WEBVTT - The Greens ‘stunning’ election defeat

0:00:01.280 --> 0:00:10.200
<v Speaker 1>From Schwartz Media. I'm Daniel James. This is seven am.

0:00:10.320 --> 0:00:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Just before four point thirty last Wednesday afternoon, Anthony Green

0:00:13.920 --> 0:00:17.160
<v Speaker 1>called it for the ABC. Green's leader, Adam bant had

0:00:17.160 --> 0:00:20.599
<v Speaker 1>lost his seat. Fifteen years after band won the inner

0:00:20.600 --> 0:00:24.200
<v Speaker 1>suburban seat of Melbourne from the ALP, Labor had taken

0:00:24.239 --> 0:00:27.360
<v Speaker 1>it back along with another two, leaving the Greens with

0:00:27.440 --> 0:00:30.000
<v Speaker 1>this a single seat in the House of Reps and

0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:33.400
<v Speaker 1>no leader. The wipeout of the Greens came as a

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:35.879
<v Speaker 1>shock to the party that entered the campaign hoping to

0:00:35.920 --> 0:00:40.320
<v Speaker 1>expand its influence and numbers in the Parliament. Today National

0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:43.800
<v Speaker 1>correspondent for the Saturday paper Mike Second on where it

0:00:43.840 --> 0:00:51.800
<v Speaker 1>all went wrong and what now for the Greens. It's Monday,

0:00:52.280 --> 0:01:01.160
<v Speaker 1>May twelfth, Mike. Last Thursday, Green's Life. Adam Bantt finally

0:01:01.200 --> 0:01:04.039
<v Speaker 1>addressed the media and conceded that he lost his seat

0:01:04.040 --> 0:01:06.240
<v Speaker 1>of Melbourne. What did you make of his speech?

0:01:07.160 --> 0:01:09.000
<v Speaker 2>Look, I guess some people would say it was not

0:01:09.040 --> 0:01:09.880
<v Speaker 2>the most gracious.

0:01:10.080 --> 0:01:12.560
<v Speaker 3>Look, thanks for coming out. I've got a few remarks

0:01:12.560 --> 0:01:14.520
<v Speaker 3>that I'd like to make and won't be taking any

0:01:14.600 --> 0:01:16.000
<v Speaker 3>questions at the end of it.

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:19.880
<v Speaker 2>Ironically, Peter Dutton's concession speech was probably the most gracious

0:01:19.880 --> 0:01:23.280
<v Speaker 2>performance he ever gave, but frankly, I kind of liked

0:01:23.280 --> 0:01:25.440
<v Speaker 2>what it said about Bett. You know, he got into

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.120
<v Speaker 2>politics because he was passionate about issues, particularly the environment

0:01:29.160 --> 0:01:32.160
<v Speaker 2>and climate change, and he maintained that passion in defeat.

0:01:32.440 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 3>I want to thank Melbourne voters for regularly giving me

0:01:35.920 --> 0:01:39.679
<v Speaker 3>the highest vote, including in this election, and to thank

0:01:39.720 --> 0:01:42.280
<v Speaker 3>you for the last fifteen years and the chance to

0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:44.360
<v Speaker 3>do some amazing things together.

0:01:45.040 --> 0:01:47.640
<v Speaker 2>It was a stunning outcome, you know. I thought his

0:01:47.720 --> 0:01:50.520
<v Speaker 2>loss was even more surprising than that of Peter Dutton.

0:01:50.560 --> 0:01:52.280
<v Speaker 2>In his seat of Dixon. He only held it by

0:01:52.280 --> 0:01:55.080
<v Speaker 2>about one point seven percent at the twenty twenty two election,

0:01:55.560 --> 0:01:58.840
<v Speaker 2>so it was in play. Band, in contrast, held his

0:01:58.880 --> 0:02:01.600
<v Speaker 2>seat by a very multi ten percent. In fact, he

0:02:01.640 --> 0:02:04.200
<v Speaker 2>barely needed preferences to win n twenty twenty two. His

0:02:04.320 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 2>primary vote was forty nine points six percent, so he

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:10.640
<v Speaker 2>looked to have a pretty firm hold on it, even

0:02:10.680 --> 0:02:13.720
<v Speaker 2>given the fact that since the last election there'd been

0:02:13.880 --> 0:02:16.960
<v Speaker 2>a redistribution in his seat which took some of the

0:02:17.040 --> 0:02:19.680
<v Speaker 2>more progressive areas out and put some more conservative areas in.

