Latest / Inside Politics / Best of 2024: What’s going on with the Greens?

Transcript

Best of 2024: What’s going on with the Greens? · Inside Politics

0:02
S1: Hi there, I'm Jacqueline Maley, the host of Inside Politics,
0:06
S1: The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald's weekly politics podcast.
0:09
S1: We're bringing you the best episodes of 2024 before we
0:12
S1: return in early February for the election year. Last year
0:18
S1: was a big one for the Greens, often called the
0:20
S1: third party of Australian politics. They took what was seen
0:23
S1: as a hardline stance backing Palestinians in the war with Israel.
0:28
S1: They owned the issue of affordable housing and controversially came
0:31
S1: to the defence of the CFMEU in the wake of
0:33
S1: revelations the union had been infiltrated by criminals. National affairs
0:38
S1: editor James Massola and federal political correspondent Paul Circle bring
0:42
S1: you this episode today. On January 10th. James, I want
0:53
S1: to start with you because you've reported a lot on
0:55
S1: the Greens in recent times. First of all, can you
0:57
S1: tell us what did the latest Resolve Political Monitor polling
1:01
S1: show about how well the Greens are faring with voters.
1:04
S2: Yeah, look, there are a couple of takeaways for me, Jacqui,
1:07
S2: from the resolve poll. I think it sort of showed
1:10
S2: two slightly contradictory things. First of all, it showed that
1:14
S2: the Greens have taken a small dip in terms of
1:18
S2: their share of the primary vote. What was more significant
1:22
S2: for me was the standing of the party's leader, Adam Bandt. Now,
1:26
S2: Adam Bandt is never going to be the most popular
1:29
S2: political leader in the country because he leads a smaller party.
1:32
S2: You know, you wouldn't expect a massive amount of support
1:35
S2: for him. But, you know, certainly positive territory is possible.
1:39
S2: We've seen that in the past. What this poll showed, though,
1:42
S2: he had a net likeability rating of -50 or -15
1:46
S2: percentage points, and that made him the equal third least
1:51
S2: liked politician in Australia. So you had Lydia Thorpe, the
1:54
S2: former Greens senator, way up on top of the dubiously
1:59
S2: on top of the list. And then you had Pauline
2:02
S2: Hanson coming in second, and then Bandt was equal with
2:05
S2: Bob Katter. So not a great result. The other thing
2:08
S2: I thought that was really interesting, jacki, was we also
2:11
S2: asked a series of detailed questions about Greens policies. Now,
2:16
S2: there was a real disconnect here. For example, the policy
2:20
S2: on putting dental care into Medicare and putting psychological care
2:25
S2: into Medicare that was extremely popular. Many of their other policies,
2:29
S2: student debt relief, things like that were popular as well.
2:32
S2: But that obviously isn't boosting the Greens support, nor is
2:37
S2: it boosting Adam Bandt. It also showed that the party's
2:40
S2: position on the war in Palestine didn't have the level
2:44
S2: of support you might have thought that they would have,
2:47
S2: given that it's an issue that the Greens have spoken
2:50
S2: and focused on so much this year. In some ways,
2:54
S2: you know, I think they probably thought there'd be some
2:57
S2: kind of political dividend from that, but there certainly has
2:59
S2: not been. Yeah.
3:00
S1: Okay. That's interesting. And on that point, Paul, in recent years,
3:04
S1: the Greens have really broadened their scope. Once upon a time,
3:07
S1: they were just pretty much the party of the environment,
3:09
S1: maybe the party of climate change, but they've become a
3:12
S1: much broader based movement. So what other issues have become
3:15
S1: key for the Greens? James just mentioned Palestine.
3:18
S3: Yeah. You often hear this critique from labor people. Now
3:21
S3: that the party is not the party of Bob Brown anymore.
3:24
S3: I think it's a it's simplistic and there's truth to it,
3:26
S3: but there's also some, some a misleading element to it.
