Author: Jan Bowman

There are eleven candidates standing for election to the House of Representatives in the Queensland division of Griffith, and the polls are getting tight

Many will be watching Griffith because Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is, of course, the sitting member, with the LNP’s Dr Bill Glasson his main contender.

Mr Rudd’s office has politely declined my request for an interview, but Dr Glasson’s office has not responded to several requests.

But the minor parties have had no problem talking to me.

Here are links to my pieces on each of the candidates I spoke to.

Redistribute the wealth – Liam Flenady – Socialist Alliance

The Churches should pay their way – Anne Reid – Secular Party

The world’s problem is population – Jan McNichol – Stable Population Party

 

Griffith’s PUP is a Hunter – Palmer United Party – Karin Hunter

Katter invokes country Labor – Luke Murray – Katter Australia Party

Gays and muslims cause global warming – Sherri Church – Rise Up Australia

Many of the minor parties seem to be using the election as a platform for their policies and a way to raise their profile in this division. The rise of single-issue parties may also be a symptom of voter disillusionment with the major parties. It will be interesting to see if this translates into votes for some of them on Election Day.

Xenophon dumps Greens to be kingmaker: Milne

Republished with the permission of citizen journalism site No Fibs

After firing up a rally for marriage equality in Brisbane’s Queens Park on Saturday, Greens leader Christine Milne rallied the faithful at the campaign launch for Griffith candidate Geoff Ebbs at the Fox Hotel on Saturday night.

This was the first time I have attended a campaign launch, and it was a more intimate and candid affair than I had anticipated. There was no mainstream media present and the speeches, most unscripted, seemed to be heart-felt and genuine.

The aim was to portray the Greens’ as an inclusive party in touch with the aspirations of most Australians, not the fringe group it is portrayed to be, and in the light of recent deals on preferences and Labor’s poor showing in the polls, to stress the need for the Greens to retain the Senate balance of power.

Senate hopeful Adam Stone kicked things off by ridiculing at the ‘old parties’ and the media for labeling the Greens a fringe group. If you support Ebbs, he said, “you will be throwing your lot in with a small business owner who publishes on such obscure, irrelevant topics as people’s rights at work, a man with the audacity to publicly stick it to the Prime Minister in front of the national media on the economic uncertainty he has created …for his back-flipping on significant economic reforms like carbon pricing”.

Greens Senator Larissa Waters said she was “scared to the core” by the prospect of an Abbott government, “but what scares me even more is that we may have an Abbott controlled Senate (and) that’s why we need Adam in the Senate, because the alternative is unimaginable. We know what happened when John Howard had control of the Senate – we got Work Choices.”

Ebbs said the press and politicians referred to the Greens constituency as ‘fringe groups’ to marginalise them.

“The aim of that process is to create this idea that there is some kind of normality, and that people who are normal should be afraid of all of those people who are in fringe groups.’” Although these tactics were obvious, “they work”. People who hate the Greens and hate refugees and hate gay people “hate them because they are afraid, and they’re afraid because they are not secure”.

“They’re afraid because they don’t know what the future holds, they don’t have job security; they’re afraid because the newspapers and the politicians tell them that they should be afraid.”

The Greens challenge, he said, “is not just to celebrate diversify, but to get out there and help calm those people who are afraid’”.

“The Greens want to stand apart from the parties of exclusiveness who want to keep having a dialogue about normality, about the Australian way, about the kind of myth-making that excludes people. What unites us is our inclusivity.”

Milne said that if Abbott won Senate control “he would repeal the clean energy package and he would pull apart the renewable energy target, because his whole driving force is to retain the business case of the old coal fired generators for as long as possible”

“The Greens are not just thinking

about the forward estimates…we are thinking about what it is going to be like to live on this planet in the next 50 years.”

Milne alleged that “the big announcement by Kevin Rudd” that he now supports same sex marriage is nothing more than political gamesmanship, citing Karen Middleton’s recent revelation on SBS that Julia Gillard was poised to change her mind on same-sex marriage when Kevin Rudd announced his change of heart. She pointed out all Rudd had done was say he would allow a conscience vote. “That’s what they have got already. We have already had a conscience vote but it was lost because the Coalition does not allow a conscience vote.”

“I am confident that we will achieve marriage equality, but it will only happen if the Greens are there strongly in the Senate and if Adam Bandt is returned to the Reps.”

Milne said Tony Abbott needed only three Senate seats – in WA, SA and NSW – to gain effective control of the Senate. She appeared to be incredulous at Nick Xenophon’s decision to preference both Liberal and Labor before Greens Senator, Sarah Hansen Young.  ‘

“How is that possible when he is a person who says his key issue is gambling, and the Greens are only political party that has stood up with him time and time again on gambling?”