0:02:19.919 --> 0:02:22.519
<v Speaker 2>But he still had a notional margin of six or

0:02:22.520 --> 0:02:25.800
<v Speaker 2>seven percent. So yeah, short answer, I didn't see this

0:02:25.800 --> 0:02:27.239
<v Speaker 2>coming and I don't think anyone did.

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:30.920
<v Speaker 1>Yes, it was very surprising. What about the other Greens

0:02:31.200 --> 0:02:32.720
<v Speaker 1>seats lost, how surprising?

0:02:33.320 --> 0:02:37.400
<v Speaker 2>Were a not nearly as surprising, frankly, but still a

0:02:37.400 --> 0:02:40.760
<v Speaker 2>bit unexpected. The opinion polls during the campaign, even as

0:02:40.760 --> 0:02:43.960
<v Speaker 2>they were showing the Dutton opposition was tanking, showed the

0:02:43.960 --> 0:02:47.120
<v Speaker 2>Greens vote was holding or in fact increasing slightly. But

0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:50.800
<v Speaker 2>the Green's three Brisbane seats Griffith, Brisbane and Ryan, it

0:02:50.919 --> 0:02:54.360
<v Speaker 2>became increasingly clear. I think during the election campaign that

0:02:54.440 --> 0:02:57.280
<v Speaker 2>those three seats were in play. All the parties put

0:02:57.360 --> 0:03:00.400
<v Speaker 2>big resources into them. But the way they fell and

0:03:00.720 --> 0:03:03.680
<v Speaker 2>probably in the case of Brian didn't fall, was still

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:07.080
<v Speaker 2>remarkable because it was all about preference flows. You know,

0:03:07.320 --> 0:03:09.400
<v Speaker 2>it's a bit complicated, but let me try to explain.

0:03:11.600 --> 0:03:14.400
<v Speaker 2>If we take Griffith for example, which was Max Chandler

0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:17.760
<v Speaker 2>Mather's seat in twenty twenty two, he came first on

0:03:17.800 --> 0:03:20.320
<v Speaker 2>the primary vote right, he got thirty four point six

0:03:20.320 --> 0:03:22.960
<v Speaker 2>percent of the vote, so he finished first, but he

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 2>was still well short of an outright majority. The Coalition

0:03:25.840 --> 0:03:28.840
<v Speaker 2>came in second and Labour came in third. So what

0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:32.280
<v Speaker 2>this meant was that Labor preferences were distributed because they

0:03:32.320 --> 0:03:35.120
<v Speaker 2>go upwards according to the vote check, and they pushed

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:37.680
<v Speaker 2>Chandler Matha not just over the line, but to what

0:03:37.760 --> 0:03:40.280
<v Speaker 2>looked like a very big win, you know, sixty forty

0:03:40.400 --> 0:03:43.560
<v Speaker 2>after preferences. But this time around, the order in which

0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:48.480
<v Speaker 2>the candidates finished changed, so Labor came first, Greens came second,

0:03:48.600 --> 0:03:51.960
<v Speaker 2>and the Liberal National Party the Coalition party, came third.

0:03:52.400 --> 0:03:55.560
<v Speaker 2>So instead of Labor preferences being distributed and flowing to

0:03:55.680 --> 0:04:00.000
<v Speaker 2>Max Chandler Mather, Coalition preferences flowed and they went to

0:04:00.040 --> 0:04:02.640
<v Speaker 2>the Labor candidate, which led to what appeared to be

0:04:02.640 --> 0:04:05.840
<v Speaker 2>a hammering basically sixty forty in the other direction. So

0:04:06.280 --> 0:04:09.080
<v Speaker 2>that was the pattern. Their Brisbane followed essentially the same pattern,

0:04:09.480 --> 0:04:12.960
<v Speaker 2>and the Greens candidate, Stephen Bates, was behind Labor on

0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:16.720
<v Speaker 2>the primaries and the Coalition preferences went to Labor and

0:04:17.160 --> 0:04:22.200
<v Speaker 2>he was gone. I spoke to the excellent election analyst

