The Greens Ready To Take It To The Next Level

Blog Post
Wednesday 11th November 2009, 2:58pm

In a guest post, former Senator and Greens candidate for the seat of Brisbane Andrew Bartlett explains how the Greens will be pushing hard to win a bunch of new seats at the next federal election.

As was reported in the mainstream media and on a few different blog posts, it was announced this week that I would run for the House of Representatives seat of Brisbane for the Greens. Having spent nearly 11 years in the Senate as a Democrat, and another nine years before that in a wide range of roles within the Democrats, it's an interesting change on a few counts.

Deciding to stick my head up again as a political candidate after 16 months of being able to get involved in issues without a party label on my head is not without its impact. I had just about fully adjusted to being a private citizen and activist without any political party involvement, so I had to be quite sure I was prepared to once again jump back into politics. The dismally inadequate response from both major parties to the issue of climate change played a key role in convincing me to put my hand up as a candidate again, although there is no shortage of other issues also needing more attention than they're currently getting.

Getting involved in the Greens is not much of an adjustment from the Democrats, apart from having to get a better handle on some of the structures and who some of the office holders are. The Greens are still evolving and have developed a broader focus in recent years, and have been shifting into the space and role the Democrats used to play in the Senate. There are far more similarities than differences in the past policy approaches of the two parties. They've shown they're willing to negotiate and compromise, and have put a lot more effort into participating in Committee inquiries - something which is hard to do with a only small number of Senators.

The Greens have even taken on a few of the private senators bills originally produced by Democrat Senators, including one of mine requiring a parliamentary vote before troops can be sent into combat overseas, which has been reintroduced by WA Senator Scott Ludlam.

Despite the obvious fact that the Greens have now become the third party in Australian politics, it should be recognised that they still only have five Senators. The Democrats had more than that from the mid 1980s onwards, right up until their final few years. It was still very hard work being in a team of just 8 or 9 Senators, so for the Greens to have even fewer than that means some issues just cannot be fully engaged with.

This makes the next election crucial for the Greens in a number of ways. The first goal is to obtain sole balance of power in the Senate. This will be dependant on the Coalition losing Senate seats, as well as Greens gaining them.

It is still a difficult ask for a third party to break through in an entrenched two-party system. But that is what has to be the goal for a party such as the Greens if they are not to tread water by only having one or two senators from each state into the foreseeable future.

The Greens tactics will also include concerted pushes in a number of House of Representatives seats with a goal of winning at least one. Like the Democrats, the Greens vote has been smaller for lower house seats in recent times than in the Senate, a pattern which for the Democrats reflected their Senate focus and profile, For the Greens, a higher vote in the House of Representatives will almost certainly also translate into a higher Senate vote. Running a strong and credible campaign in a House of Representatives seat should therefore assist the chances of achieving the Greens' goals in the Senate, as well as strengthening and broadening the Greens vote base. This is one of the key reasons I decided to contest a House of Representatives seat, rather than try for a Senate spot, despite the differences in campaigning for a lower house seat.

Winning a House of Representatives seat would be a bonus and a breakthrough - something the Democrats failed to achieve, despite a couple of close calls. Seats such as Grayndler, Sydney and Melbourne, and perhaps one or two others, should be goals for the Greens and winning them is not out of the question. Getting the seat of Brisbane up on to that list is a goal for the party and for me.

The Coalition will inevitably lose one of their four Senators in Queensland up for election this time - which will be Russell Trood, who is stuck at number four on the single ticket of the merged Liberal National Party (a bit of a shame really, as he is one of the Coalition's more thoughtful contributors). There needs to be at least one more Coalition seat lost in one of the states for the Greens to hold the balance of power on their own, although the likely failure of Family First to retain their sole seat from Victoria and the fact that Nick Xenophon won't be running this time (unless it's a double dissolution) means there will probably end up being only one person sharing the Senate cross-benches with the Greens.

Apart from aiming to gain the balance of power, another core Senate goal for the Greens will be to increase the size of their representation. Only two of the five are up for election again at next year's poll - Christine Milne (TAS) and Rachel Siewert (WA). Milne is very likely to be re-elected. Siewert's position is not as safe, but she is still in with a good chance. The big opportunity for the Greens doesn't lie in retaining these seats, it is how well they go at picking the four or five extra seats that are potentially winnable for them.

