WEBVTT - Larissa Waters seems nice

0:00:01.480 --> 0:00:04.680
<v Speaker 1>Oh look. Thank you so much everyone and appreciate you

0:00:04.760 --> 0:00:07.960
<v Speaker 1>waiting out here in the cold. I am just so

0:00:08.200 --> 0:00:12.040
<v Speaker 1>thrilled to have had the support of my colleagues to

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:14.080
<v Speaker 1>be the leader of the Australian Greens.

0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:17.400
<v Speaker 2>The risk of Waters is the new leader of the

0:00:17.440 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 2>Australian Greens. She takes over as the party reels from

0:00:21.360 --> 0:00:25.040
<v Speaker 2>a wipeout at the last election, losing three of their

0:00:25.079 --> 0:00:29.040
<v Speaker 2>four seats in the House of Representatives, including their leader.

0:00:29.120 --> 0:00:31.520
<v Speaker 1>And I want to send all of my love, as

0:00:31.560 --> 0:00:35.320
<v Speaker 1>does our whole team to our former leader, Adam Bant.

0:00:35.520 --> 0:00:38.960
<v Speaker 1>We miss him desperately and he was a wonderful leader

0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:39.880
<v Speaker 1>for this party.

0:00:40.520 --> 0:00:43.400
<v Speaker 2>Senator Waters's job now is to mend the image of

0:00:43.440 --> 0:00:47.559
<v Speaker 2>the Australian Greens, as the perception cultivated by Labor that

0:00:47.680 --> 0:00:52.040
<v Speaker 2>the party is obstructionist and militant arguably cost them votes.

0:00:52.440 --> 0:00:55.160
<v Speaker 1>People elected us to get shit done and that's what

0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:57.560
<v Speaker 1>we intend to do in the service of people on

0:00:57.600 --> 0:00:58.080
<v Speaker 1>the plant.

0:01:01.560 --> 0:01:04.880
<v Speaker 2>From Schwartz Media, I'm Michael Williams filling in for Daniel

0:01:04.920 --> 0:01:09.360
<v Speaker 2>and Ruby. This is seven am Today, National correspondent for

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:12.920
<v Speaker 2>the Saturday Paper. Mike's second on Larissa Waters, why she

0:01:13.040 --> 0:01:19.720
<v Speaker 2>won and whether she can rebuild the Greens. It's Monday,

0:01:19.920 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 2>May nineteenth, Mike. The Greens have a new leader, Larissa Waters.

0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:33.000
<v Speaker 2>So tell us who was she up against and how

0:01:33.000 --> 0:01:33.840
<v Speaker 2>did they pick her?

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:36.199
<v Speaker 3>Well, let's start with how they picked her. They picked

0:01:36.200 --> 0:01:39.040
<v Speaker 3>her in a very Green's sort of very secretive way.

0:01:39.560 --> 0:01:43.600
<v Speaker 3>In fact, the Greens leadership selection process bears some resemblance

0:01:43.640 --> 0:01:46.880
<v Speaker 3>to a papal conclave. In fact, it's even more inscrutable

0:01:46.920 --> 0:01:50.279
<v Speaker 3>because at least in a papal conclave there are votes. Often,

0:01:50.280 --> 0:01:53.320
<v Speaker 3>in the case of Green's leadership ballots, there is no

0:01:53.360 --> 0:01:56.080
<v Speaker 3>formal vote taken. The party just talks about it until

0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:58.600
<v Speaker 3>it reaches a consensus on who should be the leader

0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 3>or the deputy leader or whatever. And that's what happened

0:02:01.120 --> 0:02:03.040
<v Speaker 3>with the leadership on Thursday. You know, the party room

0:02:03.040 --> 0:02:06.240
<v Speaker 3>reached consensus that Larissa Wards was the one to lead.