0:04:22.240 --> 0:04:25.960
<v Speaker 2>Ben Rowi about this, and he said, this is a

0:04:26.040 --> 0:04:29.360
<v Speaker 2>peculiarity of the preferential voting system that we will see

0:04:29.360 --> 0:04:32.000
<v Speaker 2>more and more over time, and that is that anytime

0:04:32.040 --> 0:04:35.279
<v Speaker 2>the top two contenders are not clear. You know, once

0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 2>you get into a three way contest, preferencing gets, as

0:04:38.080 --> 0:04:41.080
<v Speaker 2>he put it, really weird. And he says the Greens

0:04:41.640 --> 0:04:45.120
<v Speaker 2>have a much better chance of winning seats when they're

0:04:45.200 --> 0:04:47.120
<v Speaker 2>up against a Liberal in the final count than when

0:04:47.120 --> 0:04:49.919
<v Speaker 2>they're up against Labor because of the way the preferences flow.

0:04:50.680 --> 0:04:53.279
<v Speaker 2>So if we go to the third Brisbane seat, Brian,

0:04:53.839 --> 0:04:57.200
<v Speaker 2>that shows the flip side of this. There Elizabeth Watson

0:04:57.279 --> 0:05:01.720
<v Speaker 2>Brown one in twenty two. Her vote share actually declined

0:05:02.360 --> 0:05:04.720
<v Speaker 2>at this election. It was down to just twenty eight

0:05:04.720 --> 0:05:08.039
<v Speaker 2>point seven percent, so seven points adrift of the L ANDP.

0:05:08.680 --> 0:05:10.800
<v Speaker 2>And yet she appears to have squeaked back into office

0:05:10.839 --> 0:05:13.560
<v Speaker 2>and the reason for that was that the order of

0:05:13.560 --> 0:05:17.159
<v Speaker 2>finishing of the parties didn't change. Labour again finished third

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:21.239
<v Speaker 2>and so Labour preferences flowed to her. As Rowi summed

0:05:21.279 --> 0:05:24.279
<v Speaker 2>it up, the preferential system has delivered kind of a

0:05:24.320 --> 0:05:27.560
<v Speaker 2>perverse result here, which is that the more conservative seat

0:05:28.000 --> 0:05:30.560
<v Speaker 2>wound up electing the more left wing candidate, i e.

0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:34.120
<v Speaker 2>The Green, The more progressive seat ended up electing the

0:05:34.200 --> 0:05:36.200
<v Speaker 2>less left wing candidate with Labor.

0:05:37.160 --> 0:05:39.760
<v Speaker 1>So while there was a minus swing away from the Greens,

0:05:40.600 --> 0:05:42.880
<v Speaker 1>was this more of a case of the coalition crashing

0:05:42.920 --> 0:05:45.080
<v Speaker 1>and bringing the Greens down with them.

0:05:44.880 --> 0:05:47.880
<v Speaker 2>Not entirely, but to a considerable extent. You know. Someone

0:05:47.920 --> 0:05:49.880
<v Speaker 2>in the Greens described it to me by way of

0:05:49.920 --> 0:05:51.760
<v Speaker 2>a sporting analogy. They said it was like one of

0:05:51.760 --> 0:05:55.000
<v Speaker 2>those races where one competitive falls on trips another on

0:05:55.040 --> 0:05:57.279
<v Speaker 2>the way down. The bottom line here is that while

0:05:57.320 --> 0:06:00.599
<v Speaker 2>the Greens lost seats in the House of Representatives, including

0:06:00.960 --> 0:06:03.320
<v Speaker 2>that of their leader Adam Bant, their primary vote was

0:06:03.320 --> 0:06:06.200
<v Speaker 2>only down a little So in this election, the Greens

0:06:06.240 --> 0:06:08.680
<v Speaker 2>actually did not do that badly in terms of their

0:06:08.720 --> 0:06:12.240
<v Speaker 2>overall vote share, it was only down about half a percent.

