Latest / The Morning Edition / High risk or the right time? Zali Steggall on the new teal party

Transcript

High risk or the right time? Zali Steggall on the new teal party · The Morning Edition

0:02
S1: I'm Jacqueline Maley, and you're listening to Inside Politics from
0:05
S1: the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
0:09
S1: This week we have a very special interview for you.
0:11
S1: We are talking to Zali Steggall, who, of course, is
0:14
S1: the community independent MP for Warringah in Sydney's north, and
0:18
S1: she has just announced this week that she will form
0:20
S1: a new political party called Community Strong, with fellow independent
0:24
S1: MP Allegra Spender of Wentworth Zali. A very warm welcome
0:30
S1: to Inside Politics. Thank you.
0:31
S2: It's exciting to be here.
0:33
S1: This move has been much anticipated, much picked over by
0:36
S1: the press gallery, much discussed. Can you tell us how
0:38
S1: long you've been contemplating secretly contemplating forming a political party?
0:43
S2: Oh, look, to be fair, I started thinking about this
0:45
S2: in 2020 when I introduced the Climate Change Act and
0:48
S2: the difficulty in getting the major parties to the table
0:51
S2: on clear, cohesive climate policy that will keep us safe,
0:55
S2: but really take action and do the things that so
0:58
S2: many in our community want. So at that time, I,
1:01
S2: you know, I respect that I am one out of
1:03
S2: 151 votes in the lower house and how to keep
1:07
S2: growing the movement and paying it forward. At the time,
1:10
S2: I felt like the best way to pay it forward
1:12
S2: was actually to help maybe mentor other communities to get
1:15
S2: a community independent electorate elected. So we shared our learnings
1:19
S2: from our 2019 campaign with the teams in Mackellar, North Sydney, um,
1:24
S2: Wentworth and Bradfield and, and broader. Um, and we saw
1:28
S2: that great wave of community independence in 2022, 2025 didn't
1:33
S2: quite result in more. Um, you know, Bradfield, of course,
1:36
S2: Nicolette Bullock got elected, but I guess after seven years,
1:40
S2: I formed the view that it is now time to
1:42
S2: evolve into a different proposition.
1:44
S1: Is it because you felt that the teal movement, as
1:47
S1: it's often called? And no, you don't particularly like that term,
1:50
S1: but it is familiar to voters. Did you feel it
1:52
S1: sort of putted out a little bit or it had
1:54
S1: outgrown its usefulness?
1:55
S2: Not, not really, because I totally respect that some of
1:58
S2: my colleagues want to stay. Community independence, and I hope
2:01
S2: we can work with them as allies to community strong
2:04
S2: in continuing to work on policy. But what I felt
2:08
S2: was a. The feedback from so many where in communities
2:11
S2: where they're not able to succeed as independents, there are
2:14
S2: barriers to entry. It's hard mobilizing enough people, enough resources
2:19
S2: and having the knowledge. And it can be intimidating to
2:22
S2: go out on your own. Coming out as part of
2:25
S2: Community Strong is an opportunity to be part of a
2:27
S2: team where you get the benefits of the team, the
2:30
S2: support of a team, but still the opportunity to respond
2:33
S2: to your community. So it is about supplementing and growing
2:36
S2: the movement. It is not about, um, you know, taking
2:40
S2: over the community independent movement.
2:42
S1: Do you think there's a bit of cognitive dissonance involved
2:44
S1: for some people and some voters that you guys have
2:46
S1: got such strong branding as independents? And that's the I mean,
2:49
S1: it's right there in the name that you're independent. It's
2:52
S1: contrary to a party structure. And here you are going
2:54
S1: into a party structure.
2:56
S2: Sure. I appreciate there is that criticism. But part of
2:59
S2: the analysis around this proposition has been as a community
3:03
S2: independent of those two words, which is the most meaningful
3:06
S2: to the people of Warringah? Is it the fact that
3:09
S2: I'm of the community supported by the community, or is
3:12
S2: it that independence because and I strongly feel it, is
3:16
S2: that responsiveness to community. That's the most important element. And
3:21
S2: essentially the the independence is preserved under community strong because
3:25
S2: we have the free vote. So independence is exercised by
3:30
S2: being able to vote on every piece of legislation on
3:32
S2: its merit, responsive to the feedback I've received from the community.