“Because he knows that if Abbott can pick up these three seats he and Abbott will have effective control of the Senate and The Greens and Labor will be side-lined. He will be the king-maker in that context. And that is why he is doing it.”

“I can’t imagine what Australia will look like if you gave effective control of both houses to Tony Abbott in conjunction with Nick Xenophon and John Madigan, the DLP Senator from Victoria’,” she said, who would be “trading women’s reproductive rights”.

“This election really, really matters. The Greens will make the difference.”

Volunteers get ready to commence divestment campaign.

350.org trainer Charlie Wood, took a group of 20 volunteers through their paces at its first Brisbane Workshop on Saturday.

350.org stands for 350 parts per million, this figure is what the science says is the absolute limit for CO2 emissions in our atmosphere to avoid runaway climate change.

The aim of the Brisbane workshop was to equip volunteers with the resources to engage with their own banks, superannuation funds, universities, churches and other organisations about the need to challenge the fossil fuel industry and to invest in a more sustainable financial system.

350.org is seeking a global shift in investments to renewables from the current 3% to 5%.

Ms Woods said that while organisations may initially consider divesting of shares in fossil fuel companies to be risky, in reality the energy market is highly volatile. There are a number of studies she said from respected sources such as The World Bank and Goldman Sachs which conclude that energy stocks are overvalued and reinvestment in new and emerging industries can provide equal to greater returns. 

Further, she said, conversations with organisations about divestment can provide organisations with an opportunity to assess whether their values align with those of the companies they invest in.

According to 350.org, 300 campuses and 100 cities and states in the US and other countries have joined the campaign to divest from fossil fuel companies. The movement is still in the early days in Queensland, but the Brisbane group plans to step up its campaign over the coming months. 

A public forum is planned for late September for anyone interested in learning more about the evidence for climate change and divestment strategies. A panel of financial, health and climate experts will answer audience questions.

 

BZE’s plan to cut emissions and power bills in ten years.

Making a difference to cutting energy use and greenhouse impacts at the individual or family level can often seem daunting and out of reach for many of us.  As a home owner, I have wondered what exactly I could do to make a difference, and whether the long term savings will cover my investment.

Now the Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) think-tank, in partnership with The University of Melbourne Energy Institute claims to be able to provide the answers.

On an unseasonably warm evening last Monday (12 August) an audience of approximately 300 gathered for the launch in South Brisbane of the BZE Building Plan. The Zero Carbon Australia Buildings Plan is according to BZE, ‘the first comprehensive, nationwide plan to retrofit Australia’s buildings’.

Lead author and Project Director Trent Hawkins was assisted by 100 volunteer engineers, architects, data analysts, and students over three years to develop the plan. The project also attracted partners and company sponsors that add weight to the academic rigour and practical utility of the plan.

The aim is to halve energy consumption in Australia by retro-fitting family homes and high rise office spaces using existing off-the-shelf technologies. Through its modelling work, Mr Hawkins said BZE is able to conclude that across Australia reductions of 53% in residential demand and 44% in non-residential energy use are feasible.

For the family home, the authors claim these reductions can be accomplished by a move away from gas, and investment in such measures as roof and wall insulation, double glazing windows, roof-top solar power collection, LED lighting, air-sourced heat pumps for hot water, and real time monitoring of in-home energy use.

While many of you may be familiar with these options, BZE has done the research to show how these technologies can be integrated with, or replace older technologies. The plan provides the costs and benefits, not only in economic terms, but in terms of the reduced reliance on non-renewable energy sources.

Participating in the launch were Science & Engineering Adj. Professor David Hood AM from QUT, Mark Thomson, Architect  & Corporate Sustainability Principal at Schiavello, and Queensland Greens Senator, Larissa Waters.

David Hood told the audience that climate change ‘will bring about near collapse of much of the world’s economic systems’, and yet it was the missing topic at the first Sunday night leaders’ debates. ‘Neither of the leaders raised it’, he said, “so with the main political parties not taking any notice, and not doing anything, it’s up to us’. He commended the research underpinning of the BZE plan which he said provides a practical guideline on how we can get energy efficiency into our homes and in the process, save money.

Senator Waters reminded the audience that governments subsidise the fossil fuel industry by up to $12 billion, and asked us to imagine the impact if this money was invested instead in renewal energy sources. She said the BZE report proves that change can be achieved and ‘we can just get on with it’. ‘There are no logistical barriers, no engineering constraints, often no economic constraints compared to business as usual, but there is a ‘political will’ constraint.’ She encouraged audience members to remind their local political candidates that ‘we have an environmental emergency … and that we have ways for addressing that emergency’.  As the mother of a four year old, she said it is inconceivable to her that we can stand back and allow this looming catastrophe to happen.