0:06:13.040 --> 0:06:15.520
<v Speaker 2>And bear in mind also that there is this long

0:06:15.600 --> 0:06:18.680
<v Speaker 2>term trend away from the major parties. So last Saturday,

0:06:18.800 --> 0:06:23.000
<v Speaker 2>almost a third record opted for someone else. Younger voters,

0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.159
<v Speaker 2>particularly young women, are far more inclined to vote for

0:06:26.200 --> 0:06:30.080
<v Speaker 2>the Greens than previous generations were. At this election shore

0:06:30.360 --> 0:06:33.080
<v Speaker 2>more of them went for labor. But should the Albanese

0:06:33.200 --> 0:06:36.760
<v Speaker 2>government fail to sufficiently address the concerns of these younger voters,

0:06:36.800 --> 0:06:39.799
<v Speaker 2>you know, on issues like housing, social justice, the environment,

0:06:39.880 --> 0:06:43.719
<v Speaker 2>climate change, the Greens remain an obvious alternative and continue

0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:47.200
<v Speaker 2>to be an entirely viable political outfit, which is possibly

0:06:47.279 --> 0:06:48.719
<v Speaker 2>more than can be said at this stage for the

0:06:48.760 --> 0:06:49.440
<v Speaker 2>Liberal Party, I.

0:06:49.440 --> 0:06:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Think after the break Adam band in the big red toothbrush. So, Mike,

0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 1>let's talk about the actual campaign. The Greens ran. What

0:07:02.800 --> 0:07:04.400
<v Speaker 1>was their pitch to the electric.

0:07:04.240 --> 0:07:08.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, the mantra, the relentless slogan that they kept saying

0:07:08.360 --> 0:07:11.520
<v Speaker 2>was keep Dutton out, push Labor to act. You know,

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:13.840
<v Speaker 2>this was repeated endlessly by Bantony his team.

0:07:14.040 --> 0:07:16.440
<v Speaker 3>We're in reach of winning new seats across the country.

0:07:16.480 --> 0:07:19.120
<v Speaker 3>This is our chance to deliver again for real change,

0:07:19.240 --> 0:07:21.440
<v Speaker 3>to keep Dutton out and to get Labor to act.

0:07:21.520 --> 0:07:22.800
<v Speaker 3>Vote won Greens.

0:07:22.640 --> 0:07:24.600
<v Speaker 2>And the intent of it was obvious. You know. They

0:07:24.600 --> 0:07:27.640
<v Speaker 2>were framing the Greens as a progressive safeguard that if

0:07:27.720 --> 0:07:30.880
<v Speaker 2>voters delivered a minority parliament, and let's remember that that

0:07:31.080 --> 0:07:33.720
<v Speaker 2>looked a very real prospect only a month or so ago,

0:07:34.200 --> 0:07:37.280
<v Speaker 2>they and the cross Bench would be there to stop

0:07:37.320 --> 0:07:40.040
<v Speaker 2>the worst instincts of the Liberals. In retrospect, though, it

0:07:40.040 --> 0:07:43.560
<v Speaker 2>doesn't look as smart, does it, because obviously, when voters

0:07:43.600 --> 0:07:46.440
<v Speaker 2>went into the polling booths, they decided that the best

0:07:46.440 --> 0:07:48.640
<v Speaker 2>way to keep Dutton out was just to vote Labor

0:07:48.920 --> 0:07:50.360
<v Speaker 2>and not the Greens.

0:07:50.680 --> 0:07:53.120
<v Speaker 1>So you think the Greens made a major miscalculation on

0:07:53.160 --> 0:07:56.080
<v Speaker 1>betting that a minority government was almost an inevitability.

0:07:56.720 --> 0:07:59.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think so. I think so. You know, there's

0:07:59.600 --> 0:08:03.080
<v Speaker 2>central campaign issues. I wonder about that too. I think

0:08:03.120 --> 0:08:05.240
<v Speaker 2>the Greens always do best when the focus is on

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.320
<v Speaker 2>environment and climate, and it wasn't in this campaign.

0:08:08.560 --> 0:08:11.960
<v Speaker 4>Okadam, We've got to talk about the toothbrush.

0:08:14.400 --> 0:08:17.200
<v Speaker 1>We can't not talk about it. Obviously, you want dental

0:08:17.400 --> 0:08:19.640
<v Speaker 1>in medicare instead.

0:08:19.240 --> 0:08:22.200
<v Speaker 2>We had bent running around with the giant red toothbrush

0:08:22.400 --> 0:08:24.320
<v Speaker 2>about putting dental into medicare.