0:02:06.800 --> 0:02:10.240
<v Speaker 3>The two other assumed mooted candidates, Sarah Hanson Young and

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:14.680
<v Speaker 3>Marine Ferruki, pulled out and subsequently Ferruki was reconfirmed as

0:02:14.720 --> 0:02:18.959
<v Speaker 3>deputy so to Larissa the ultimate winner. She is the

0:02:19.080 --> 0:02:21.040
<v Speaker 3>most low profile of the three. I think you would

0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:24.520
<v Speaker 3>say she's interesting. She's got an environmental background, she spent

0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:28.200
<v Speaker 3>ten years before she went into the Senate working as

0:02:28.240 --> 0:02:32.160
<v Speaker 3>a lawyer for the Queensland Environmental Defender's Office. I'm told

0:02:32.200 --> 0:02:35.080
<v Speaker 3>by party sources that she is absolutely loved by the members.

0:02:35.560 --> 0:02:38.880
<v Speaker 3>She really presents well. I guess the question is whether

0:02:38.919 --> 0:02:42.200
<v Speaker 3>she's tough enough. You know, she's nice, but one source

0:02:42.240 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 3>described her to me as kind of the vanilla option

0:02:44.960 --> 0:02:48.480
<v Speaker 3>among the three. The former party leader, though and icon,

0:02:48.639 --> 0:02:52.320
<v Speaker 3>Bob Brown, told me he suspect that she's underestimated and

0:02:52.320 --> 0:02:55.240
<v Speaker 3>that we might be surprised at just how strong she

0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:56.320
<v Speaker 3>can be once in the job.

0:02:56.720 --> 0:02:59.919
<v Speaker 2>Do you think Bob's right, Mike, I mean, you've reported

0:03:00.080 --> 0:03:02.280
<v Speaker 2>on the Greens for a long time. What do you

0:03:02.400 --> 0:03:04.440
<v Speaker 2>make of Larisa Waters?

0:03:04.840 --> 0:03:09.000
<v Speaker 3>Well, let me start by saying she's nice. She's certainly

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:12.040
<v Speaker 3>well credentialed. She's got degrees in both science and the law.

0:03:12.480 --> 0:03:15.519
<v Speaker 3>The latter the lawd agree with honors. She's dedicated to

0:03:15.520 --> 0:03:18.880
<v Speaker 3>the Green's original cause. She's diligent, she has a strong

0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:21.839
<v Speaker 3>track record of work in Senate committees. There's a list

0:03:21.880 --> 0:03:24.760
<v Speaker 3>as long as your arm on the Parliamentary website. And

0:03:24.800 --> 0:03:28.000
<v Speaker 3>she's enduring. You know, she has shared the deputy position

0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:31.320
<v Speaker 3>with three different co deputies under two leaders over seven years,

0:03:31.760 --> 0:03:36.080
<v Speaker 3>so she's experienced. She's performed in a number of different portfolios,

0:03:36.360 --> 0:03:40.200
<v Speaker 3>notably the portfolio of Women's Affairs, and has had some

0:03:40.280 --> 0:03:44.440
<v Speaker 3>good runs on the board there. But I come back

0:03:44.440 --> 0:03:46.880
<v Speaker 3>to the fact that she seems nice, and I don't

0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:50.640
<v Speaker 3>say that glibly, but because she has something about her

0:03:50.720 --> 0:03:53.480
<v Speaker 3>of the sort of Tanya plebasec. She connects with people,

0:03:53.880 --> 0:03:57.000
<v Speaker 3>and given the party's current circumstance, it may well be

0:03:57.080 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 3>that that's as important as anything, is that she seems

0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:02.960
<v Speaker 3>nice and reasonable and not overly aggressive.

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:05.840
<v Speaker 2>Well, that makes a lot of sense. I mean you've

0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:09.640
<v Speaker 2>reported widely, Mike about that perception that seems to have

0:04:09.680 --> 0:04:13.760
<v Speaker 2>taken hold in the community, that the Greens have become obstructionists,

0:04:13.800 --> 0:04:17.719
<v Speaker 2>that they're angry, and that that's this turn off for voters.

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:21.720
<v Speaker 2>What sense do you have of whether the Greens are

0:04:21.760 --> 0:04:25.800
<v Speaker 2>hearing that message and whether the pick of Senator Waters

0:04:26.160 --> 0:04:28.039
<v Speaker 2>might suggest they're trying to write the ship.

