Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
Put a smile on your face: vote Green!
Hello. I attended the National Press Club in Canberra yesterday to hear Bob Brown. Here is his speech.
A decade ago The Greens had a very simple slogan - “No environment no economy”. Today that is even truer.
Ten years ago it was a warning. Now, in 2007; it is a description of our reality. And the farmers, the fishers, the tourism industry workers, the city dwellers on water restrictions – Australians everywhere – know this is true. Without the environment, there is no economy.
And yet John Howard, the now self-defined ‘climate change realist’, persists with the same policies and the same thinking that has failed Australia for the past decade. And Kevin Rudd shows little sign of making that seismic shift in thinking required to address the most urgent matters confronting Australia today – climate change and water security.
John Howard’s so-called ‘good’ economic management has produced another key theme for this election – the growing disparity between his prosperous and comfortable Australia and the millions, including pensioners, who are struggling with huge burdens of personal debt, dramatic increases in the cost of living.
On Monday, a report funded by the Australian Research Council found that one in seven people who rely on charities, is not eating at least one proper meal every day. One third of the 2,700 respondents in the study do not have a decent and secure home. The study found that parents from poor families are going without food so that their children have enough to eat. Another report released on Monday, as part of Anti-Poverty Week, found that Queensland's housing affordability crisis has plunged almost 350,000 residents into poverty. Some people live on as little as $10 a day. This study estimates that more than 65,000 children are living in poverty.
Meanwhile a small but growing number of Australian corporate executives take home pay packets in the millions of dollars.
Back in 1996, Mr Howard condemned Paul Keating for governing for the elites. Howard won government with the slogan ‘For all of us’.
We now know this was a sham. It was not true for Indigenous Australians, for pensioners, for people with disabilities and their carers – and for millions of other Australians who watch as the cost of living rises and their pay packets shrink by comparison. Under Howard’s watch, Australia has become more like America, and more divided than before.
The Greens are here to offer Australians a much better option when they go to their local polling booths. We advocate a more compassionate Australia, a less divided nation.
Different for the Coalition and Labor, Australians who want more than just a change of Prime Minister – who want a real change in our nation’s direction – will vote Green at this year's election. We Greens are progressive and compassionate and we don't change our principles to suit the latest opinion polls.
Like working for a less divided society, protecting the environment is central to the Greens’ vision. It is not something we latched on to in the last few years. And we stand up for human rights consistently; we don't ignore people’s rights when it's inconvenient or unpopular, as Labor was content to do with David Hicks and, more recently, Dr Mohammed Haneef.
The Greens have different values and priorities from both the Labor party and the Coalition.
Where Rudd and Howard repeatedly vote for above-average pay rises for politicians, the Greens have voted to increase the aged pension by $30 a week and restore free pensioner dental services instead. Where Rudd and Howard back tens of billions of dollars in tax cuts favouring the already-rich, the Greens would raise spending on education to best OECD standards, concentrating the money in schools that need it most. Where Rudd and Howard would build more tollways, the Greens would make public transport cheap, rapid and on-time across the nation.
Rudd and Howard want to expand uranium mining - the Greens back clean, renewable energy technology for export instead.
Before I go to some policy issues in detail, let me list some where we are ahead of the Howard government’s thinking.
• First, one where even George Bush is ahead of Howard. Today the US President will be at Congress for the award of the Congressional Gold Medal to the Dalai Lama. Like Bush I had no trouble in greeting the Dalai Lama – while our Howard and Rudd, after churlish procrastination about meeting him at all, met out of public reach. If Ali Alitas warranted an order of Australia, why not the compassionate Nobel Laureate from Tibet.
• The Greens have legislation to ban junk food ads in children’s television viewing hours.
• We would end free plastic bags and pursue a national agreement to extend South Australia’s highly successful beverage container deposit legislation, which makes stopping litter a paying proposition. This would create thousands of jobs across Australia.
• The Greens will end the broad-scale discrimination under national law against Australians on the basis of their sexuality. This includes laws preventing same-sex partners from superannuation entitlements, depriving people of $1 billion over the coming years. We would extend this provision to assure interdependent partners of equal superannuation access – worth another $1 billion over time.
• Enhancing the ideal of ‘one person, one vote, one value’ by bringing proportional representation into the House of Representatives.
• We will vote in the Senate against Mr Howard’s intention to throw out his own laws prohibiting nuclear power stations across Australia.
• I will, for a third time, move to lift the lid off the Excusive Brethren sect which forbids voting and military service, moves money around the world in couriered envelopes, separates families and ardently supports Mr Howard as the ‘right’ Prime Minister – a term he has adopted for himself.
• And we will work to ensure the next government has the gumption to take on Japan, including in the international courts, over its bloody harpooning of our humpback and other whales in our Antarctic territorial waters.