Mark Thomson concluded the speeches by saying the challenge for those who want to take action, ‘is to make sure the change is well-informed’. The BZE he said has produced more than just a vision: it is a 10 year ‘practical, simple and implementable’ plan, based on current technology.

The plan can be obtained from the BZE Website or for a hard copy, by emailing the BZE Woolloongabba Office at  qld@bze.org.au

Debate is the “life-blood of democracy”

Republished with the permission of No Fibs

So this is what it feels like to live in the electorate of the sitting Prime Minister of Australia. We are just two days into the election campaign and Kevin Rudd has finally got the debate he has so long wanted – but with his LNP opponent in Griffith Bill Glasson. The media circus is in town.

I arrived early but the television networks were already there. Channel 7 and 10 trucks and generators were set up in the Colsmlie Hotel car park, cameras were hoisted onto shoulders and reporters were coiffured and practicing their pieces to camera. I was amused and slightly embarrassed by my little Olympus camera and flimsy tripod.

At this stage no-one was too interested in the three other candidates Dr Bill Glasson (NLP), Geoff Ebbs (Greens) and Karin Hunter (Palmer United Party) who had already arrived to debate Rudd. The wait was for the PM. Does he stage manage his arrival I wondered, so not to be upstaged? Is it possible to upstage a PM?

I suppose these media guys do a lot of waiting. I asked one cameraman whether he gets advance notice of when the PM is arriving. No, he said resignedly, we just wait.

I stood back at what I thought was a safe distance to observe, but when Mr Rudd did finally arrive I was nearly knocked off my feet in the frenzy for the best vantage point. I did not even get close, and from where I stood Mr Rudd’s face appeared to be an almost a translucent white from the intensity of the press lights. No wonder politicians have to wear make-up.

Rudd is taller than I expected, and not quite as chubby as he appears on TV. And in this, my first up close encounter, he certainly does have a statesman-like carriage. Or is that bestowed on him by the cameras and the flurry of attention? For all my cynicism, I was a little in awe.

In their opening remarks all four candidates went about establishing their credentials as either locals, or business people, or both. Both Rudd and Glasson claimed a history in the electorate. Both live locally. Rudd claims to have campaigned door-to-door in most streets of the electorate since first standing (and losing) in 1996. Glasson, Ebbs and Hunter all claimed to be, or have been, operators of small businesses.

The South East Brisbane Chamber of Commerce (SEBCC) is LNP territory however, and it was Glasson who, at the beginning at least, received the loudest and longest applause.

I expected Rudd to be at ease with his audience, and he was. Given his relative inexperience I was surprised at how well Greens candidate Geoff Ebbs was able to hold the audience: he even had them laughing at times. Palmer United Party (PUP) candidate Karin Hunter stuck rigidly to script and for a party that wants to stand out from the mob, there was disappointingly lacklustre and repetitive tone to her responses.

The forum was organised by the local SEBCC and while many of the questions had a predictable business theme and focus, it was the more thoughtful questions of the high school students that most captured my attention and which drew the most considered responses.

When questioned about the high rate of unemployment amongst young people in Queensland, Mr Rudd pointed to Premier Newman’s austerity measures and recent job losses in the state. Dr Glasson and Ms Hunter blamed the federal government for burdening small business with red tape and taxes and Ms Hunter spoke specifically of unfair dismissal laws. They both claimed that being freed from these entanglements will give business an opportunity to create jobs. Ebbs in contrast, reminded the audience that taxes are not a bad thing, they pay he said for the education needed to build the workforce and he suggested that Australia look to high taxing countries in Northern Europe for a renewed focus on innovation.

In a follow-up question to the Greens on how to bring employment to Queensland, Ebbs supported the need for the full rollout of the NBN, and on the need to focus on changing the landscape of energy production to focus on renewable sources. Mr Rudd too focussed on the NBN as a ‘pro-business, pro-growth’, ‘liberating technology’ which will ‘overcome the tyranny of distance’ for many Queenslanders. Again Dr Glasson and Ms Hunter were pretty much in lock-step; with both supporting the concept of the NBN, but both claiming it is just not affordable in its current form.