0:04:28.560 --> 0:04:31.360
<v Speaker 3>Well, they know it's a problem. You know, whether it's

0:04:31.360 --> 0:04:34.040
<v Speaker 3>a fair characterization or not is another matter, but they

0:04:34.040 --> 0:04:36.400
<v Speaker 3>certainly know it's a problem, and they know also that

0:04:36.440 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 3>it's a perception that Labor has assiduously cultivated over the

0:04:40.000 --> 0:04:44.640
<v Speaker 3>past few years, and it landed pretty successfully in the media,

0:04:44.680 --> 0:04:48.000
<v Speaker 3>particularly the right wing media. Greens Party members, including some

0:04:48.080 --> 0:04:50.000
<v Speaker 3>in the party room, tell me they were picking it

0:04:50.080 --> 0:04:52.920
<v Speaker 3>up at polling places as they handed out their Heart

0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:53.840
<v Speaker 3>of Vote cards.

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:57.159
<v Speaker 4>My next question comes from Amazon.

0:04:57.400 --> 0:04:57.800
<v Speaker 1>And you.

0:04:59.279 --> 0:05:02.440
<v Speaker 5>So my question to Senator Schubridge.

0:05:02.000 --> 0:05:03.800
<v Speaker 3>And you've really got a sense of this. I think

0:05:03.839 --> 0:05:07.120
<v Speaker 3>on Monday night where Q and A had David Chubridge

0:05:07.120 --> 0:05:09.039
<v Speaker 3>if the Greens on the panel, and one of the

0:05:09.040 --> 0:05:11.760
<v Speaker 3>members of the audience stood up and asked a question.

0:05:12.080 --> 0:05:15.440
<v Speaker 5>The Greens have seeing their support decrease during the previous term,

0:05:15.680 --> 0:05:19.480
<v Speaker 5>particularly in electates where members held seats. Given the reduced

0:05:19.520 --> 0:05:22.520
<v Speaker 5>support from members who are directly associated with moves to

0:05:22.520 --> 0:05:25.599
<v Speaker 5>block legislation in the Senate, is now the time for

0:05:25.640 --> 0:05:29.240
<v Speaker 5>the Greens to truly uphold their promise to work constructively

0:05:29.279 --> 0:05:31.960
<v Speaker 5>with the government or will you continue to obstruct in

0:05:32.000 --> 0:05:33.920
<v Speaker 5>the Senate and attack the government in the press.

0:05:34.200 --> 0:05:38.919
<v Speaker 3>Chubridge, in response, talked about the need to work constructively.

0:05:38.400 --> 0:05:40.640
<v Speaker 4>And there is now no excuse for us not having

0:05:41.200 --> 0:05:44.120
<v Speaker 4>the kind of relationship with labor where we can just

0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:47.560
<v Speaker 4>sit down and talk through the issues and hopefully put

0:05:47.680 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 4>forward some of that incredibly important legislation and policy that

0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:52.400
<v Speaker 4>we're going to need.

0:05:52.720 --> 0:05:55.480
<v Speaker 3>Because you certainly didn't mention any names about, you know,

0:05:55.560 --> 0:05:59.120
<v Speaker 3>pointing the finger at anyone for being obstructive. But Labour's

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:01.359
<v Speaker 3>Ed Husick, who was also in the panel, piped up

0:06:01.360 --> 0:06:03.560
<v Speaker 3>at that point and he did name some names, and

0:06:04.160 --> 0:06:06.440
<v Speaker 3>there was a slight mutual admiration thing going on, I

0:06:06.440 --> 0:06:11.080
<v Speaker 3>think between Husick and Schuebridge, because Husick praised Chubridge for

0:06:11.120 --> 0:06:14.520
<v Speaker 3>being consultative in their dealings and then said, but there's

0:06:14.520 --> 0:06:17.280
<v Speaker 3>a big difference between a David Schubridge and a Max Chandler.