3:36
S2: I am preserving that right within community strong. So I
3:40
S2: would argue we're taking the best bits of being community
3:43
S2: independence and putting it into an infrastructure that will enable
3:47
S2: us to amplify and grow the movement.
3:49
S1: It is quite an unusual party structure, and you've just
3:52
S1: alluded to it there. It doesn't you won't have ordinary
3:55
S1: branch members like most political parties do. the only actual
3:59
S1: members will be the parliamentary members. And that's just you
4:01
S1: and Allegra at the moment. Explain to us what else
4:04
S1: about the structure is unusual and different to the regular
4:08
S1: party structure.
4:09
S2: Well, and in that respect of membership, we have provision
4:12
S2: for additional classes of membership can be made. But the
4:16
S2: overwhelming feedback I have received from the community and volunteers
4:19
S2: is that they don't want to be members of a party.
4:21
S2: They want to sign up to be a team member,
4:23
S2: to be a volunteer, and to have that good faith
4:26
S2: contract with their MP around policies. Now, the other element
4:30
S2: that is different is that aspect that we will put
4:34
S2: community at the heart and that consultation. So forming a
4:37
S2: community engagement committee with a particular committee around First Nations
4:42
S2: voices and youth voices. Now, our community strongly supported constitutional
4:47
S2: recognition for First Nations people. And so it's important there
4:52
S2: is that that contribution to policy building and having that
4:56
S2: two way street around. How do we come up with
4:59
S2: more sensible solutions? Now, Allegra and I have probably agreed
5:03
S2: on about 90% of things, and I think other communities
5:05
S2: will have different views. But I think we're stronger when
5:08
S2: we focus on what we all agree on than, than
5:11
S2: the maybe last 5% where we might have differences of opinion.
5:15
S1: You've said that you're deeply worried about the rise of
5:17
S1: One Nation, and that's one of your sort of motivations
5:19
S1: for putting forward this movement or this party at this time.
5:23
S1: Tell us a little bit more about that. It seems
5:25
S1: counterintuitive that you would be going after One Nation voters
5:28
S1: who would, on the face of it, seem very opposed
5:30
S1: to the things that your movement stands for.
5:32
S2: I appreciate that maybe traditional One Nation voters, you know,
5:37
S2: the and not probably core policy pillars aligned as me
5:42
S2: and community strong. But for a lot of people indicating
5:46
S2: an intention to vote for one Nation, it's because they
5:49
S2: are feeling politically homeless. They are frustrated with the major parties.
5:54
S2: They see the coalition as being just an infighting, you know,
5:57
S2: the constant leadership challenges and the infighting as being unproductive.
6:02
S2: And they see labor as being unwilling to step up
6:05
S2: to some of the big issues they want tackled, but
6:07
S2: also the frustration that so many are working really hard
6:11
S2: and yet not feeling like they're getting ahead, not feeling
6:14
S2: like the system is working for them, that too often
6:18
S2: big business or big interest lobbying has more sway, and
6:23
S2: you only have to look at a couple of policy
6:24
S2: issues we have before us at the moment, like gambling, advertising, um,
6:29
S2: where overwhelmingly Australians want that dealt with meaningfully so that
6:33
S2: we protect people. And yet the Prime Minister is absolutely
6:37
S2: blocking meaningful reform on that against the wishes of communities.
6:42
S2: Why is it because there is too much sway by
6:46
S2: vested interests in keeping that predatory industry advertising and luring
6:51
S2: people in? So I think, um, for many voters considering
6:56
S2: One Nation, it's because they are angry and frustrated. And
6:59
S2: I hear that. We hear that what we are would
7:03
S2: say is it's not enough to be angry and frustrated.
7:06
S2: You actually have to put forward sensible solutions, and you
7:09
S2: have to have rational policy, and you have to really
7:12
S2: be focused on building consensus for that to happen. So
7:16
S2: I think differently to One Nation and far right. I'm
7:20
S2: very focused on bringing communities together. Um, we won't achieve
7:24
S2: a strong Australia by dividing and blaming, but we will
7:28
S2: by bringing people together.