Some questions felt like they’d been planted. Had they? A question about policy on preventable health care gave the PM the opportunity to raise the question of smoking, and this ended with the inevitable taunt to Dr Glasson, as a former President of the AMA, about the continued acceptance by the Liberal party of donations from the Tobacco industry. Dr Glasson in response said his mother had died of a smoking related illness, and that he is personally passionately anti-smoking. It was not until after the forum when being interviewed on ABC radio that he said (if elected) he would take up the issue of tobacco company donations in the party room. Ebbs reminded the audience that both parties accept donations from gambling firms and so neither can claim to be pure in these matters.

Questions on Gonski and asylum seekers were answered predictably enough, although Karin Hunter seemed to get into a tangle on asylum seekers, and it was hard to know exactly what the PUP is proposing.

Perhaps the best question of the day to all the candidates was ‘How do you separate your moral beliefs from what is expected of you by your party?’ Kevin Rudd said whether religious or not, we are all shaped by a set of beliefs. The question for him when entering politics was how the political parties measured up against his personal beliefs. ‘I believe passionately in a fair go for everyone’. ‘I made a judgement that for me, through a lot of reflection, [that the ALP] is the best approximation, of the things I believe in most passionately’. But he admitted that from time to time there is a struggle, and the policy stance he feels he has had to take on asylum seekers provides such an example.

Dr Glasson made reference to the importance of marriage and the family in his life. But he said, at the end of the day politicians should also represent the views of the people they stand for, ‘that’s what you’re there for’. For him, he says it will be important, ‘when sitting in my rocking chair at the end of my career, to be able to say, ‘Yes, I made the right decision; I made it for the right reason.’’

Geoff Ebbs said that the responses by Mr Rudd and Dr Glasson illustrate that nearly everyone goes into public service, ‘because they are driven by something in their heart and they want to make a contribution to the community’. Political parties according to Ebbs play a much more significant role in Australia than the constitution was designed for. We now have a ‘sort of team approach to politics’ where everyone has to follow the party line. Ebbs said the Greens have a few basic principles that guide them but often grapple with moral judgements on the detail and priorities. But politics he said is about listening and practical common sense, not ideology.

Similarly Ms Hunter said being a politician is not about you, ‘but about the people you represent’. The PUP she said will give a conscience vote to all its members on social and moral issues such as same sex marriage and abortion. Being a politician she said has nothing to do with power, ‘it is about serving the people’.

In summary, Ms Hunter challenged both Mr Rudd and Mr Abbott to debate Clive Palmer (though she doubts they would have the courage to do so). She contrasted Mr Palmer (who was in the room at this stage) as a man who had built himself from nothing to become a multi-billionaire, with Mr Rudd and Mr Abbott who are professional politicians, who do not deal with their own money and who therefore don’t understand small business.

Mr Ebbs said politics takes effort; it is not something you can just step into from the business world. The Greens he said began twenty years ago as a group protesting environmental destruction, but it has developed and broadened its base, much as the Labor party was started 100 years ago by a bunch of shearers. The future he said is Green. In a world of resource shortages, ‘we have to nurture our natural resources’ and ‘have the moral fortitude and courage to control and manage our greed’. He considers the Greens will continue to grow and may be in a position to hold government in a decade or so to come.

Dr Glasson’s concluded that he is not a very political person. He said of his late father who was a National party member for 18 years, that his greatest honour was when he won the town of Barcaldine (the home of the Labor Party); not because he was a strong National, but “because he was there to represent the people”.

“I have a passion to represent the people of Griffith. I have lived in Griffith almost all my life. Griffith is my turf’.”

Dr Glasson appealed to Mr Rudd to support Hummingbird House “if I don’t get elected” as the first children’s hospice in Queensland. Mr Rudd: “We are happy to support the project, and we will do so.”

He concluded however on a more adversarial note. Debate was the “life-blood of democracy”, so “if the Liberal candidate for Griffith can front up with me, and I welcome it, why can’t the bloke who wants to be prime minister?”

 

Socialist Equity claims refugee policy is “a cynical and calculated diversion from the real issues”.

Last Sunday evening (28 July) I attended the campaign launch for the Socialist Equity Party (SEP) in Queensland.

Held in Jagera Hall in South Brisbane’s Musgrave Park, this was a somewhat austere affair when contrasted to the more ‘tub thumping’ Socialist Alliance public launch held in Boundary Street on 13 July.

I paid the $3 entry fee for workers (it was $2 for non-workers) and explained my purpose in attending. I was welcomed to take photographs of the candidates and to record proceedings. The room was set up formally in theatre style. A large table of SEP books and pamphlets staffed by a volunteer was at the back of the room. None of this material is offered free, and while the prices are nominal, if you want to know the detailed philosophy of this party, you need to be prepared to pay for the opportunity. The take away message for me was, “this is serious, and it requires effort’.