3:29
S3: I spoke to Bob Brown and Christine Milne, who was
3:32
S3: his successor as Greens leader a few weeks ago, about
3:35
S3: this question. If you look at the 70s and 80s,
3:37
S3: when the Greens were formed, peace and non-violence and being
3:40
S3: anti-war has always been a really core tenet of the
3:42
S3: Greens party. Environmentalism has obviously been the fundamental part of it,
3:47
S3: and the environment was its probably its biggest issue until
3:51
S3: sometime in the last decade. And Christine Milne and Bob
3:54
S3: Brown both talk about the fact that the inequality crisis
3:58
S3: that really came to to life post GFC. Around the
4:01
S3: GFC and subsequently. Which is kind of, in their view,
4:04
S3: tearing apart Western society. Hollowing out the middle class has
4:08
S3: exacerbated the housing crisis, has created social and both inequality
4:13
S3: and unrest that has come to the forefront of Greens
4:16
S3: political maneuvering. Adam Bandt, in his first years in Parliament
4:21
S3: around 2010, talked about how the Greens are not just
4:24
S3: the environmental party, but are the party of kind of
4:27
S3: radical economic policy. He sees economics and and economic justice
4:33
S3: as just as important a part of Greens political philosophy
4:37
S3: and Greens political tradition as the environment. And I think
4:40
S3: as those issues have risen in salience and climate change
4:43
S3: has potentially dropped in salience slightly because there is greater
4:47
S3: consensus on the left with labor coming on board on
4:49
S3: climate change that has risen in terms of importance within
4:54
S3: the Greens party as a as a point of differentiation.
4:56
S1: Yeah. So we we I mean, we have the social
4:59
S1: issues like Palestine and, you know, LGBT+ kind of issues.
5:03
S1: I think on the one hand. But then we have,
5:06
S1: as you say, the economic issues. So that's like tax reform,
5:09
S1: negative gearing reform, CGT reform and housing affordability. So housing affordability,
5:15
S1: you know, the the Greens housing affordability spokesman Max Chandler-mather
5:19
S1: has almost become I would call him like a breakout
5:21
S1: star from the Greens in recent years. The PM seems
5:25
S1: to personally dislike Max Chandler-mather to quite an intense degree,
5:30
S1: it seems. I mean, what does that tell you? How
5:33
S1: big of a threat is that issue of housing affordability
5:35
S1: and the salience of that, particularly for younger Australians to
5:39
S1: the labor voting bloc or the labor younger voter cohort?
5:43
S2: Look, I think it's hugely significant if you're under 35
5:47
S2: or 40. I think increasingly you're thinking, how the heck
5:51
S2: am I ever going to buy a house? Like, you know,
5:53
S2: absent the bank of mum and dad, which is more
5:56
S2: and more of a factor of getting younger Australians onto
6:00
S2: that rung, You know, the first rung on the ladder. Um,
6:03
S2: housing is absolutely central to the Greens approach to winning
6:08
S2: more support, winning more seats at the next election. I
6:11
S2: think you're right that Max Chandler-mather has been a breakout
6:15
S2: star this year for the Greens. I think you're right
6:18
S2: that the PM doesn't like him. That's extremely clear in
6:22
S2: Question Time.
6:23
S1: That he really doesn't. He really doesn't hide his antipathy
6:27
S1: at all.
6:27
S2: No I know, and look, I actually think there's a
6:29
S2: lot of a young of the young Anthony Albanese in
6:33
S2: Chandler May that they're both firebrands. They're both, you know,
6:37
S2: no compromise. Hard left the sort of warriors for their
6:40
S2: for their causes. And obviously the PM is a bit
6:43
S2: older than Max. And, you know, over time your views
6:46
S2: moderate and you sort of do things differently. But I
6:49
S2: actually think there's some kind of thread there that sort
6:53
S2: of binds them together. Yeah. To bring this discussion back
6:56
S2: to the poll that we ran earlier this week, two
6:59
S2: of the key policies the Greens are pushing phrasing and
7:03
S2: capping rent increases. Phasing out negative gearing and capital gains tax.
7:07
S2: So the rent caps and freezes hugely popular with voters.