0:06:17.320 --> 0:06:20.080
<v Speaker 6>Masa, David and I did have to work together and

0:06:20.120 --> 0:06:23.920
<v Speaker 6>work together, I thought constructively on particularly issues around tech,

0:06:24.800 --> 0:06:27.960
<v Speaker 6>where you don't agree with everything, but you reach common ground.

0:06:28.400 --> 0:06:31.760
<v Speaker 6>That wasn't always the case though, and the most frustrating

0:06:31.800 --> 0:06:33.760
<v Speaker 6>thing for us was around housing.

0:06:34.279 --> 0:06:38.800
<v Speaker 3>Of course. Matha was the rather hardline housing spokesman for

0:06:38.839 --> 0:06:41.320
<v Speaker 3>the Greens in the last parliament and he lost his

0:06:41.400 --> 0:06:44.440
<v Speaker 3>seat and after the election, of course, Anthony Alberanezi made

0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:47.159
<v Speaker 3>a big point of calling him out for his quote

0:06:47.279 --> 0:06:50.760
<v Speaker 3>unquote offensive behavior in the parliament. And it's not only

0:06:50.839 --> 0:06:53.000
<v Speaker 3>Labor of course that is pointing this out, and it's

0:06:53.040 --> 0:06:55.200
<v Speaker 3>not only people at the polling boost. You know Drew

0:06:55.279 --> 0:06:58.080
<v Speaker 3>Hutton who helped found the party with Bob Brown all

0:06:58.120 --> 0:07:01.440
<v Speaker 3>those years ago. He's no longer actively involved, but he

0:07:01.520 --> 0:07:04.080
<v Speaker 3>was quoted in the nine media this week complaining of

0:07:04.120 --> 0:07:07.760
<v Speaker 3>a quote hyper militant approach by the party over the

0:07:07.760 --> 0:07:10.680
<v Speaker 3>past three years and also accusing them of having a

0:07:11.280 --> 0:07:14.720
<v Speaker 3>terrible way. He put it, of expressing their moral superiority,

0:07:15.320 --> 0:07:17.160
<v Speaker 3>and he said they needed to get out and talk

0:07:17.240 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 3>meaningfully with ordinary Australians.

0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:21.880
<v Speaker 6>How are the Greens going to be different under your

0:07:22.000 --> 0:07:24.680
<v Speaker 6>leadership compared with what it was like under Adam Band?

0:07:24.800 --> 0:07:26.040
<v Speaker 6>Is there going to be a bit of a change

0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:27.520
<v Speaker 6>in direction, even a subtle one.

0:07:27.720 --> 0:07:31.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, look, Mike. Both in her press conference and in

0:07:31.320 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 2>her first interviews as leader, Larissa Waters went out of

0:07:34.160 --> 0:07:38.720
<v Speaker 2>her way to praise Adam Band, but also to stress

0:07:38.840 --> 0:07:42.200
<v Speaker 2>the sheers and a quote a different person.

0:07:42.440 --> 0:07:44.200
<v Speaker 1>But I am a different person and I bring a

0:07:44.240 --> 0:07:46.640
<v Speaker 1>different style. I really want to get outcomes. I really

0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:50.280
<v Speaker 1>want to work with the current government to try to improve.

0:07:50.360 --> 0:07:52.200
<v Speaker 2>Why do you think she felt it was so important

0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:55.280
<v Speaker 2>to separate herself from Band and to distinguish her own

0:07:55.400 --> 0:07:56.800
<v Speaker 2>leadership style from his.

0:07:57.680 --> 0:08:00.960
<v Speaker 3>Well, there's a few factors. I spoke to a number

0:08:01.000 --> 0:08:03.840
<v Speaker 3>of people in the party room in the lead up

0:08:03.880 --> 0:08:06.920
<v Speaker 3>to the leadership change. You know, they spoke obviously on

0:08:06.960 --> 0:08:11.360
<v Speaker 3>the condition of anonymity, But under bands leadership, I was

0:08:11.400 --> 0:08:14.280
<v Speaker 3>told by a couple the Greens sort of long standing

0:08:14.360 --> 0:08:17.880
<v Speaker 3>process of collective decision making became more of a top