0:08:24.440 --> 0:08:26.800
<v Speaker 3>Well, people are putting off going to the dentists because

0:08:26.800 --> 0:08:29.640
<v Speaker 3>they can't afford us. And when you do go, if

0:08:29.680 --> 0:08:32.640
<v Speaker 3>you need something more than a routine treatment, or your

0:08:32.720 --> 0:08:36.120
<v Speaker 3>child needs braces, it can run into the thousands of dollars.

0:08:36.360 --> 0:08:38.040
<v Speaker 2>Not a bad idea, I would suggest, but I'm not

0:08:38.080 --> 0:08:38.920
<v Speaker 2>sure it cut through.

0:08:39.280 --> 0:08:41.240
<v Speaker 1>There's been a trend though, where the Greens have been

0:08:41.320 --> 0:08:43.920
<v Speaker 1>losing votes in what you might consider their heartland, particularly

0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:47.600
<v Speaker 1>in places like Victoria, first in state and local elections

0:08:47.600 --> 0:08:50.880
<v Speaker 1>and now federally. What are people within the party saying

0:08:51.080 --> 0:08:51.880
<v Speaker 1>is the reason for.

0:08:51.880 --> 0:08:54.800
<v Speaker 2>That well's you won't be surprised to know. There's a

0:08:54.840 --> 0:08:58.200
<v Speaker 2>number of different interpretations on this, so there's a degree

0:08:58.200 --> 0:09:00.439
<v Speaker 2>of argument within the party. But you're right, some people

0:09:00.440 --> 0:09:02.880
<v Speaker 2>in the party and outside the party attribute this to

0:09:02.960 --> 0:09:05.120
<v Speaker 2>the sort of broadening of the suite of issues that

0:09:05.160 --> 0:09:08.280
<v Speaker 2>the Greens now champion, you know, in particular, a lot

0:09:08.280 --> 0:09:11.439
<v Speaker 2>of people single out Gaza and they're very strong support

0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:14.040
<v Speaker 2>for the Palestinians and they're very strong criticism of Israel.

0:09:14.559 --> 0:09:17.720
<v Speaker 2>Oddly enough, Ben Ray suggests that the Gaza issue appears

0:09:17.760 --> 0:09:20.439
<v Speaker 2>to have won the party some big swings in some seats,

0:09:20.480 --> 0:09:23.040
<v Speaker 2>you know, like Chiffley and Werrowa in Western Sydney, which

0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:26.840
<v Speaker 2>have quite substantial Muslim populations but not big enough to win.

0:09:27.480 --> 0:09:30.400
<v Speaker 2>And he says that he doesn't think that Gaza explains

0:09:30.440 --> 0:09:32.800
<v Speaker 2>why the vote was going down in their heartland. But

0:09:32.920 --> 0:09:34.760
<v Speaker 2>some of the Greens I spoke to who wanted to

0:09:34.800 --> 0:09:38.280
<v Speaker 2>stay anonymous, argued that it wasn't so much the party's

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:42.000
<v Speaker 2>policy positioning that has been damaging, but more the sort

0:09:42.000 --> 0:09:44.920
<v Speaker 2>of immoderate way that those positions have been argued. You know,

0:09:45.000 --> 0:09:48.040
<v Speaker 2>on Gaza, for example, it's one thing to accuse Israel

0:09:48.080 --> 0:09:51.400
<v Speaker 2>of committing crimes under international law. But it's quite another

0:09:51.400 --> 0:09:54.079
<v Speaker 2>thing to accuse the Australian government of being and I'm

0:09:54.120 --> 0:09:57.720
<v Speaker 2>quoting here, complicit in Israel's genocide. You know. That was

0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:00.000
<v Speaker 2>what Marine Ferruki had to say a couple of months ago.

0:10:00.360 --> 0:10:03.920
<v Speaker 4>So long as we have defense contracts with Israeli weapons companies,

0:10:04.120 --> 0:10:07.800
<v Speaker 4>the Labor government is complicit in genocide. So long as

0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:11.040
<v Speaker 4>we refuse to impose sanction on Israel, this Labor government

0:10:11.160 --> 0:10:14.679
<v Speaker 4>is complicit in genocide, and there are no excuses for inaction.