7:29
S1: So you're actively going to be pursuing those voters who
7:31
S1: are so disaffected with the major parties that they're now
7:34
S1: saying that they're going to support One Nation.
7:36
S2: Absolutely. Because I, I agree that it is frustrating the
7:40
S2: status quo. It hasn't been delivering. Um, and, you know,
7:43
S2: around cost of living, around risk around so many areas
7:46
S2: that where it's frustrating. So transparency process, um, authenticity is
7:52
S2: really important. Um, I think in my seven years in
7:56
S2: this place, and Allegra has been here for four years,
7:58
S2: we've shown our capacity to work hard, to bring reason
8:01
S2: to the table, to listen to experts outside of, um,
8:05
S2: vested interests, um, around how do we build good solutions?
8:10
S1: There was a lot of discussion before the last election
8:12
S1: that there might be a minority government situation. And in
8:15
S1: that scenario, the teal independents or community independents would have
8:18
S1: potentially had the balance of power. Obviously, that didn't happen.
8:21
S1: There was a labor landslide. Were you a bit disappointed
8:23
S1: by that and the sort of lack of clout that
8:26
S1: you have, even as a collective in the lower house,
8:29
S1: and are you hoping to be able to translate that
8:31
S1: to Senate seats?
8:33
S2: Um, it's not about being disappointed, but I worry for
8:35
S2: democracy of how do we get good policy outcomes when
8:39
S2: you have a very dominant one side? So a supermajority
8:43
S2: doesn't deliver good democratic outcomes because more extreme propositions can
8:47
S2: be pushed through without proper scrutiny. And we're seeing that
8:50
S2: around policy areas. We saw that with Epbc reform. We
8:55
S2: are seeing that with some of our the proposals around
8:57
S2: the NDIS, around the tax reform, where there isn't the
9:00
S2: right kind of consultation around the proposition that ultimately gets
9:04
S2: pushed through. But whilst it's hard to get to minority
9:08
S2: government in the lower house, and there's only been twice in,
9:11
S2: I think, our entire entire political history, the upper house
9:15
S2: is a minority. So labor has to negotiate with either
9:19
S2: the Greens or the coalition to pass legislation. I do
9:23
S2: worry that in the future the coalition will be a
9:26
S2: coalition One Nation coalition, and that is the if that
9:30
S2: is the negotiating platform for where we land, I think
9:34
S2: there needs to be a different centrist voice at the
9:37
S2: table and forcing that consultation and negotiation to have better laws.
9:45
S1: Mhm. At the moment, you don't have any candidates for
9:47
S1: the Senate lined up. What kinds of people would you
9:50
S1: see as arising from the community, given that we're talking
9:54
S1: about state based constituencies.
9:56
S2: Yeah, and I appreciate that is different to the lower house,
9:58
S2: but it still has to be Senate candidates that are
10:02
S2: focused on the core policy pillars. So sensible economic management,
10:05
S2: climate action, integrity and equality, and a clear professionalism, and
10:11
S2: that bring to the table that commitment to the values
10:16
S2: and that ability to consult and listen. I look at
10:19
S2: the work someone like David Pocock does for the act.
10:22
S2: He is a political party to be elected in the Senate.
10:26
S2: And I asked, why can't we have more members in
10:28
S2: the Senate doing that kind of diligent analysis and listening
10:33
S2: to their communities, doing the town halls and bringing that
10:37
S2: forward in the Senate as well?
10:38
S1: You raise the example of David Pocock. I mean, he
10:41
S1: already had a bit of fame, you know, a platform.
10:44
S1: He's a pretty well known name. He's got a really
10:46
S1: good record as a sportsman. And also the act is
10:49
S1: a very small community. So he's kind of almost able
10:51
S1: to be like a local candidate. How are you going
10:54
S1: to manage that in in a big state like New
10:56
S1: South Wales, will you choose candidates who've already got a
11:00
S1: bit of a platform, a bit of a name for themselves?
11:02
S1: Have you spoken to anyone about running in New South
11:05
S1: Wales or Victoria? Any any of the states?