7:12
S2: Phasing out negative gearing and capital gains. Not quite as popular,
7:15
S2: but still majority support. So the Greens are kind of
7:19
S2: on a winner there where I think they're losing a
7:21
S2: bit of paint, is they've blocked the labor policies of its, uh,
7:27
S2: bill to rent and help to buy to to housing schemes.
7:30
S2: I think people are disappointed in them doing that much
7:33
S2: in the same way that there was anger at the
7:35
S2: Greens in 2009 when they blocked Kevin Rudd's Carbon Pollution
7:39
S2: Reduction Scheme. It's that they're in that kind of dangerous
7:42
S2: position where it's possible to argue that they're letting the
7:47
S2: perfect be the enemy of the good, or they're not
7:49
S2: allowing anything to happen because they want the utopian kind
7:53
S2: of ideal to be reached, which is their housing schemes. But, um,
7:59
S2: that notwithstanding, Withstanding. Housing has been a key issue and Chandler-mather,
8:04
S2: I think has done really well.
8:05
S1: And Paul, which voter, cohort or cohorts does the green
8:09
S1: hope to steal from labor, in particular with the housing
8:11
S1: affordability issue making it so front and centre?
8:14
S3: Well, it's those who are under rental stress and people
8:17
S3: who have potentially just broken into the housing market as well,
8:20
S3: who are under big mortgage stress. Um, but to, um,
8:24
S3: just to the point of the kinds of voters who
8:26
S3: the Greens want off labor at the last election as well.
8:28
S3: And this goes to James Point. James point two. Um,
8:32
S3: I spoke to a labor person who was from Queensland
8:34
S3: who studied the last election results where the Greens won
8:37
S3: three seats in that city, which is two more than
8:40
S3: they hold across the rest of the country. And the
8:42
S3: key group that they peeled off labor last time was
8:46
S3: a group of voters who were mostly younger but also
8:48
S3: in their 30s and 40. So yeah, on the younger side,
8:50
S3: but not necessarily people in their 20s who are radicals,
8:53
S3: but people largely who wanted to vote against Scott Morrison
8:57
S3: because they were very dissatisfied with that government. Looked to
9:00
S3: Labor and Albanese and saw a small target opposition without
9:03
S3: a kind of hugely ambitious plan to address social and
9:06
S3: economic inequality. So they looked to the Greens at the
9:09
S3: last election because they were looking for a new home.
9:11
S3: They were looking for some ambition on housing, on climate.
9:15
S3: And these are people who wanted to see a more
9:16
S3: constructive approach from the Greens in this term of government,
9:19
S3: a more outcomes based Greens party, which was seeking wins
9:24
S3: and seeking to get runs on the board rather than
9:26
S3: seeking to have kind of hyperbolic, supercharged fights at every point.
9:31
S3: And Labor's hope is that these people who have looked
9:33
S3: at the Greens in this term of government had a
9:35
S3: close look, have found them to be radical on the
9:38
S3: Palestinian issue. But in up to the CFMEU and labor
9:41
S3: hopes some of those people might come back. And in
9:44
S3: Brisbane in particular, where some of those seats were former
9:46
S3: Liberal seats, the liberals hoped that some of those, you know,
9:49
S3: highly educated, higher income Greens voters, which is a significant
9:53
S3: chunk of the Greens base. The Greens base is not
9:55
S3: all 21 year old university radicals come back to the
9:58
S3: Liberal Party.
9:59
S1: Yeah. And you've seen, you know, Labour and Albanese very
10:02
S1: much paint the greens that way or try to paint
10:04
S1: the greens that way in this, in this government as radical,
10:08
S1: unable to compromise and essentially just kind of not serious
10:11
S1: players in sort of the policy space.