Up front in 2007, Australia will be voting to decide who will be Prime Minister for the next three years – John Howard or Kevin Rudd?
Well, no matter who holds the keys to the Lodge, only a strong, independent Senate will hold the government to account.
So this election is also much very much about the Senate – and restoring it to its proper role as the house of review and a backstop for the people.
SENATE BALANCE OF POWER
There are three possible outcomes in the Senate:
• First, the Coalition could hold all of its seats and retain absolute control of the senate, even if the ALP wins government. That would mean a hostile senate and possible double dissolution, cutting short the next three-year term.
• Second, the Greens could hold the balance of power outright. As Labor’s Deputy Leader Julia Gillard has stated, it is “mathematically impossible” for the ALP to win the 38 seats required for a senate majority in its own right.
• Third, the Greens could share the balance of power with the Democrats, Family First’s lone Senator, or an independent.
In any balance of power configuration, the Greens will have a major role to play. But remember that, if the Greens do achieve the balance of power, our vote will only matter when the major parties disagree with each other.
For example, if the ALP in government supports changes to climate change policy and the Coalition is opposed to it, the Greens in the balance of power will determine the result. Alternatively, if the ALP and Coalition both support further tax cuts for high income earners instead of pensioners, then the vote of the Greens becomes irrelevant.
It is important to note, therefore, that the Greens would be unable to prevent any legislation being passed, or to insist that any legislation be passed, unless we had the support of either Labor or the Coalition.
We Greens would use that Senate balance of power responsibly – just as we have done in the West Australian upper house since 2001, for example – right through the resources boom.
We will restore the Senate’s role as the people’s House of Review, beginning with its vital committee system. We will ensure that Australians have their right – robbed of them by the Howard government – to be heard before vital legislation is debated and voted through the Senate.
Either major party willing, we will have more Senate sitting days to allow for better scrutiny and debate of this nation’s laws and affairs. The Greens will move legislation to ensure fixed 3 year terms of government and so end the Prime Minister’s ability to manipulate election dates. We will move to stop government advertising unless it provides truly essential public information and ensure all taxpayer-funded ads show, along with an authorisation, just how much they cost. We will restore people’s rights to be safely enrolled at election time. On a more comprehensive plane, the Greens will work for a Bill of Rights as in most similar countries around the world – like the United States which achieved this goal two centuries ago.
And we will pursue a new referendum based on the Greens 1999 formula, and then opposed by the major parties, of a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ from Australians to the question: “Do you want our nation to be a republic with an Australian as head of state?”.
We welcome Mr Howard’s proposal for a referendum recognising First Australians at the heart of the Constitution – but it must come from real consultation with the nation’s Indigenous Peoples.
WORKCHOICES
And before I finish talking about balance of power in the Senate I want to make it clear that the Greens are committed to shredding WorkChoices and returning better protection for working Australians, including the right to be represented by unions, and the right to better pay and conditions through collective bargaining.
The Australian Greens are now the only party committed to abolishing the Work Choices regime. We opposed Work Choices at the time it was rushed through Parliament and it has become clear since then that Work Choices is hurting many workers in Australia. We are seeing lower wages, reduced conditions, less job security and less representation at work. Labor now agrees with a surprising amount of Work Choices. But the Greens believe a fair and just industrial relations system must provide a framework that values workers, has collective bargaining at its centre, gives all workers unfair dismissal protection, provides a fair dispute resolution process and acknowledges the important role of unions.
We will negotiate to amend Labor’s workplace laws in the Senate to improve them. But I want to make it very clear: The Greens will not block Labor’s workplace legislation if it means Australians will be left with the unfair and extreme Howard WorkChoices currently cutting workers out of a fair go.
TAX CUTS
The $34 billion tax cuts announced by the Prime Minister on Monday bring the total cuts for the last three years to $100 billion. But a rise in pensions is still off the ledger.
What these tax cuts mean is that Australian families will have more interest rate rises; they will also end up spending more money on private health insurance, more money on private school fees and HECS fees and more money reducing the impact of their own houses of global warming as power prices rise.
The Howard-Costello priorities are, as Mr Costello himself says ‘radical’. I call on Kevin Rudd to resist the urge to get into a tax cutting auction with Peter Costello. Building the nation’s services and infrastructure is a much better and more popular option.
EDUCATION
Labor wants an education revolution. The $34 billion in tax cuts could fund it. The Prime Minister compares our tax rates with the OECD average, but he should look instead at our spending on education. If Australia invested another [$5 billion] in education that would bring us up to best OECD practice and it could also eliminate the future HECS repayments, totalling $645million, made through the tax system each year.
