.

It’s all a bit incestuous when you think about it. The Greens famously courted Peter Garrett on numerous occasions before his controversial decision during the (pre-explosion) Latham era to join the Labor Party. In years past, high-profile players within the Labor Party organisation seriously entertained the idea of Malcolm Turnbull joining the ALP’s ranks. One does wonder whether Clive Hamilton would be considered an asset as a candidate by the Labor Party. Clearly his strong views on the nature of modern capitalism, climate change and stringent opposition to nuclear power paint him as more of a natural Greens candidate. Leaving aside the much debated travails of Peter Garrett for a moment, just what sort of impact could a few high-profile leftish intellectuals have on the parliamentary Labor party?