11:07
S2: Look, I think now that this is we're on the
11:09
S2: start line right where the 747 has taken off. Um,
11:13
S2: we're building it. Um, and there are people that want
11:16
S2: to contribute that haven't had capacity to or the opportunity. So, um,
11:21
S2: I'm really keen to have those discussions. Allegra and I
11:23
S2: have talked about this of going out on a road
11:25
S2: show out to communities to be able to hear, um,
11:28
S2: in terms of the Senate, it is more challenging to
11:31
S2: have that community focus, but ultimately the Constitution gives every
11:35
S2: member a free vote. And so every senator will also
11:38
S2: have to engage with the merits of the legislation and
11:42
S2: vote properly. You know, clearly something I've observed is too often, um,
11:48
S2: the major party members have a view personally, whether they
11:53
S2: be in the upper house or the lower house. But
11:55
S2: then they vote differently because the party room has determined
11:58
S2: that a different position needs to be achieved. Um, and
12:01
S2: it's like this idea that their personal responsibility has been, uh, is, um, well,
12:10
S2: that they're absolved of the ultimate decision of how they're
12:13
S2: voted on the basis of collective responsibility. And somehow that
12:17
S2: excuses it. I don't accept that. I think we all
12:20
S2: have a responsibility to be authentic to the platform we've
12:25
S2: taken to people when we've been elected and the and
12:27
S2: those values, and to vote accordingly. And so a clear
12:31
S2: commitment in community strong will be that members, whether they
12:35
S2: be in the Senate or the House, have to continue
12:37
S2: to proactively engage with how they vote.
12:42
S1: Kylie Tink, the former member for North Sydney before that
12:44
S1: seat was abolished, she was a community independent who was
12:46
S1: sort of part of your broad movement. Have you spoken
12:49
S1: to her about a possible Senate ticket for 2028.
12:52
S2: Look, I had talked to her about this before the
12:54
S2: last election when North Sydney was abolished. I thought it
12:57
S2: was a real loss after all the work her community
12:59
S2: did and her she was a passionate politician, so good
13:03
S2: on so many issues. Now she's turned her advocacy to
13:06
S2: helping people in need through food bank and getting. You know,
13:10
S2: there is so much the more vulnerable needing assistance. Um,
13:14
S2: and we had discussed it prior to the last election,
13:17
S2: forming a party so that she could run a Senate ticket. Um,
13:20
S2: a time circumstance scale were against us. Um, again, but,
13:28
S2: but it definitely, I guess crystallized for me the need
13:33
S2: to broaden and amplify what community independents were doing. And
13:37
S2: the only way to do that was with a more
13:40
S2: a party structure.
13:41
S1: So is Kylie Tink in the mix for Senate 2028?
13:44
S2: Oh, I think I think her desire to re-enter the
13:48
S2: fray of politics is something you probably need to ask
13:50
S2: her about, but she made a huge contribution and there
13:53
S2: are many others like her. And so it's ultimately going
13:57
S2: to be community led, right? There's no point on proposing
14:00
S2: a candidate if the community and all the volunteers aren't
14:02
S2: behind it. And that's the difference. The major parties pre-select
14:06
S2: they have power deals. They, you know, they parachute people
14:09
S2: into communities. They, you know, I've asked my volunteers how
14:13
S2: many of you can name who are the senators for
14:17
S2: New South Wales? They struggle because there isn't an engagement
14:20
S2: by the senators with the community that they're technically representing.
14:25
S1: But you're I mean, at the moment you don't have
14:26
S1: any candidates, but you're confident that you're going to be
14:28
S1: able to get more candidates in the lower house in
14:30
S1: seats that don't currently have an independent choice, and also
14:34
S1: Senate candidates.
14:35
S2: Look, our capacity to field candidates will be directly linked
14:41
S2: to our capacity, communities coming on board and growing and fundraising. Right. We.
14:45
S2: It is expensive. We. It is a David and Goliath
14:48
S2: battle against the major parties and now against One Nation's
14:52
S2: supercharged by Gina Rinehart. So it's. No one is pretending
14:56
S2: this is going to be easy, but our capacity to
14:58
S2: fill candidates, whether it be lower house or upper house,
15:01
S2: will be directly a direct result of how how much
15:06
S2: we can grow.