0:08:17.920 --> 0:08:21.440
<v Speaker 3>down model. One person actually called it command and control

0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:23.680
<v Speaker 3>was the way they put it. And to some extent

0:08:23.920 --> 0:08:26.040
<v Speaker 3>they told me this was a matter of circumstance because

0:08:26.080 --> 0:08:28.920
<v Speaker 3>at the last election the Greens inherited four new and

0:08:28.960 --> 0:08:31.920
<v Speaker 3>inexperienced senators and three new House members, so that's almost

0:08:31.960 --> 0:08:34.880
<v Speaker 3>half the party room. So obviously, you know, they were

0:08:34.960 --> 0:08:37.920
<v Speaker 3>learning their way, and maybe that gives some excuse for

0:08:37.920 --> 0:08:40.160
<v Speaker 3>the leadership group to have a bit more influence. But

0:08:40.240 --> 0:08:41.920
<v Speaker 3>the way it was put to me, and I'm quoting

0:08:41.920 --> 0:08:44.400
<v Speaker 3>someone here, there was a definite A team and a

0:08:44.400 --> 0:08:46.600
<v Speaker 3>B team, and you know, the A team made the cause.

0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:50.080
<v Speaker 3>I should note here, incidentally, that the A team included

0:08:50.120 --> 0:08:52.960
<v Speaker 3>all three of the mooted candidates for the leadership, you know,

0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:56.040
<v Speaker 3>Hans and Young Feruki and Waters. So to some extent

0:08:56.080 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 3>that was a criticism of them, I think as well

0:08:57.760 --> 0:09:00.360
<v Speaker 3>as ban but I get the impression and that the

0:09:00.400 --> 0:09:03.000
<v Speaker 3>party roumors made this known to Larisa Wards, that they

0:09:03.040 --> 0:09:04.679
<v Speaker 3>want it to be a bit more consultative, and I

0:09:04.720 --> 0:09:06.960
<v Speaker 3>think she's going to be. The people I spoke to

0:09:07.080 --> 0:09:10.200
<v Speaker 3>also felt that under band the party focused too much

0:09:10.320 --> 0:09:12.560
<v Speaker 3>on trying to expand its numbers in the House of

0:09:12.600 --> 0:09:16.200
<v Speaker 3>Representatives and as part of that, on attacking Peter Dutton

0:09:16.679 --> 0:09:20.760
<v Speaker 3>rather than articulating a positive agenda. It probably looked like

0:09:20.760 --> 0:09:22.920
<v Speaker 3>a good idea a few months back when it looked

0:09:22.960 --> 0:09:24.840
<v Speaker 3>like it might be a tight run race in the House,

0:09:24.840 --> 0:09:26.400
<v Speaker 3>but obviously it didn't work out.

0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:26.720
<v Speaker 5>That way.

0:09:28.840 --> 0:09:32.000
<v Speaker 2>After the break. Why Labour needs the Greens, whether or

0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:40.520
<v Speaker 2>not they'd like to admit it, Mike, I've been fascinated

0:09:40.559 --> 0:09:42.920
<v Speaker 2>to read in your reporting the ways in which other

0:09:42.960 --> 0:09:46.000
<v Speaker 2>factors may have contributed to the greens poor showing, and

0:09:46.040 --> 0:09:48.280
<v Speaker 2>one of them in particular that you've singled out was

0:09:48.559 --> 0:09:51.880
<v Speaker 2>the idea that less emphasis on climate and the environment

0:09:52.800 --> 0:09:56.040
<v Speaker 2>was causing damage to their brand. How well placed will

0:09:56.080 --> 0:10:00.320
<v Speaker 2>Larissa Wards be to refocus the party's attention on this area.