We can build and equip schools for the twenty-first century and attract and keep highly qualified teachers in public education – as well as guarantee pre-school learning for all Australian children – but not tax cuts draining public funds away continued.
PENSIONS
The big end of town is doing well. But Australia’s 2 million aged pensioners are sidelined. They remain John Howard’s forgotten battlers.
We Greens are determined to put pensioners back on the election agenda.
This year Labor and Liberal combined to vote down our Senate motions to halt the politicians’ 7 percent pay rise and to give Australia’s pensioners a much-needed extra $30 per week. In the new parliament we will try again. That’s fair. That’s just. That’s Green Action!
The Howard government has made the cost of ageing and the impending retirement of baby boomers central to its claims of economic responsibility.
The government just relaxed the aged pension assets test so that people who own their own home and have up to $800,000 in super can qualify for a part pension and a health concession card.
This generosity to wealthier retirees costs around $1 billion per year, an amount which will balloon as the number of wealthy retirees increases rapidly over the next ten years.
So what’s so tough about a $30 per week increase in the aged pension for the lowest income retirees?\
Come on John Howard and Kevin Rudd: give Australia’s aged pensioners a fair go!
We can tell you where to find the funds. That $30 per week for pensioners will cost less than the $3.5 billion in tax cuts allocated to people earning over $75,000 a year.
DENTICARE
No Australian child or adult should live with dental caries by 2010. The Howard government torpedoed the $100 million concession cardholders’ dental care program in 1996. Now there are an estimated 650,000 Australians on dental waiting lists. Australians who can’t afford the high costs of private dental care wait for years on public lists to get the care they need. This includes the most vulnerable members of our community – the elderly and people with disabilities. They wait two to three years to have their dental problems cared for – and unforgivable neglect from a government that announced $34 billion in tax cuts just two days ago.
The Greens call for a Commonwealth Dental Scheme for low income earners and their families, to ensure essential dental care and a full dental examination every two years. The prospect of a national Denticare system, paralleling Medicare should be followed up. We will investigate mechanisms to increase access to primary dental services for everyone. Good dental care means healthier citizens and it saves taxpayer’s money otherwise needed for health and hospital services.
PUBLIC HEALTH
The government continues down the path towards an American-style two-tiered health system. The Greens would abolish the taxpayer-funded private health insurance rebate scheme. The current scheme serves the nation so badly that the government top-up for this private system blew out by $283 million last year alone. Yet recent studies show that this expensive rebate is not taking the pressure off Australia’s 750 public hospitals. We would return the $3.5 billion rebate to the public health and hospitals system. This would make available $100 million extra for Tasmania, $100 million for the ACT – and much more for the bigger states. It would provide a big boost for beds and equipment as well as many more trained nursing and medical staff for our public hospitals.
INDIGENOUS HEALTH AND HOUSING
I say “Sorry!” – but not for the influence of the 1950s and ‘60s on my thinking. The Greens share with most Australians a deep sorrow for the Aboriginal people separated from their children, or from their parents, in those same decades.
And the Greens will do everything we can, based on a commitment I renewed last Australia Day, on Palm Island, to provide health and other services essential to end the 17 year shortfall in life expectancy faced by all First Australians.
The Northern Territory intervention has not been accompanied by a long-term plan to close that dreadful gap.
Health experts, including the Australian Medical Association, agree that $500 million per year is required. Taking this figure, Tom Calma, the Social Justice Commissioner, has proposed a plan to lift life expectancy to parity within a generation. The Greens back him.
The Greens policy has always been to recognise the first Australians in the Constitution. However, unlike Howard and Rudd, we back Greens back the Constitutional right of Indigenous Australia in the Northern Territory to receive ‘just terms’ compensation for land taken from them under the government’s emergency intervention laws.
CARERS
There are 2.6 million carers in Australia and this number will increase as our population ages. It has already increased as a result of the failure of the government to invest in services and facilities to meet the needs of people with disabilities. Carers make a huge contribution to society – in monetary terms is worth an estimated $30 billion a year. Their care also comes at a big personal cost to their own health and wellbeing. Deakin University research released this week showed that one third of Australia’s carers are suffering from severe depression and that young people caring for family members with a disability are the most depressed group in Australia.
Australia’s carers must be properly recognised.
The Greens commit to:
• Developing an integrated national carer strategy that formally acknowledges the role and contribution of carers and provides co-ordination of carer policy across government.
• Financial security for carers – we will double the Carer Allowance to $197 per fortnight at a cost of $927 million per annum.
