As most people who read the election news will know by now, the national preference deal between us and Labor is almost 100% bedded down, with a few more details to be hammered out before we sign it off.
The really good news is that, in exchange for preferences from Greens candidates in marginal electorates on the mainland, Labor will direct their second preferences to Greens Senate candidates across the board. In Tasmania, because of the pulp mill, we’re going open ticket, asking voters to determine which of the major parties which support the pulp mill deserves their preferential vote.
Given that ALP preferences in 2004 helped elect Family First’s Steve Fielding off less than 2% of the vote, over the Greens’ David Risstrom, who polled almost five times as much, this deal is crucial to seeing the Greens increase our Senate representation and hold balance of power in the Senate with Labor.
For a discussion of Greens work in the Senate in the last term, and a reflection of what the Greens might do in such a situation, have a read of this or this or this.
One of the most interesting aspects of this almost deal, or of its announcement, is the virulent response it has garnered from the extreme right. Steve Fielding came out swinging with the old chestnut of handing out free heroin to kids on the streets. Mark Vaile followed with a surprisingly similar line. Nick Minchin, the famous climate sceptic, warned of “radical causes that would damage the fabric of our society” and a “frightening reality” that would unfold, engulfing Australia with sensible policies of sustainability, compassion and non-violence. Today, the Australian Christian Lobby launched their election website with an attack on us, claiming we hadn’t responded to their questionnaire. You can read Christine Milne’s response here.
What all these are really demonstrating is that, when you scratch the surface, the positive, ‘reasonable’ image that these extreme right wingers have been quite successfully marketing for some time gets wiped away with a very gentle rub. There’s a lot of nastiness there, and not a lot of compassion. Certainly not a lot of rationality. And, as their lies about our policies demonstrate, no regard for facts.
For so long, the mainstream debate in Australia has been moving so far to the right that we Greens do end up looking like extremists. But, when you see how closely our policies and positions align with mainstream Australians’, on tax cuts vs services, on climate action, on harm minimisation for drug users, on so many issues, it’s clear that we are not the extremists.
You can watch a great panel interview with Bob Brown, Lyn Allison of the Dems and Steve Fielding on yesterday’s Insiders here. Fielding’s attack on the Greens fell rather flat. Bob also responded to the line on Channel Ten’s Meet the Press (transcript here).
In my own experience with drug addicts and addiction, one of the most damaging results is the exclusion from his or her family that occurs when an addict is forced to steal from them in order to fund his habit. Supervised programs in which the drugs are supplied would all but eliminate this aspect, as well as reducing the enormous level of petty property crime that goes hand in hand with the illegal trade. If you find yourself arguing with someone who is stuck in the past and can’t comprehend sensible drug policy, you should simply point out that there will be noone to break into his house or car once the users no longer need to pay for their drugs. Cold logic but I’m sure it would sit well with many of the ‘back in my day!’ generation.
Just so long as the Libs lose the Senate to the Dems or Greens I’m happy.
Tim, next time FF runs their “free heroin in the streets” line, try pointing out that Jesus was the inventor of the harm minimisation approach. Seriously. Their hero/saviour didn’t spend much time moralising, he restored their humanity. The vitriol was saved for those who empahasised moral purity over human wellbeing.