10:21
S4: Hi. Morning edition listeners, if you're looking for a series
10:24
S4: to binge over the break, I want to recommend Trial
10:26
S4: by Water. It's a podcast by some of my colleagues
10:29
S4: at The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald. It's about
10:32
S4: a man, Robert Farquharson, who was convicted of murdering his
10:35
S4: three sons by driving them into a dam. And about
10:38
S4: the people who are now questioning that conviction. Trial by
10:42
S4: Water is a compelling and informative podcast series that will
10:45
S4: make you question the way our justice system operates. So
10:48
S4: please take a listen and recommend it to your friends. Thanks.
10:57
S1: The Greens have had a lot of bad publicity this year.
11:00
S1: There was Max Chandler-mather was criticised for appearing at the
11:03
S1: CFMEU rally a few months ago, they've been condemned for
11:07
S1: not condemning pro-Palestinian activism that's turned violent. James, you've reported
11:13
S1: on issues with recently with Greens Senator Dorinda Cox and
11:16
S1: her staff turnover. Tell us about how bad the brand
11:21
S1: damage has been with those kinds of issues. And, you know,
11:24
S1: that's not even mentioning Lidia Thorpe. Former Greens senator.
11:27
S2: Yeah. Look, indeed, I think the Max Chandler-mather issue appearing
11:31
S2: at the CFMEU rally, to go to Paul's point, it
11:34
S2: does hurt the Greens to at least some extent, because
11:37
S2: it's that it throws up that question in the mind of,
11:40
S2: you know, the non 21 year old university radical who
11:43
S2: votes for the Greens. Hang on, what do these guys
11:46
S2: stand for. And similarly with the Palestinian the strong Palestinian
11:50
S2: support I think it just plants seeds of doubt or asks.
11:55
S2: It prompts people to ask questions about who are these
11:58
S2: guys that you know, I voted for in 2022 22
12:01
S2: and on the Dorinda Cox stuff. Look, I think that's
12:04
S2: been pretty damaging for the Greens and in particular for
12:07
S2: Adam Bandt, the party leader, in terms of how they've
12:10
S2: handled it. What we've seen over the last month and
12:13
S2: a half or so, the series of stories that I've
12:16
S2: been writing about this is essentially that Senator Cox has
12:19
S2: lost at least 20 staff over a period of three years. Now,
12:23
S2: a normal backbencher's office has about five staff in it,
12:27
S2: so that's four times a full complement of staff who've
12:31
S2: left in that time. And why these staff are leaving?
12:34
S2: Many of them, not all of them. 15 I've spoken
12:37
S2: to say it is for these reasons. They allege bullying.
12:40
S2: They allege it's it's sort of a difficult work environment.
12:43
S2: Unreasonable demands. Some of them have made complaints to the
12:47
S2: leader's office and they say they haven't been addressed. Some
12:50
S2: of them have made complaints as well to the Parliamentary
12:53
S2: Workplace Support Service, which was set up after the Jenkins
12:56
S2: review to deal with these sorts of issues, because political
12:59
S2: offices are high pressure environments And these staffers, some of
13:02
S2: whom are on the record, some of whom. You know,
13:05
S2: preferred to remain anonymous. They say the PWS has done
13:08
S2: a terrible job at handling these complaints, these issues, and
13:13
S2: all the way through, you know, Adam Bandt, when I've
13:15
S2: asked him at press conferences, when others have asked him
13:17
S2: at press conferences, has said, oh, no, look, it's a
13:20
S2: matter for PWS when I've said, you know what? But
13:22
S2: what about your office? What did it do particularly? What
13:25
S2: did it do before the PWS was even set up?
13:27
S2: Because these complaints go back to late 2021. And he
13:31
S2: just won't answer the question. So what it's resulted in
13:34
S2: is some really bad blood within the Greens, you know,
13:38
S2: between sort of rank and file supporters, particularly in the
13:40
S2: WA branch where Senator Cox is from, and the national office,
13:44
S2: which is saying, look, there's nothing to see here. And
13:46
S2: WA wanted to censure her. The national office intervened to
13:50
S2: stop that happening. And the issue, you know, it's still
13:52
S2: on foot, jacki, but it's it's been tough for them.
13:55
S1: Yeah. And and as you say, Adam Bandt has sort
13:57
S1: of batted the issue, at least publicly. I want to
13:59
S1: ask you about his leadership just to finish up this topic.