0:10:00.400 --> 0:10:03.960
<v Speaker 3>Well, First, you're absolutely right that has been a criticism,

0:10:04.400 --> 0:10:06.720
<v Speaker 3>and I understand that that was raised not in the

0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:09.120
<v Speaker 3>party room meeting that elected the new leader, but there

0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:11.200
<v Speaker 3>was one a couple of days beforehand to sort of

0:10:11.240 --> 0:10:13.679
<v Speaker 3>look at the direction of the party, and that was

0:10:13.720 --> 0:10:16.240
<v Speaker 3>definitely one of the themes of it. And it's certainly

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:20.640
<v Speaker 3>also true that compared with Band and particularly Chandler Matha,

0:10:20.800 --> 0:10:23.320
<v Speaker 3>she comes more out of that stream in the party,

0:10:23.559 --> 0:10:26.679
<v Speaker 3>you know, from an environmental background, as obvious from her history.

0:10:26.720 --> 0:10:29.920
<v Speaker 3>I guess so I suspect that we're going to see

0:10:30.080 --> 0:10:33.040
<v Speaker 3>Larissa Waters chart a slightly new course in the Parliament.

0:10:33.520 --> 0:10:36.360
<v Speaker 3>That doesn't mean that the party will drop issues like

0:10:36.440 --> 0:10:40.040
<v Speaker 3>housing and gaza. You know, social justice has always been

0:10:40.040 --> 0:10:42.800
<v Speaker 3>one of the Green's pillars, but I suspect we'll see

0:10:42.840 --> 0:10:45.480
<v Speaker 3>a change in emphasis, and to some extent that will

0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:47.720
<v Speaker 3>be due to the new leader. And to some extent

0:10:47.760 --> 0:10:50.200
<v Speaker 3>also it's kind of dictated by the election outcome. Right,

0:10:50.679 --> 0:10:54.080
<v Speaker 3>while the Greens failed in the House of Reps, they're

0:10:54.080 --> 0:10:56.240
<v Speaker 3>actually much more powerful in the Senate than they were.

0:10:56.920 --> 0:10:59.160
<v Speaker 3>And you know, these two factors say to me that

0:10:59.200 --> 0:11:01.800
<v Speaker 3>the Greens will you know, be focusing very heavily on

0:11:02.200 --> 0:11:04.240
<v Speaker 3>what they can do in the Senate and first and

0:11:04.280 --> 0:11:06.240
<v Speaker 3>foremost in the Senate, I would suggest, you know, we'll

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:10.200
<v Speaker 3>be getting better environmental laws, you know, working with Labor

0:11:10.640 --> 0:11:12.959
<v Speaker 3>who were going to reintroduce what they call their Nature

0:11:13.000 --> 0:11:16.000
<v Speaker 3>Positive suite of legislation that they failed to get through

0:11:16.000 --> 0:11:16.880
<v Speaker 3>in the last parliament.

0:11:17.200 --> 0:11:20.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm glad you mentioned the Nature Positive laws because you

0:11:20.320 --> 0:11:24.320
<v Speaker 2>know famously that negotiation was going well and was kibosh

0:11:24.400 --> 0:11:26.920
<v Speaker 2>by the PM at the last minute. But we have

0:11:26.960 --> 0:11:29.880
<v Speaker 2>a new environment minister as well, in Murray Watt. How

0:11:29.920 --> 0:11:33.600
<v Speaker 2>do you think the nature Positive laws negotiations are likely

0:11:33.679 --> 0:11:35.640
<v Speaker 2>to go between what and waters?

0:11:36.120 --> 0:11:38.840
<v Speaker 3>You're right, in the previous parliament, Sarah Hanson Young and

0:11:38.920 --> 0:11:42.240
<v Speaker 3>Tanya Plebisek, the then Labor Environment Minister, formed a pretty

0:11:42.280 --> 0:11:45.480
<v Speaker 3>good working relationship. They did actually make progress and reach

0:11:45.520 --> 0:11:48.640
<v Speaker 3>agreement on aspects of the Nature Positive laws, and then

0:11:48.640 --> 0:11:50.960
<v Speaker 3>they went to the Prime Minister's office and he kiboshed them,

0:11:51.000 --> 0:11:54.400
<v Speaker 3>you know, largely at the behest or at the claimed

0:11:54.440 --> 0:11:58.520
<v Speaker 3>behest of the w a premier. He literally claimed responsibility

0:11:58.520 --> 0:12:01.280
<v Speaker 3>for it. So going to the new parliament, Murray what

0:12:01.600 --> 0:12:05.120
<v Speaker 3>the new minister is seen by the Greens as much

0:12:05.120 --> 0:12:09.760
<v Speaker 3>more pro development and potentially pro mining an a fixer

0:12:09.840 --> 0:12:12.280
<v Speaker 3>for the government. I mean, he's a deal maker. I

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:15.240
<v Speaker 3>spoke to Bob Brown about this and I'll quote him.