Unless their primary vote is close to a quota (approx 14.3 per cent of the primary vote) by themselves, minor parties are always dependent on preferences from both smaller and larger parties. The way these preferences flow is itself complicated by factors such as how much the two major parties poll relative to each other. This makes predications difficult. But there is no doubt the Greens have a credible chance of new Senate seats in all six states, as well as the possibility of a chance in the ACT if they can get a strong candidate. Given they currently have no federal representation at all from the three biggest states of NSW, Victoria and Queensland, it will be crucial for their community and media presence (as well as the sharing of their parliamentary workload) for them to get seats in these three places.

Queensland is particularly important for the Greens, as unlike every other state and territory they have no representation at any level of government here, including local government. The need to regain a Queensland voice in the Senate outside of the two major parties is one of the key reasons I decided to lend my weight to the Greens and get back out there as a candidate. The gap created in a state's representation by not having a member in the Senate from a third party - for the first time since 1981 - is very obvious, at least to me. As well, a seat in Queensland will give the Greens a presence across the nation.

The more seats, the more profile and the more resources, as well a chance to better share the workload. This makes it important for the Greens, and for the future shape of the Senate, for the Greens to make a very strong effort to win every Senate seat they are a chance in.

First published on New Matilda

Bookmark, email and share

Comments

Contrasting the Greens and the Democrats

Firstly I am impressed by the courage and vision of Andrew Bartlett as conveyed above. Clearly he has great insight into the political process which has also been revealed in "The Bartlett Diaries".

He compares the potential of the Greens and with the former position of the Democrats, however I fear there may be an obstacle to that transition having to do with the relative comfort people feel with each party.

The general impression created by the Democrats to an ordinary punter was that the Democrats were decent people with good intentions and not about to threaten our entire way of being. "Keeping the bastards honest" implied in some way that the Democrats weren't bastards. If you were dissatisfied with the major parties then in their heyday the Democrats were a safe choice.

The Greens just don't feel like as safe a choice. Its a more dangerous voting choice which requires a sense of a higher level of desperation in order to make it. There is a strident, angry undertone to the Greens which may feel justified but may also stand in the way of making the transition that Andrew Bartlett discusses.

I think the tragedy of contemporary Australian politics is the lack of representation for green conservatives. The upshot is they are by default rolled into the liberal party where they become a minority and have no voice. If the green conservatives felt they had credible representation the power of the liberal party skeptic MPs would vanish along with their member count.

The tension is rising and there are two ways out of this for the increasingly frustrated green conservatives:

a) a schism in the liberals (where the green conservatives break free of the skeptics) or
b) a schism in the greens (where those concerned about climate break free of the wider non-environmental agenda of the Green party).

I wonder which one it will be ...

by Jim on Thursday 12th November 2009 at 8:51am

A little worried about Greens motives

I can see how The greens have a chance to increase their pressure and influence by winning more seats in the next election. And I can see how a double dissolution would assist this cause. I can also see how a troubled coalition might lose seats, and how some of these might be picked up by The Greens.

What troubles me is that alot of these are maybes. The Greens may get more seats, but will it be enough to exert the sortof pressure required to push Green policies through?

What happens to somethign liek an ETS in the meantime?

The Greens seem to be frozen out of discussions in favour of of the coalition who just seem hopeless and full of skeptics. It seems to be going backwards rather than forwards.

Isnt there an opportunity for the Greens to make somethign happen with Labor, pushing crazy coalition skeptics and lobbyists to the side?

I know its not what the Greens want. What Labor is offerign in an ETS isnt enough, but its definitely more than the Libs and NAtionals are willing to do. They dont even believe.

Isnt making somesort of start better than jeopardizing any start at all? Its been so long already.

And if The Greens did try to work with Labor over this matter, would this necessarily have a negative effect on the future development of the Greens?

Im concerned, because i dont believe there is enough support in the community to get the Greens where they need to be to make something happen.

If the Coalition came back with more support (and it has happened before) that would be devastating. I feel that there is an opportunity here, and I am concerned to see it slip away.

by bill on Thursday 12th November 2009 at 11:22am

preffered transparency

Its great to read some common sense political perspective, representing as I do just one small vote in the grand mêlée its a confidence booster.