14:02
S1: Is he the best person to keep leading the Greens?
14:04
S1: Is he? Does he have a unified team behind him?
14:06
S1: Does he have the support of his party room at
14:09
S1: this stage?
14:09
S2: He does. Adam Bandt does have the support of his
14:12
S2: party room. Jackie. But if the Greens go backwards, uh,
14:18
S2: maybe even if they only hold their ground at the
14:21
S2: next election, I would not be surprised to see him
14:25
S2: step back, though. Certainly there will be people in the
14:27
S2: party room asking questions, because the strong view in the
14:31
S2: Greens has been for a long, long time that their
14:35
S2: best selection is always the election after a labor government
14:38
S2: gets in. Because you get a cohort of labor people
14:41
S2: who think, oh, you know, Kevin Rudd didn't go far
14:44
S2: enough or Julia Gillard didn't do enough, or elbows let
14:47
S2: me down or whoever it might be, and that's the
14:50
S2: opportunity for them to harvest votes. That's this election coming up.
14:53
S2: That's 2025. So if they don't go forward, there'll be problems.
14:57
S1: So it's a big test. Yeah.
14:58
S3: Jack, I just want to make the point on how
15:00
S3: rare it is for reporters to get really good access
15:05
S3: on what goes on in the greens and to kind
15:07
S3: of delve into the fissures inside the party. So James
15:09
S3: has done an exceptional job in in doing that. And
15:11
S3: I think what it's highlighted, something that we're kind of
15:13
S3: aware of but haven't really been able to see reported,
15:16
S3: which is a party culture that's at a real inflection point. Um,
15:21
S3: and I think on the trans issue, the Palestinian issue
15:26
S3: on the CFMEU, you saw this as well. It's a
15:29
S3: a secretive party that doesn't have an ability to do
15:34
S3: the kind of top down leadership that the coalition and
15:36
S3: Labor are able to do, where discipline is able to
15:40
S3: be instilled across a party, machines, that you can reach
15:42
S3: a kind of reasonable outcome on an issue that's pragmatic
15:45
S3: and and satisfies a kind of, uh, a voter who
15:50
S3: doesn't have the most radical view on an issue. I
15:52
S3: think Adam Bandt struggling on a bunch of different topics
15:54
S3: to resist going down the path of the loudest voices
15:59
S3: in his party, which means that their public positions often
16:02
S3: express the most radical position because they are the. They
16:05
S3: are the group with the most energy inside the party,
16:08
S3: and because the party is so secretive and hostile to
16:10
S3: outside voices and outside scrutiny. It means that you get
16:13
S3: these kind of warped positions that become party policy, which
16:16
S3: creates the impression of a party that's too far to
16:18
S3: the left. Yeah.
16:18
S1: It's fascinating. Just on the on the issue of leadership,
16:21
S1: who might take over from Adam Bandt when and if
16:23
S1: he stands aside.
16:25
S2: For me, the two standout candidates would be Larissa Waters
16:29
S2: or Sarah Hanson-Young, and I think Mehreen Faruqi, the current deputy,
16:34
S2: would also have a very good show.
16:37
S1: Paul, just quickly on that.
16:38
S3: Well, I think the answer to that lies in how
16:40
S3: the party deals with this kind of crisis point. It's
16:44
S3: reached crisis is maybe too strong a term, but they're
16:46
S3: definitely at a point where for the first time in
16:48
S3: a really long time, there's media and public scrutiny on
16:51
S3: the party and their and their direction and their style
16:53
S3: and their approach. If the party wants to go down
16:56
S3: the same approach, the same path it's been on, and
16:58
S3: if they determine that the kind of last few months
17:02
S3: of criticism has just been a blip. But this approach
17:04
S3: will work long term. Then they might opt for a
17:06
S3: marine Farooqi or a David Shoebridge or a max Chandler-mather.