I joined about 15 or 16 people to listen to proceedings. The chair sat at a central table flanked by the two candidates who were also the guest speakers for the evening. The two speeches were followed by questions, “through the chair please’

The subdued and the formal structure of the meeting reminded me of my early days in a somewhat obscure fundamentalist church. I was, I suspected, amongst true believers.

The SEP candidates for the Queensland senate are Mike Head and Gabriela Zabala. Both have previously stood as senate candidates in NSW. Ms Zabala set the scene. Her focus was on global imperialism of the United States, and the ‘complete integration’ as she put it, of the “Australian military with the US command”. Pine Gap in the Northern Territory she claimed is central to US drone attacks and “unlawful assassinations” in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This activity has been supported by the ALP and the Greens in the absence of public debate or scrutiny by the Australian people.

Recent revelations by Edward Snowden of illegal spying by the US and his subsequent treatment by his government, provide an illustration, she claimed, of an emerging global distrust of established governments by workers and young people. The SEP’s concern is about “…arming the working class with a genuine revolutionary program and building the necessary revolutionary leadership”. It  is the SEP she claimed, and its sister organisations in the world Trotskyist movement, that are the only organisations “capable of providing the perspective and leadership” needed to harness emerging revolutionary sentiment and activity.

Mike Head’s focus was both global and local. He explained that while the SEP is standing candidates in the election (and he said, it does want votes), its real purpose is totell the working class the truth and to “…cut through the conspiracy, lies and fraud that dominate this election campaign”. 

The Labor party he claimed has acted in violation of international and domestic law with its increasingly hard line approach to refugees. Refugees, he said have rights to basic, health, welfare and education services, and the right to access the courts and “Kevin Rudd has violated these rights”.  This he said acts as “a warning call” to the working class. “Refugees are just the most defenceless, the most oppressed, the most vulnerable section of the international working class.” This government “will be just as ruthless in dealing with any resistance by the working class to the destruction of jobs, to cuts in their wages, to cut backs to their essential services, including health care and welfare”.

Head said that the “hysteria in media’ about refugees and Tony Abbott’s calls to bring in the military, “is a cynical and calculated diversion from the real issues that confront the working class and young people in this country and around the world.” What really confronts them he said “is a wholesale assault on their jobs and living standards”.

Head’s message to workers is that refugees aren’t to blame for attacks on workers’ rights and service, they are victims,” fleeing wars and devastation caused by the US and its allies, including the Australian government”.

There is already mass unemployment and attacks on services in Australia, Head claimed, and he cited as an examples, the unemployment rate of 13.8% in the suburb of Inala in Brisbane’s south, and recent government cuts in Queensland to health, welfare and housing services.

The working class he said is paying for the failures of capitalism through the global financial crisis in 2008. He cited Detroit as a once thriving city that has now been declared bankrupt and in so doing is able to impose austerity measures that affect workers’ pay, conditions and access to services.

Australia, he said, is no exception, and ousting Gillard was an expression of this. Rudd was reinstalled he said, not just to prop up Labor’s fortunes in the coming election, but to head off the breakup of Labor party itself. The reinstallation of Rudd was supported by the media because the ruling class fears the loss of the two party system. After all Head claimed, it was the Labor party in WW1, WW2 and during the great depression that imposed sacrifices on the working class, and it has continued to do so.

SEP believes that it is the myth that “Labor represents a “lesser evil” to the Liberal/National parties”. Nor does it have any time for the Greens which it dismisses on its website as a party promoted by the bourgeoisie “as a means of diverting political opposition into safe channels”.

There were only a few questions from the floor following these rather ponderous speeches. One, concerning the SEP’s position on marijuana instigated a mini debate, but with the chair having restored order, the position of the SEP was made clear. While a revolutionary government would not criminalise drug taking, the SEP does not support recreational drug use, as the mind should be clear to read philosophy and take revolutionary action in the community. It was the free access to drugs after all, that muted the rising revolutionary zeal of young people in the 1960’s.

My question through the chair was why there had not been reference in either speech to global warming and action on climate change. I should have by then predicted Mike Head’s answer, which was, that both a carbon tax and Emissions Trading Schemes merely perpetuate the capitalist market model. True action on global warming he said will only result from the establishment of the “socialist reorganisation of the world economy”.

One wonders how long that is expected to take, but this gathering it seems, believes in the coming revolution as assuredly and as passionately as those fundamentalist Christians I used to know believe in the imminent second coming of Christ. I doubt there is any room for skeptics here.