We would:
• provide annual indexation of the Carer Bonus
• introduce a Carers Superannuation scheme, and
• improve funding for respite care across Australia.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change, according to a galaxy of experts, from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty, is a worse threat to the world’s future than terrorism. Australian of the Year, Professor Tim Flannery has pointed out that the greenhouse gas build up in the Earth’s atmosphere has passed the critical 455 parts per million of CO2 equivalent that scientists worry will warm the globe by 2 degrees or more. This may bring catastrophic weather changes, including more mega-destructive storms and bushfires, food-depriving droughts, and mass migrations of people.
Climate change is not a future event – it is here, it is now, and it is already having a costly impact on us all.
The Greens have a comprehensive plan to tackle climate change. Its aim is to make sure Australia plays its part in preventing global temperature increases going beyond that perilous 2 degrees.
Our Six Step Plan:
1. Sets greenhouse gas emission reduction targets at 30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and at 80 percent by 2050.
2. Increases energy efficiency.
3. Ensures 15 percent of Australia’s energy comes from clean, renewable sources by 2015 and 25 percent by 2020.
4. Supports a ‘polluter pays’ emissions trading scheme.
5. Immediately ends the logging and burning of old growth forests in Australia.
6. Ratifies the Kyoto Protocol, so Australia can participate as a full member in global negotiations on post-Kyoto targets.
We will release more detailed policies in these areas as the campaign continues. But let me highlight one area where the Greens are the stand out party: energy efficiency – redirecting currently wasted electricity to new users without more coal mines or coal-fired power stations being needed. We would retrofit Australia’s 7 million households – everybody’s – with energy-saving measures like insulation and solar hot water, within a decade. The Greens Energy Efficiency Access and Savings Initiative (that’s EASI!) will be funded up front by the government. But it will also cut everyone’s power bills and a percentage of that saving will go to repay the government.
This nation-building scheme will create thousands of jobs in metropolitan and rural Australia and, besides cutting everyone’s power bills, it will cut Australia’s greenhouse gas pollution of the atmosphere by a whopping 10 percent.
Already Australia’s 250 biggest energy users, who effectively consume 40 percent of our electricity, are doing energy audits. The Greens would regulate to require those audit recommendations to be implemented. Compare that with Environment Minister Turnbull’s $8 million allocation to change light bulbs, which will eventually reduce greenhouse emissions by four million tonnes per year, equivalent to taking 8 percent of cars off roads. Our energy audits scheme will save roughly eighty-four million tonnes, - 21 times as much as Turnbull’s scheme and more effective than taking every single car, truck and bus off the road.
We would also work with the states to put a rainwater tank in every backyard. We will pursue the rapid implementation of water collection, recycling and reuse schemes in every suburb, town, house and business.
Australia’s water emergency has been made much worse by human- induced and Howard-enhanced climate change. But using Australian technology, organization and long-sightedness, befitting our ‘wide, brown land’, Australia can ensure future water security. Our policies would remove the need to dam the lovely Mary River and its farmlands in Queensland, for example.
GUNNS’ PULP MILL
What will use an incredible 40 billion litres of fresh water, wreck more than 200,000 football fields in area of wild forests, put out 100 million tonnes of greenhouse gases and contaminate the airshed of a valley which is home to 100,000 Australians? What will pour 64 million litres of effluent containing toxic chemicals into Bass Strait every day and yet, just two weeks ago, was licensed to operate for the next 50 years by the nation’s top environmentalist Malcolm Turnbull? You guessed it - Gunns pulp mill!
Howard and Rudd both back the mill. Turnbull and Garrett both back the mill. Well, the Greens and everyone else I have spoken to in the streets of Tasmania, oppose it. Gunns’ prospectus says the pulp mill will create 284 jobs. That’s about half the jobs shed by the logging companies since that wondrous pre-election October day in 2004, when John Howard proclaimed he would save the timber workers’ jobs. It turned out, by the way, that Mr Howard didn’t and he won’t. His party will, however, go on accepting election donations from Gunns.
This massive, jobs-sparse, pulp mill project threatens hundreds of established jobs in the Tamar Valley’s vineyards, farmlands, tourism businesses and fisheries. It will be a job loser. Add to that the predicted health problems from pollution which have lead the Australian Medical Association to oppose the mill.
We Greens would support a chlorine-free, closed-cycled pulp mill, based on existing plantations and sited well away from the populous, beautiful Tamar Valley.
The 2007 election will be decided by voters weighing up a mix of important issues like health, education, interest rates, climate change, transport and housing. Yet voters will also have this Gunns pulp mill burden on their shoulders. It is a litmus test of how well Australia’s lifestyle, and neighbourhoods will be managed by the big political parties.
It bears repeating: if you vote Liberal, you vote for the Gunns pulp mill. If you vote Labor, you vote for the Gunns pulp mill. But if you vote Green you vote for clean air, clean green food and wines, and fisheries, and you vote to save Tasmania’s forests and endangered wildlife.