0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:17.439
<v Speaker 2>The Greens have always had a broad social justice agenda,

0:10:18.000 --> 0:10:20.640
<v Speaker 2>but some people in the party argue that there hasn't

0:10:20.640 --> 0:10:23.800
<v Speaker 2>been enough emphasis on the core turf of environment and climate,

0:10:24.320 --> 0:10:26.440
<v Speaker 2>and that the party has come to be seen not

0:10:26.600 --> 0:10:30.800
<v Speaker 2>just as obstructive, but as aggressively obstructive. In the last parliament,

0:10:30.840 --> 0:10:33.120
<v Speaker 2>you know, I spoke to some who said the feedback

0:10:33.120 --> 0:10:35.320
<v Speaker 2>they were getting from voters on the booths was that

0:10:35.320 --> 0:10:38.440
<v Speaker 2>the party seemed and are quoting here, too angry and

0:10:38.520 --> 0:10:40.840
<v Speaker 2>too personal in its critiques of the government.

0:10:41.240 --> 0:10:43.280
<v Speaker 1>It was a point that Anthony Alberanezi and the Labor

0:10:43.320 --> 0:10:46.840
<v Speaker 1>Party really hammered that the Greens had been obstructionists throughout

0:10:46.840 --> 0:10:47.720
<v Speaker 1>the first term.

0:10:47.760 --> 0:10:51.080
<v Speaker 5>That they simply combined with the coalition in what I

0:10:51.320 --> 0:10:56.160
<v Speaker 5>termed the null alition to provide blockages, and that occurred

0:10:56.200 --> 0:11:00.920
<v Speaker 5>across a range of portfolios, housing, Treasury as well the environment.

0:11:01.080 --> 0:11:03.520
<v Speaker 1>In his first interview since the election, he spoke about

0:11:03.520 --> 0:11:05.920
<v Speaker 1>the no elition the Greens had formed with the opposition.

0:11:06.440 --> 0:11:08.760
<v Speaker 1>So did that sentiment resonate with voters? Do you think?

0:11:09.040 --> 0:11:11.640
<v Speaker 2>What I think is that Anthony Albanizi is the canniest

0:11:11.679 --> 0:11:14.960
<v Speaker 2>politician in Australia and the fact that he kept hammering

0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:18.040
<v Speaker 2>that point suggests that Labor knew it was resonating, and

0:11:18.280 --> 0:11:19.920
<v Speaker 2>I think there is some truth to it. You know,

0:11:20.000 --> 0:11:23.080
<v Speaker 2>they perhaps held out too long in some cases. Of course,

0:11:23.080 --> 0:11:25.360
<v Speaker 2>the counter argument is that they got some results. Max

0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:27.640
<v Speaker 2>Chandler matha hung out and hung out and hang out

0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:30.240
<v Speaker 2>in housing policy and eventually got a few billion dollars

0:11:30.240 --> 0:11:33.640
<v Speaker 2>extra out of the government by doing so. But along

0:11:33.679 --> 0:11:36.199
<v Speaker 2>the way it got a bit ugly.

0:11:36.600 --> 0:11:39.000
<v Speaker 5>He should have a good look at the way that

0:11:39.040 --> 0:11:43.560
<v Speaker 5>he asked questions in the Parliament and maybe what he

0:11:43.679 --> 0:11:48.360
<v Speaker 5>needs as a mirror and a reflection on why he's

0:11:48.400 --> 0:11:49.800
<v Speaker 5>no longer in parliament.

0:11:50.360 --> 0:11:53.640
<v Speaker 2>And the Prime Minister singled out Chandler Matha, in particular

0:11:54.120 --> 0:11:57.080
<v Speaker 2>in that interview that you mentioned, noting that Chandler Mather

0:11:57.200 --> 0:11:59.559
<v Speaker 2>had stood up at a CFMU rally in front of

0:11:59.679 --> 0:12:02.760
<v Speaker 2>sign that described him as a Nazi Albanzi I think

0:12:02.840 --> 0:12:06.319
<v Speaker 2>was genuinely offended by that. Chandler Mather also took it

0:12:06.400 --> 0:12:09.120
<v Speaker 2>up to Albo for owning a rental property and put

0:12:09.120 --> 0:12:12.160
<v Speaker 2>that in terms that Alberanze found offensive and you know,

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:13.560
<v Speaker 2>were frankly pretty strong.