17:11
S3: If the party determines that they need to kind of
17:13
S3: reconnect with that older, more informed, more highly educated Greens
17:17
S3: voter than they might up for a Barbara Pocock or
17:19
S3: a Sarah Hanson-Young. A kind of more traditional green.
17:22
S1: There could be blood on the floor after the next election.
17:24
S2: Max is, I think Max Chandler-mather will definitely lead the
17:27
S2: party one day, and it was an oversight on my
17:29
S2: part to not mention David Shoebridge. I think he'd be
17:32
S2: in the mix as well.
17:33
S1: There we go. So many fireworks ahead, we hope. Very quickly,
17:39
S1: let's go to the fate of Labor's misinformation bill, which
17:43
S1: probably a lot of listeners won't even really be across
17:45
S1: or won't even really know much about, because I don't
17:47
S1: think it's been particularly well communicated by the government. Um, Paul,
17:51
S1: just quickly, what is that bill supposed to do?
17:53
S3: It's quite complex, but at its core it gives ACMA,
17:58
S3: the communications regulator, the power to kind of set industry
18:03
S3: standards across social media companies. So x Instagram, TikTok to
18:07
S3: ensure that they have processes in place to deal with
18:11
S3: either mis or disinformation. So either intentional, widespread misinformation that
18:17
S3: causes harm or things that are demonstrably false. The flaw
18:21
S3: in this bill, according to many experts, is that one,
18:25
S3: it's unclear who which agency or fact checker or bureaucrat
18:30
S3: determines what is the truth of an issue. There's also
18:33
S3: conjecture about whether the truth or whether the bill might
18:37
S3: encompass opinion or invective, or whether it's actually just limited
18:42
S3: to things like, um, kind of claims about election processes
18:46
S3: that are obviously false. And then there's also concern about
18:50
S3: what the minister's power is to direct ACMA to look into.
18:56
S3: So the government is keen to impress upon people that
19:00
S3: this bill does not give the regulator the power to
19:03
S3: take down individual pieces of content, which would clearly trigger
19:07
S3: free speech concerns, but rather it forces social media companies
19:11
S3: to create holistic approaches to dealing with mis and disinformation
19:16
S3: at the threat of punishment and fines if they do
19:17
S3: not do so. But particularly with the kind of what
19:21
S3: we see in the US with the increase in influence
19:23
S3: of Elon Musk, uh, much really widespread concern on the
19:29
S3: on the conservative side of politics about censorship and free speech. Um,
19:34
S3: it's quite an inopportune time for Labour to be pursuing
19:37
S3: quite a radical policy of this sort. And as you say,
19:40
S3: I think they've done quite a poor job in convincing
19:42
S3: both the kind of public policy establishment as well as
19:45
S3: the political establishment and just the general public about the
19:49
S3: need for this bill and how it would not impinge
19:52
S3: on free speech.
19:53
S1: Yeah. And as you know, various constitutional experts have pointed out,
19:56
S1: if you're going to have a definition of misinformation, then
19:59
S1: you need to have someone who's the arbiter of the truth.
20:01
S1: And I don't think anyone wants a ministry of truth
20:04
S1: set up or anything.
20:05
S2: Yeah, no one's approaching it for that job, are they? Either. Jackie,
20:08
S2: do you want to do it?
20:10
S1: Thanks very much, fellas. That was very interesting. We're going
20:12
S1: to keep an eye on that legislation, because it does
20:14
S1: look like it's going to be in trouble of passing
20:17
S1: the House and the Senate. So thanks very much. We'll
20:19
S1: see you very soon.
20:21
S2: Great to chat guys. Thank you. Thanks, guys.
20:26
S1: Today's episode of Inside Politics was produced by Julia Katzel
20:30
S1: with technical assistance by David McMillan and Debbie Harrington. Our
20:34
S1: head of audio is Tom McKendrick. Inside politics is a
20:38
S1: production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If
20:41
S1: you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism,
20:43
S1: subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to
20:46
S1: support what we do. Search the Age or Smh.com.au. Subscribe.
20:53
S1: I'm Jacqueline Maley, this is inside politics. Thank you for listening.