Mr Howard and Mr Rudd, what is the sense in you subsidising Gunns to log and burn the wild forests at a return of $10 per tonne to Tasmania when, by saving those same forests, you would protect a carbon bank keeping CO2 out of the atmosphere worth $40 per tonne, in an age of carbon trading. Why not ensure the forests of Southern NSW, Victoria and Tasmania are kept as an economically sensible hedge against global warming and to ensure our wildlife heritage.
CONCLUSION
The Australian Greens go to this year’s election offering a plan for Australia which is more far-sighted than either that of the Coalition or Labor. We would build this country as a world leader in science, ecological innovation and good green business; guaranteeing domestic jobs, export income and pride in country in the century ahead.
Ten years ago Coalition senators laughed when I warned of the dangers of climate change. They are not laughing now. Ten years from now this nation can be transforming. But that needs a different hand on the helm. My job, our commitment as Greens, is to accelerate that transformation.
We Greens are better prepared and placed than ever before in our short but brilliant history.
We have a growing membership, near 10,000 with 20,000 more listed supporters and at the last election in 2004, 917,000 Australians put us first on their ballot papers.
In each state and territory The Greens have Senate teams headed by intelligent candidates who are or would make excellent senators. They are: in NSW my fellow Senator Kerry Nettle, who is up for re-election and certain to win a big increase in her primary vote as the reward for her top performance in the Senate these last six years. In Victoria, Dr Richard Di Natale; in Western Australia, Scott Ludlum; in the ACT, former Greens leader in the Territory’s Legislative Assembly, Kerrie Tucker ; in Queensland, Larissa Waters; in the Northern Territory, Alan Tyley and in South Australia, Sarah Hanson-Young.
I am up for re-election in Tasmania where, I must say, the street feedback and warmth I receive from Tasmanians these days point to a good outcome in 2007. My good feeling is boosted a little more by odds for a win offered on me by Portlandbet. Better still, next on my Tasmanian senate team is Andrew Wilkie, the intelligence officer who exposed the Prime Minster’s false excuse of WMDs in Iraq before the 2003 Bush-led invasion .
The last 5 years have witnessed inexcusable suffering, including a massive civilian death toll in Iraq. We Greens will bring Australia’s troops home from combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, to be available for service in our own sometimes unstable region. We will take off the Howard Deputy Sheriff’s badge, while remaining great friends with America, and call Australia, proudly independent and Sheriff in its own affairs.
There is a fundamental difference between the Greens and the old parties. We look 100 years ahead, not just 3 years to the next election. Because if you can put a smile on the face of your grandchildren, you’re soon smiling too.
In Tasmania, a short time back, Kevin Rudd eyed the wild forest with the loggers and proclaimed “I’m 100 percent with (Howard)”. Well we Greens are not. We are his real opposition. We are the plum in Australia’s political pudding.
And remember, voting Green is double value voting. It sends a strong message to whoever is elected. And if that’s not your Greens candidate, your vote carries on at full value to the major party candidate of your choice. You don’t have to vote twice to get double value – simply vote Green.
In 2007 we’re giving 15 million Australian voters the climate – friendly, people friendly, nation-building best option. Ladies and gentlemen of the National Press Club: no one will ever know if you vote Green – except for the smile on your face as you leave the polling booth.
 |
|
 |
 |
| © 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd |
| Disclaimer: | This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors. Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way, please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary. |
Red Rag to a Bull
I was 9 years old. The annoucement came over at school. All teachers and little kids were delighted that Whitlam had been booted out. All adults I saw that day were very happy. My mother was at the golf club where they of course broke out the champagne. She called my father at work. He and others left for the pub in delight. It was certainly a very good day.
Margo: Not at my school - The Gap State high in Brisbane. The school was bitterly divided. We had a debate - I spoke for Whitlam.It's A Lovely Day For A Walk
It was a nice day. So nice that a few friends and I decided to take a stroll up Sir Fred Schonell Drive, straight past the RE and the Regatta without pausing, along Coronation Drive and into the city, stopping for a chat at King George Square. In the middle of the road all the way.
Funny thing was several thousand other people had the exact same idea at the exact same time.
Such A Lovely Day.
Feeling uneasy
Last federal election the Climate Change Coalition came to my notice. I was a bit nonplussed. For years I've defended the Greens against the 'one issue party' claim and downloaded their policy summaries to be able to confound that claim.
The CCC, though, really does seem to fit the 'one issue' bill. Last time around I searched their website for policy statements on other-than-climate-change topics. Nothing. Nor were there any statements on non-cc topics from their candidates.
I seem to recall, too, that they were recommending that voters put a '1' above the line but don't remember seeing any statement about them having registered where their preferences would flow.
About a week ago I emailed the CCC asking them where I could find their non-climate-change policy statements. Their reply simply said "Before the election".