0:12:14.040 --> 0:12:16.560
<v Speaker 5>So you know, I think he should have a look

0:12:16.600 --> 0:12:20.280
<v Speaker 5>at the way that he conducted himself in question time,

0:12:20.360 --> 0:12:23.640
<v Speaker 5>including the questions that he asked of me, which I

0:12:23.720 --> 0:12:27.640
<v Speaker 5>found pretty offensive and which some of which were ruled

0:12:27.679 --> 0:12:28.280
<v Speaker 5>out of order.

0:12:28.720 --> 0:12:31.600
<v Speaker 2>So I think so. So it'll be interesting to see,

0:12:31.679 --> 0:12:34.120
<v Speaker 2>you know, now that Chandler Mayth has gone, now that

0:12:34.160 --> 0:12:37.800
<v Speaker 2>the leader's gone, if the Greens adopted somewhat more cooperative

0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:42.160
<v Speaker 2>or at least polite approach to negotiations with the government

0:12:42.200 --> 0:12:42.760
<v Speaker 2>in the future.

0:12:43.160 --> 0:12:44.760
<v Speaker 1>So do you think the public still sees that its

0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:47.240
<v Speaker 1>valuable in terms of holding the government to account in

0:12:47.520 --> 0:12:48.000
<v Speaker 1>the Senate?

0:12:48.600 --> 0:12:51.280
<v Speaker 2>Oh? I do? I do? I mean, you know, their

0:12:51.320 --> 0:12:53.800
<v Speaker 2>performance in the House of Reps was poor, but because

0:12:53.880 --> 0:12:56.560
<v Speaker 2>Labour's win was so big that's kind of irrelevant. You know,

0:12:57.040 --> 0:12:58.920
<v Speaker 2>they're going to have probably ninety out of one hundred

0:12:58.920 --> 0:13:02.040
<v Speaker 2>and fifty lower House seat. But the Greens still performed

0:13:02.120 --> 0:13:03.880
<v Speaker 2>very well in the Senate. They held all their seats.

0:13:03.880 --> 0:13:06.960
<v Speaker 2>They've got eleven Senate seats, which, as it happens, is

0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:09.920
<v Speaker 2>exactly enough to give Labor the votes it needs to

0:13:09.920 --> 0:13:13.560
<v Speaker 2>pass legislation. And this may not have happened entirely by accident.

0:13:13.760 --> 0:13:16.600
<v Speaker 2>I spoke to the Greens New South Wales Senator David Shubridge,

0:13:16.640 --> 0:13:19.400
<v Speaker 2>and let me quote him. He said, I think a

0:13:19.440 --> 0:13:21.960
<v Speaker 2>lot of people were really anxious about getting Peter Dutton

0:13:22.040 --> 0:13:25.320
<v Speaker 2>with a side surf of Trump, and that played out

0:13:25.360 --> 0:13:27.720
<v Speaker 2>with people voting Labor out of fear of Dutton in

0:13:27.760 --> 0:13:30.400
<v Speaker 2>the lower House and then voting with their heart for

0:13:30.440 --> 0:13:33.400
<v Speaker 2>the Greens in the Senate. And you know, I think

0:13:33.440 --> 0:13:35.839
<v Speaker 2>that's right. I think that the electorate at large does

0:13:35.880 --> 0:13:38.920
<v Speaker 2>not like a government to control both houses, and I

0:13:38.960 --> 0:13:42.200
<v Speaker 2>think in the current climate they probably want a labor

0:13:42.240 --> 0:13:45.040
<v Speaker 2>government that is slightly less timid than the last one was,

0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:48.360
<v Speaker 2>you know, a bit bolder on policy, and certainly Greens

0:13:48.400 --> 0:13:50.800
<v Speaker 2>in the balance of power will be pushing in that direction.

0:13:51.040 --> 0:13:54.040
<v Speaker 1>And obviously whether the Greens adopt a less combative approach

0:13:54.120 --> 0:13:56.760
<v Speaker 1>when dealing with the government will come down to leadership

0:13:57.360 --> 0:13:59.240
<v Speaker 1>and left the way and see who the new leader is,

0:14:00.080 --> 0:14:02.400
<v Speaker 1>and they'll hold the balance of power in the Senate.