15:07
S1: Some people are saying that the the the party structure
15:10
S1: that you're proposing is just a bid to get around
15:13
S1: the donations, laws, changes which are going to come in
15:16
S1: in January 2027, of course. For listeners who don't know,
15:20
S1: those changes basically are going to mean that each each
15:23
S1: candidate in each seat is restricted to spending $800,000 on
15:28
S1: their campaign. But people who are members of a political
15:32
S1: party are able to tap in to a federal or
15:35
S1: a national political fund, which is capped at $90 million,
15:38
S1: which is a lot of money, which.
15:39
S2: Is a very big difference in, um, messaging power with
15:43
S2: your community.
15:44
S1: Yeah. And you and the other independents have been very
15:47
S1: damning of those changes. And so they say that you
15:49
S1: say that they they disadvantage you. So is this just
15:52
S1: kind of trying to sidestep those rules?
15:54
S2: Well, it's acknowledging that they're there. And as an athlete,
15:58
S2: I recognize that you you have to meet the field
16:01
S2: of play. And they are the rules in which the
16:03
S2: 2020 election will be competed, you know, will be undertaken.
16:07
S2: So it would be, I think, you know, naive to
16:11
S2: ignore the consequences of those changes. Nevertheless, they are being
16:15
S2: challenged in the High Court as to whether or not
16:17
S2: they're constitutional. Um, but beyond that, it's that challenge of,
16:22
S2: you know, it's hard for independents and communities to rally enough, uh,
16:27
S2: fundraising within their community to be able to mount the
16:31
S2: kind of campaign to take on a major party candidate. You,
16:35
S2: a major party has the benefit of a national brand
16:38
S2: of recognition. And often their candidates are not scrutinized for
16:42
S2: their individual capability or capacity, you know, their credentials. It's
16:49
S2: kind of swept under the carpet against the overall brand
16:55
S2: umbrella brand of the party. Um, I by establishing community strong.
17:00
S2: We're hoping to bring infrastructure and brand and help elevate
17:05
S2: the profile of candidates to be able to compete against
17:09
S2: that machinery.
17:10
S1: Mhm. People are rejecting the major parties, and it seems
17:16
S1: in that sense, a sort of bad time to be
17:18
S1: forming one. Isn't it counterintuitive?
17:21
S2: Well, I think they're they are rejecting the major parties
17:24
S2: of labor and the coalition because they've been in power
17:27
S2: forever and yet not delivering. And they have structures that
17:31
S2: do not put community voices at the heart of the
17:34
S2: decisions they make. So I would argue this is the
17:37
S2: Kodak moment of Australian politics. You know, we are the
17:40
S2: Uber and they are the old taxis. No offense to
17:42
S2: taxi drivers, but we are talking about bringing competition into
17:46
S2: the Australian political landscape. We look at the US where
17:50
S2: you have an incredibly polarized two party system. It doesn't deliver.
17:54
S2: It doesn't deliver choice for voters, and it doesn't create
17:57
S2: the accountability, right? So I look at European nations where
18:01
S2: there is a lot more choice on the ballot paper,
18:04
S2: and you can then find, I think you bring more
18:07
S2: consensus to the table around policies. Um, so that is
18:11
S2: a proposition. Australian politics are changing. The question is, do
18:15
S2: we have more choices on the ballot paper for Australian people,
18:18
S2: or do we wait and hope things somehow get better
18:21
S2: on their own? I strongly believe you've got to actively
18:26
S2: engage and be part of the solution.
18:29
S1: Just another quick question on donations. If I wanted to
18:32
S1: give to your campaign to Zali Steggall campaign, because I'm
18:35
S1: a local constituent in Warringah, can I still donate specifically
18:38
S1: to you, or does it all have to go through
18:40
S1: the sort of funnel of community strong and then down
18:43
S1: to trickle down.
18:44
S2: Some of those technicalities we have to work out, but
18:47
S2: ultimately the community's strong constitution provides. Funds received will be
18:53
S2: allocated to the objects of Community Strong, which include its
18:57
S2: members getting elected in the lower House and the Senate ticket.
19:00
S2: So ultimately, a donation to Community Strong is a donation
19:03
S2: to me and all the members involved. We will only
19:07
S2: succeed with all of us getting re-elected and more people
19:10
S2: getting elected, right where we've got to be pragmatic about that.