Wow.
I'm feeling distinctly uneasy. Global warming is (if you'll pardon the pun) a hot issue. We're in real trouble if it doesn't affect a lot of voters' choices. But here we have a party that, so far, doesn't give us any idea how their candidates will vote on any issue apart from climate change issues. And while that's a paramount issue I couldn't possibly vote for one of their candidates without knowing how their vote would go on defence, for example. Or industrial relations. Or health.
And if the CCC wants my vote I need them to tell me very clearly where their Senate preferences will be going.
Can anyone enlighten me?
Margo: Hi Cloud, and welcome to Webdiary. Could you email me to discuss nom de plumes? mlkingston@gmail.com. Our policy is real names or nom de plumes should you need to keep your real name secret. Let me know...
UPDATE MARGO: Cloud is Cloud's real and full name. Changed by deed poll. It's on her passport, drivers licence etc. Great name!
Voting Above the Line in the Senate
I have to do this sometime so it may as well be now.
Parties or Groups entitled to be recorded above the line are entitled to register three different preferences (available at electoral offices or the polling booth on the day).
If they do, your above the-line-vote is allocated in order by the Electoral Commission 1/3 to each registered preference distribution (or 1/2 if they lodge two preference distributions).
That means, unless your above-the-line registered Party or Group has registered only one preference, you have no idea where your preferences are going. Outrageous I know, but it is the law. The law all your current politicians agreed to.
Don't vote above the line.
Vote the bastards out - ALL the bastards.
Counting backwards
If one has the happy knack of keeping track of a backwards count, one of the purest pleasures in life - in my experience - is voting below the line in the Senate.
It is an indulgence that I have enjoyed ever since the opportunity afforded itself.
The only dilemma is deciding which of the complete and utter bastards to put last.
As a slight convolution in the exercise, there is also the joy of seeing how far one can get one's vote before it is exhausted....
Nostalgia
Ah, yes, Dr Reynolds, but do you remember the first election we ever voted in? 1975. The Senate ballot was wider than both of us put together or, if you will excuse the expression, laid end to end. Ah but I'm forgetting, you were in Canberra weren't you?
Inches
The first election in which I ever voted was 1974. However, if you expressly mean the election in which both of us first voted, yes, it was 1975.
The Senate ballot in the ACT was also expansive, to the best of my recollection.
Nevertheless, I will grant you that, whether considering the State or the Territory Senate ballot paper, none has yet managed to surpass the both of us put end to end.
For readers unacquainted with Malcolm B Duncan - he is 6'3", and Fiona Reynolds is 5"2" (and we have never yet been, and have no intention of being, laid end to end). Just don't think about all those poor woodchipped trees. And don't think about the possibilities of a Senate paper that would surpass our combined length...
Please explain
As, Dr Reynolds, we share the same birthday (and a gentleman never tells), HOW did you manage to vote in the 1974 election on 18 May?
Naughty Dr Reynolds - probably voted Labor.
Easy meat
I was born in 1955, you were born in 1956, Thus, on 18 May 1974, I was 18 and - given the electoral reforms brought in by the Whitlam government, eligible to vote. You missed out by eight weeks and one day.
Moreover, I did vote Labor. What's naughty about that, especially given the circumstances of that double dissolution?
One all
The reforms (voting at 18) were brought in by McMahon.
I voted Labor in 1975 and I was a member of the Young Liberals at the time. Naughty me - I just thought I was protecting the Constitution - pity the rest of the Country didn't agree with me.
That should get David Davies going.
Perhaps, perhaps
Much as I dislike admitting that I might be wrong, Dr Duncan, I have a nasty feeling that I might have to admit error on this point. Nevertheless, whether it were McMahon or Whitlam, I still voted in a federal election before you did.
Incidentally, I also voted Labor in 1975, and after election night had one of the worst hangovers in my life. Nor bourbon-induced, either.
No Admission Necessary
The period from 1949 to 1983 was not marked by extensive electoral reforms. The coalition government in power from 1949 to 1972 was disinclined to change arrangements which were, as it saw them, working effectively; while the Labor government in power from 1972 to 1975 was unable to persuade a hostile Senate to accept the many initiatives it put forward, and unwilling to seek common ground with its opponents. Two enduring changes were however made to the franchise: in 1962 aboriginal voters were finally given, without exceptions, the right to enrol and vote, while in 1973, the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18.
Australian Electoral Commission -History
Hence the first federal election in which all 18 year olds were entitled to take part was held on 18 May 1974 due to an electoral reform by Whitlam and Murphy. If memory serves, however, troops under the age of 21, including conscripts, serving in Vietnam were allowed to vote under earlier reforms introduced by the Liberals, possibly McMahon. I doubt that there were many, if any in this category by the time of the 1972 election given the earlier withdrawals of ground forces.