Dont really know much about the art & science or the behind the scenes machinations with regard to preference lobbying but can offer a pleb constituent perspective.

Please just stay relevant without compromising the integrity hard won by the Democrats and the Greens.
For me its that uncompromising approach allowing an integrity for the personal beliefs which underpin the political motive that re attracts my vote every time.

It would be really wonderful and quiet amazing if we could actually be kept up to date with regard to preference shuffles across the board, not just from the Greens. Unfortunately the major players probably realized long ago that they would lose to the independents and minor parties if all their compromise deals were exposed.

Thats what good, uncompromised journalistic integrity is all about though, if its there at all.

Perhaps one future day all preference deals will have to be made immediately public in order to be registered as valid. Lets see that one get through.

Its a real shame about Nic, he is an inspirational independent. It would be wonderful to see him in the Greens line up sometime, his political agenda is a parallel after all.

Good luck

by shyt on Thursday 12th November 2009 at 1:39pm

Bartlett

Lets hope Andrew Bartlett actually gets up. It will be dificult for him and we can only stay positive and campaign hard. I hope the QLD division really gets behind him.

by Danielsydney on Monday 16th November 2009 at 9:36pm

Peak oil

Andrew Bartlett would do well to invigorate the Queensland Greens' abysmal record on peak oil mitigation. There is a real groundswell of community grassroots action in South East Queensland, including Transition Towns, local governments starting to prepare peak oil mitigation strategies, and of course even the state government working behind the scenes on its oil vulnerability mitigation strategy. Only the federal government and the local Greens are missing in action. I hope Andrew picks up on this, or the local Greens will continue to be a lost cause on the big picture (non-NIMBY) issues.

by Brisvegas on Monday 23rd November 2009 at 9:29pm

Replies

Thanks for the comments.

The balancing of the various things that people have mentioned - such as appearing reasonable vs "angry undertones", "staying relevant" vs "maintaining integrity", broadening public appeal vs maintaining core principles, etc. Some of the issues Gough Whitlam was getting at when he said "only the impotent are pure"

I've presented these here as competing or binary choices, but in reality they are amongst a variety of things you have to keep in creative tension. Maintaining a clear understanding of what you stand for and what principles and values you seek to represent is the key thing - with that, some of the difficult choices that any growing political party faces are usually resolvable, even while remaining difficult. But if you lose that foundational understanding and become too focused on short-term opportunity or opportunitistic vote-seeking, you will eventually trip yourself. This is particularly the case for a smaller or 'minor' party, who will inevitably attract and retain some support precisely because they are not as driven by the spin, opportunism and hollow pragmatism which all too easily drive the major parties. I'm not interested in having a go at the Democrats - they have a great legacy which in many ways I believe the Greens can and must build on. But the Democrats also made some mistakes, and hopefully the Greens can learn from and avoid those.

The policy issues and principles which have been at the core of a lot of what both the Democrats and now the Greens fight for are too important to simply be satisfied with pottering round making occasional amendments and heart-warming speeches. Expanding public support and thus increasing seats, influence and power in Parliament has to be a key goal. But there are challenges and difficulties in trying to appeal to 40% of the public which are not present when you are only needing to appeal to 10%. There is a reason why opliticians have a habit of not telling people things they don't want to hear, but unfortunately that can mean public support is never developed for difficult issues - the lack of adequate action on climate change is a tragic, current example.

Being practical and realistic, without using it as an excuse to betray core principles is an important part of growing as a party. I hope I can help contribute to that growth and encourage others who believe we need more diversity and some different policy directions in our politics to also devote some energies in this direction.

by Andrew Bartlett on Tuesday 24th November 2009 at 3:33pm

Broadening Greens' support base and representation of Asian Aust

You wrote that (the Greens) 'need more diversity and some different policy directions in our politics'. I note that Asian Australians are grossly under- represented in the Party. What is the Party doing to address this anomaly? With Asians forming such a significant proportion of votes in Australia, their inclusion will not only broaden your support base, but also help to involve the Party in more diverse issues.

by Dr/Mr Wei S YU on Friday 27th November 2009 at 7:10pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.