19:13
S2: And I have had capacity to fundraise more than maybe
19:17
S2: other people have been able to and individually. Um, and
19:21
S2: so I will bring a lot of that effort and
19:24
S2: energy to build capacity for others.
19:28
S1: The teal movement, for better or for worse, has been
19:30
S1: associated with climate 200, which is the sort of political
19:32
S1: fundraising vehicle which is headed by Simon Holmes, a court
19:36
S1: businessman and philanthropist. And, you know, different campaigns have taken
19:40
S1: different donations from from that vehicle. Do you have any
19:43
S1: arrangement with Simon Holmes a court or with climate 200
19:47
S1: And community strong?
19:48
S2: No, there is none. We've advised them of our decision. Um,
19:52
S2: I've had very little support from climate 200, but I
19:55
S2: absolutely respect and recognise the help they have provided other
19:59
S2: community independents in building capacity and fundraising for them. Allegra
20:04
S2: has had more support from climate 200 than myself. But, um,
20:09
S2: they are not part of this. Um, there is no
20:12
S2: agreement or anything like that. So the call is for
20:16
S2: if you want to donate to Community strong to donate
20:18
S2: to Community Strong directly. It's not to do it through
20:20
S2: an intermediary.
20:21
S1: Would you take donations from climate 200 in the future?
20:25
S2: Well, I think you've got to remember climate 200 is
20:27
S2: an aggregator of a lot of donations from individuals. So
20:30
S2: my message to individuals is donate directly to climate, to
20:34
S2: community strong.
20:35
S1: But you wouldn't rule out taking, you know, a chunk
20:38
S1: of donation from climate 200. The body.
20:40
S2: Well, again, the way that was done in the past
20:42
S2: is not possible under the donation reform laws. In fact,
20:45
S2: there is a cap of 5000 per donation. So that's
20:49
S2: sort of that point is kind of moot. Um, in
20:52
S2: relation to that, look, community climate 200 is focused on
20:56
S2: community independence, building capacity. And, and I respect that. That's
21:01
S2: their focus. I formed the view that community strong is
21:05
S2: needed to be an alternative, um, opportunity for communities to
21:09
S2: come into the system and engage. Um, and I think,
21:14
S2: you know, we are all supportive of one another to
21:17
S2: grow this movement.
21:18
S1: Will you take defections from the Liberal Party?
21:22
S2: Look, I guess we community strong is a centrist broad church.
21:28
S2: I hope there are labor members and liberal members that
21:30
S2: consider this, but first and foremost, they need to have
21:33
S2: a strong commitment to their community and an endorsement by
21:36
S2: their community. And they need to be have authentic, you know,
21:41
S2: be authentic around the policy, the the core policy pillars
21:45
S2: and the values of community strong. So this is not
21:48
S2: a life raft for a career politician that's been in
21:51
S2: the Liberal Party that's now seeing their fortune dissipate, because
21:56
S2: the Liberal Party is veering off to the right in
21:58
S2: one nation.
21:59
S1: Okay. But you're open to it. If anybody wanted to
22:02
S1: sidle over your way and they had the correct values
22:04
S1: and they wanted to kind of, um, share the policy
22:07
S1: pillars of, of your movement.
22:09
S2: We want to build a team that is genuine around
22:13
S2: that commitment to community, the values and the core pillars.
22:16
S2: So again, it's actually everyone wanting to be part of community.
22:20
S2: Strong has to establish their bona fides from that point
22:23
S2: of view.
22:24
S1: Sally, how ambitious are you for this political party? Is
22:27
S1: it sort of a bid to dominate the centre of
22:29
S1: Australian politics and fill the vacuum that the Liberals have left,
22:32
S1: or is it just a boost to the independence movement?
22:35
S1: I mean, how big do you want this thing to grow?
22:38
S2: It's hard to say. Again, I don't I'm when I've approached,
22:42
S2: you know, when I was 13, I watched the Winter
22:44
S2: Olympics and I thought, I want to go to the
22:46
S2: Olympics as an Australian. And many told me it couldn't
22:49
S2: be done. Wouldn't be done. And yet I won Australia's
22:52
S2: first individual medal and I became world champion. Then when
22:55
S2: I decided to get into politics in 2019 and take
22:58
S2: on Tony Abbott, people told me it can't be done.