Vote Green to get rid of Howard/Hanson supporters.
Senator Abetz believes a preference deal between Labor and the Greens will cause people to leave the country. I suppose most of the people leaving would be Howard or Hanson supporters, bring it on I say.
I dream of a future where the Labor government is the main conservative party opposed by a Green opposition. All the Howard supporters have left and gone to live in the US where the politics may be more to their liking.
standing at the wharf...
John Pratt: "Senator Abetz beleives a preference deal between Labor and Greens will cause people to leave the country."
Does he mean "people" like himself?
If so, I'd loosely follow Sen. Brown's formula concerning Gunns John Gay and be at the docks to see him off. And that's despite the fact that it would cost a lot of money to fly over from Adelaide first.
Dinkum.
Pensioners the forgotten Australians.
As the cost of living soars our sick and elderly are handed crumbs from the mining boom table. No wonder Howard's battlers are leaving him in droves. The politicians have given themselves a pay rise of 8.5%. It is about time Australia's wealth was shared more equitably.
Green Senate candidate Sarah Hanson-Young is showing she has a heart.
Politicians given themselves a payrise of 85% not 8.5%
Sorry about the decimal point. That's right 85 percent. The politicians have given themselves an 85 percent pay rise. I believe politicians' pay increases should be linked to pensions. Then we may see a real change.
Fiona: The decimal point was my error, John. You had written "eight five percent". My apologies.
Greens would lower the voting age to 16.
Bob Brown in his speech to the Press Club on Wednesday said the Greens would support lowering the voting age to 16. In contrast Howard has disenfranchised many of our young voters by cutting short enrolment date.
My seventeen year old granddaughter who helped me hand out ALP how to vote cards at the last federal election is very disappointed that she has missed out on voting by just three days.
She is well educated and has been in the workforce for 2 years she is not allowed to have a say on the type of political leadership that will shape her future. The climate change decisions made today will effect the world in thirty, forty and fifty years time most of us over 50 or 60 will not see the worst of it. It is about time we gave our kids and grand kids a say in their future.
Canberra Webdiarists, an invitation to Parlie House Sunday
From Kerrie Tucker's website:
Greens invite public to alternative Leaders Debate – with the worm
October 21, 2007, 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm
Greens Leader Bob Brown and Greens lead Senate candidate in the ACT Kerrie Tucker invite the public to attend the Greens’ alternative to the Leaders Debate at the Parliament House Theatrette on Sunday night. Unlike Prime Minister Howard’s debate, everyone is welcome to the Greens ‘People’s Forum’. The Greens are trying to secure ‘the worm’ for audience members.
Senator Brown and Ms Tucker will also talk about the Greens campaign to put aged pensioners on the election agenda. The Greens are campaigning for a $60 a fortnight increase in the aged pension and for fair indexation for Commonwealth and Defence Force superannuants.
Ring Senator Brown’s office to book (6277 3170) and come to the public entrance of the Parliament House before 6pm.
Further information:
Ebony Bennett 0409 164 603 (Senator Brown)
Roland Manderson 0412 241 379 (Kerrie Tucker)
We must ratify Kyoto immediately
We should not vote for any party that refuses to ratify Kyoto and supports the introduction of Nuclear power. If you are normally a Liberal voter, it is time to think about the direction John Howard is taking Australia. Vote Green to make sure they understand the importance of climate change. Give your preference to Liberal and you will send a real message and get a real bang for your vote.
The right track
Here's an interesting piece from Kenneth Davidson of the Age.
I didn't intend voting green, was thinking about it and maybe putting them second behind an independent. Until reading Bob's speech, I'd read the policies on their site and felt it was just another bunch of semantic waffle. But his speech shows they may actually have their fingers on the pulse and have plans that will make a big difference. What impressed me was saying they would ask the people before doing anything radical, along with their policies on just about everything. I, like a lot of people, can see what's happening, realise the economy is worthless unless we have the right environment and that includes every environment in our society. Health, transport, education, law, freedoms, safety, you name it. All environments have to be improved for us to have an economy which represents the people and environment, not just those who choose the path of economic insanity and monopolisation for just a few. I wonder if there are other journalists who have the same opinion of Brown's speech, or other opinions for that matter. I just wish we had a free media and press, rather than an economically and ideologically captive one.
I was taught, if you want change, it starts now, or nothing changes. The greens don't have all the answers, but they are real change and have the approach we needed to make a start. It would be wonderful to get rid of the despotic lib/lab coalition for a while. Our future couldn't look any worse with the greens in power and would look a lot better than under the current lib/lab regime. The biggest problem is getting the heavily indoctrinated lib/lab supporters to see and accept the real situation and not the one they want to have, but never get, with lib/lab. History shows us that societies quickly collapse over a couple of years when they step beyond the bounds of sensibility and common good and elitists are in control. I don't want our society to be like past advancing ones, but that looks the outcome with our present direction and time frame.