0:14:02.720 --> 0:14:04.920
<v Speaker 1>The Government is going to have to negay shape with

0:14:04.960 --> 0:14:07.440
<v Speaker 1>them at some point. So what do we know about

0:14:07.480 --> 0:14:09.640
<v Speaker 1>what the Greens agenda will be for the next parliament.

0:14:10.480 --> 0:14:13.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, Adam Bann at that media conference on Monday he

0:14:13.440 --> 0:14:15.760
<v Speaker 2>spelled it out, you know, and he made the point

0:14:15.760 --> 0:14:18.680
<v Speaker 2>he said, the government now can't blame any independent senator

0:14:18.720 --> 0:14:21.080
<v Speaker 2>for not getting its reforms through.

0:14:21.440 --> 0:14:24.960
<v Speaker 3>The only thing stopping getting dental into medicare, stopping you

0:14:25.080 --> 0:14:29.160
<v Speaker 3>coal or gas mines, or rebalancing unfair housing tax breaks

0:14:29.520 --> 0:14:30.560
<v Speaker 3>is the government itself.

0:14:31.000 --> 0:14:33.840
<v Speaker 2>And he's absolutely right. He was absolutely right also when

0:14:33.840 --> 0:14:36.480
<v Speaker 2>he said that this could be the most progressive parliament

0:14:36.520 --> 0:14:40.040
<v Speaker 2>Australia's ever seen. It comes down essentially to how bold

0:14:40.120 --> 0:14:43.360
<v Speaker 2>Labor is because the Coalition can't stop them if they

0:14:43.360 --> 0:14:46.280
<v Speaker 2>want to do radical things, because the Greens will happily

0:14:46.320 --> 0:14:49.560
<v Speaker 2>wave it through. So it will be interesting to see,

0:14:49.600 --> 0:14:53.120
<v Speaker 2>won't it. It really comes back I guess not so

0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:56.040
<v Speaker 2>much to the Greens as to where the labor has

0:14:56.080 --> 0:15:00.000
<v Speaker 2>the nerve to actually push the envelope a little bit

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:01.000
<v Speaker 2>on some of these things.

0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:03.200
<v Speaker 1>Nerve is one word for it. Mike, thank you so

0:15:03.280 --> 0:15:04.000
<v Speaker 1>much for your time.

0:15:05.080 --> 0:15:06.080
<v Speaker 2>Thanks sir, cheers.

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:17.120
<v Speaker 1>Also in the news today, dumped Industry and Science Minister

0:15:17.320 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 1>Ed Husick has called the Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles

0:15:20.520 --> 0:15:24.000
<v Speaker 1>a factional assassin. Hoosick was acts last week as Males

0:15:24.000 --> 0:15:27.000
<v Speaker 1>and the Victorian Right successfully argued to take a front

0:15:27.040 --> 0:15:30.600
<v Speaker 1>bench place from the new South Wales Right. Attorney General

0:15:30.640 --> 0:15:33.720
<v Speaker 1>Mark Drayfus has also been sacked, and mister Hughesy questioned

0:15:33.760 --> 0:15:36.040
<v Speaker 1>why the Prime Minister didn't use the huge mandate of

0:15:36.080 --> 0:15:39.040
<v Speaker 1>his win to protect the two ministers from the factional fight.

0:15:39.480 --> 0:15:43.960
<v Speaker 1>The new cabinet will be announced today and hours after

0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:47.000
<v Speaker 1>the US President Donald Trump announced to cease fire between

0:15:47.080 --> 0:15:50.440
<v Speaker 1>India and Pakistan. Both countries have accused the other of

0:15:50.480 --> 0:15:54.000
<v Speaker 1>breaching it. Clashes between the two nations have been escalating

0:15:54.040 --> 0:15:56.520
<v Speaker 1>for weeks, triggered by a mass shooting of tourists in

0:15:56.520 --> 0:16:01.480
<v Speaker 1>India controlled Kashmir. India blame Pakistan repeated violations of the

0:16:01.520 --> 0:16:06.160
<v Speaker 1>truth and said it was retaliating. Both countries are nuclear armed.

0:16:07.320 --> 0:16:10.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm Daniel James. This is seven am. Thanks for listening.