23:01
S2: You know, ex Prime Minister, 25 years in the job,
23:03
S2: you're not going to move him. And yet the community
23:05
S2: had a different say. So how big or how small
23:08
S2: community strong becomes will be up to communities.
23:12
S1: And just finally, how will you measure the success of
23:15
S1: this venture? What does success look like for community?
23:17
S2: Strong success looks like. Election night 2028. And people have
23:23
S2: genuinely had a choice, right? And I don't want people
23:26
S2: going to one nation by default because they don't like
23:29
S2: the major parties. I don't want people selecting one party
23:32
S2: over the other, even though they don't like the policies
23:35
S2: that they stand for. So for me, it is about
23:37
S2: competition and choice. And that's what I said to the
23:40
S2: people of Warringah in 2019 when I stood against Tony Abbott,
23:44
S2: it was about the. People will decide. But you, you
23:48
S2: can't vote for what's not on the paper. Right? And
23:52
S2: so people need an option on the ballot paper that
23:55
S2: reflects their views and values.
23:57
S1: So it would it would look like putting up a
23:58
S1: lot of candidates in the lower House and in the Senate.
24:01
S2: Um, it's not a lot of people focus on a
24:04
S2: lot of candidates in lower house. I do lean to
24:08
S2: quality over quantity. Um, because again, I think it's more
24:11
S2: important to do it well in the communities that are
24:14
S2: genuinely mobilized than have just a presence for the sake
24:18
S2: of it. Like we've seen with other parties where they
24:20
S2: often will run a candidate in every seat more for,
24:24
S2: I think, collecting revenue from the AEC than to genuinely
24:28
S2: put a candidate up for to be competitive in that seat.
24:32
S1: Okay. And just final bonus question. We've heard a lot
24:35
S1: this week and last week about a monoculture and Pauline
24:38
S1: Hanson saying that she wants Australians to live under a monoculture.
24:41
S1: What would your sort of pitch be to disaffected One
24:45
S1: Nation voters who you might want to come across to
24:47
S1: community strong who who like the idea of a monoculture.
24:50
S2: Well, in fact, I've actually heard the opposite that a
24:52
S2: lot of people are leaning towards one nation because they're
24:55
S2: frustrated with the major parties, but are really uncomfortable about
24:59
S2: the racist overtone, actually, not just overtones, just the racist
25:03
S2: nature of a monoculture. And some of the things said
25:06
S2: during Pauline Hanson's Press Club address. And so they are
25:10
S2: the ones actually that we are pitching to and inviting
25:14
S2: to come and be part of this because they are
25:16
S2: uncomfortable with that divisive and, and, you know, rhetoric around
25:21
S2: blaming and not recognizing the strength and beauty of Australia
25:26
S2: as its multiculturalism. When I go and sit at citizenship
25:29
S2: ceremonies and I watch people who have often been in
25:32
S2: the country for ten, 20 years as permanent residents, they've worked,
25:36
S2: they've paid taxes, they've cared for people, and now they're
25:39
S2: taking that extra step to become a citizen. I love
25:42
S2: that we celebrate the culture, their heritage, their traditions and
25:46
S2: bring that part of what Australia is a modern Australia
25:49
S2: is a multicultural Australia. Um, and I will absolutely champion that.
25:55
S1: Zali Steggall, thanks so much for being with us and
25:56
S1: taking time in your very busy week. Good luck with
25:58
S1: the new venture. We will follow it with great interest
26:01
S1: on our podcast.
26:01
S2: Thank you.
26:07
S1: You can read all of our political news on our website,
26:09
S1: theage.com.au or smh.com.au. Today's episode was produced by Kai Wong
26:16
S1: with help from Debbie Harrington. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills,
26:20
S1: and our podcasts are overseen by Lisa Muxworthy and Tom McKendrick.
26:24
S1: Before you go, please follow Inside Politics and leave a
26:27
S1: review for us on Apple or Spotify. I'm Jacqueline Maley,
26:31
S1: thank you for listening.