Greens Preferences
David Curry, remember that in the House of Reps you alone decide where your preference goes when you number the candidates. How to Vote cards may indicate a particular choice, but you can number them however you like.
Of course the same goes for the Senate as well, though a majority of people choose to number above the line thus letting parties determine their preferences.
Fiona: Thank you for making this point with respect to the Senate, Stuart Johnson. That’s how Family First’s Steve Fielding got up in Victoria, much to the chagrin of many rusted-on ALP supporters. It has always given me immense pleasure to vote below the line, though sometimes it’s a real problem deciding which of the wacko groups to put last.
Greens in the Senate, and Bob Brown
My feeling is that a vote for the Greens in the Senate is the way to go. We'll need the Greens in the Senate to keep Labor on their toes.
But in the House of Reps, isn't it better to vote Labor so Howard goes? I guess most Green preferences will go to Labor (except in Tasmania), but Labor needs 16 seats to topple Howard, a big ask.
Bob Brown? I love the guy. It's true that he can speak his mind a lot more freely than the two big parties because he doesn't have to try to appeal as broadly as possible to the Australian community, because the Greens will never form Government. But that means he so often says what many of us think, but will never hear from a Rudd or a Howard. He doesn't have to get every soundbite past a focus group and a battalian of media advisors.
On the environment, human rights, and social justice, Brown (and the Greens) is the beacon in Australian politics. What an inspiration.
It's not just the economy, stupid!
Greens
ish very good
Margo, "Hello. I attended the National Press Club in Canberra yesterday to hear Bob Brown. Here ish is speech".
I could not resist this, but did you have a couple of glasses of wine?
to Alan on tippling
Vote Green
The Greens are the only ones who have been willing to talk abou the most important issues for years now.
They should not be the third party they should be the first. They are the only ones to have even raised the real issues. They are most certainly the only ones to have proposals to address them.
Vote Green.
Brown and green but no voice. Great!
So it seems we should all think Brown, and vote Green.
Could do with a bit of green in our neck of the woods, brown is all we get these days.
Absolutely beautiful dawn coming up - red sky in the morning - used to mean shepherd's warning so tomorrow the rains may come.
But just for today I wish that I could just turn back to yesterday and cling to that time, as the last leaf clings to the bough on an autumn eve.
And now today I find, like the Greens, I have no voice on a day when I needed it most. Great! And I know it would be no use asking Alga or Daniel to come and do the Reading for me. Roger, if I had a helicopter I would send it for you.
The sun has risen and I know the dairy farmers are hard at work. Being a dairy farmer had its rewards - you got to see the dawn every day of the year.
Thinking of you Jenny
Dear Jenny, thinking of you my dear. Especially today.
If I lived closer, I'd give you a hand with that Reading. But, I will be there with you in spirit, Jen.
Would have liked to have shared that dawn with you, with a comforting arm around your shoulder..
I am reminded of this poem of Robert Frost's.
Nothing Gold Can Stay:
Nature's first green is gold,
Her hardest hue to hold.
Her early leaf's a flower,
But only so an hour.
Then leaf subsides to leaf.
So Eden sank to grief,
So dawn goes down to day.
Nothing gold can stay.
God Bless, Jen.
Margo: I'm sending you good vibes too, Jenny. Love always.
Kath - thank you and how nice is that
Kath: What a beautiful poem, and so apt. As the Matron of the hospital at which my sister worked for years and years said of her: She was pure gold. But as the last line of your poem says: Nothing gold can stay. How true.
Thankfully my voice recovered in time and I know I read Eccl 3 beautifully. But I had the good Scot on standby just in case!
Huge crowd and we put out a lovely booklet on her life - which people were over the moon about. I think they were as shattered as we were, having been celebrating the birthday with her and us just the week before. Not fair on us, or them really.
Will send you a copy with that other book very soon. Have to go see what has happened with the crop out west on Monday as there has been no rain, but after that life will settle down I hope. Then maybe I will come back here and do a bit of stirring again though I feel I need to move on to new things now. Life is short.
The sun has now set and it was a beautiful evening, eating with all the family on the old home verandah and looking out over the cattle grazing in the cool night air and the fading light.
Unto every thing there is a season....
Margo: Thank you and my love to you. Sorry I won't see you before you head off. I hope the other launches go well. And I hope Ian has been looking after you. And you him. He was pretty down today and had to leave to take people back to the airport so I hardly had time to even talk to him. Give him a big hug.