0:12:15.520 --> 0:12:18.199
<v Speaker 3>He said, the appointment of Murray, what is a torpedo

0:12:18.280 --> 0:12:22.240
<v Speaker 3>into the hopes of environmentalists right around Australia. It's confrontational

0:12:22.280 --> 0:12:25.040
<v Speaker 3>by alban easy. So that's his view and I suspect

0:12:25.080 --> 0:12:27.840
<v Speaker 3>if he's reading it that way, so's the Greens party room.

0:12:28.400 --> 0:12:30.040
<v Speaker 3>Bottom line here is Waters is going to have a

0:12:30.080 --> 0:12:30.800
<v Speaker 3>tough job.

0:12:31.000 --> 0:12:35.040
<v Speaker 2>All right. So the big question Mike ultimately has to

0:12:35.080 --> 0:12:39.320
<v Speaker 2>be can the Greens do this rebrand? Can they change

0:12:39.440 --> 0:12:42.240
<v Speaker 2>tone without backing down from what they believe in? Is

0:12:42.280 --> 0:12:46.040
<v Speaker 2>the inevitable product of a brand change a softer, less

0:12:46.040 --> 0:12:47.760
<v Speaker 2>effective presence in the Parliament.

0:12:48.640 --> 0:12:51.679
<v Speaker 3>Well, there's certainly not painting it that way right. What

0:12:51.720 --> 0:12:54.000
<v Speaker 3>they're saying is that they're here to deal with the

0:12:54.040 --> 0:12:57.240
<v Speaker 3>government and they're here to be cooperative, but they're not

0:12:57.400 --> 0:13:01.440
<v Speaker 3>walking away from the issues they care about. The broadview

0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:03.440
<v Speaker 3>seems to be that they need to change their tone,

0:13:03.559 --> 0:13:06.600
<v Speaker 3>not their policies. I spoke with another former leader, Richard

0:13:06.600 --> 0:13:09.280
<v Speaker 3>de Natalie, who led the party before Adam Bann, and

0:13:09.320 --> 0:13:12.040
<v Speaker 3>the way he put it was that in terms of substance. Actually,

0:13:12.320 --> 0:13:14.800
<v Speaker 3>the platform that they took to this election, which wasn't

0:13:14.800 --> 0:13:16.960
<v Speaker 3>so successful, was the same as the one that they

0:13:17.000 --> 0:13:19.359
<v Speaker 3>took to the previous election, at which they were very successful,

0:13:19.679 --> 0:13:21.840
<v Speaker 3>and essentially the same as the one that they took

0:13:21.880 --> 0:13:24.280
<v Speaker 3>to the election before that. So, you know, he said

0:13:24.440 --> 0:13:27.440
<v Speaker 3>things like reforming capital gains tax and the negative gearing,

0:13:27.520 --> 0:13:29.960
<v Speaker 3>you know, things that they've been banging on about for

0:13:30.000 --> 0:13:32.640
<v Speaker 3>ten years. About housing, he said, they're still going to

0:13:32.679 --> 0:13:36.080
<v Speaker 3>be banging on about. It's really just a question of tone.

0:13:36.160 --> 0:13:38.200
<v Speaker 3>And he made what I thought was a very good point.

0:13:38.640 --> 0:13:40.640
<v Speaker 3>You know, he said that he keeps reading about how

0:13:40.679 --> 0:13:43.360
<v Speaker 3>the Greens today are not the party of Bob Brown anymore.

0:13:43.640 --> 0:13:45.560
<v Speaker 3>But he went back and pointed out that when it

0:13:45.679 --> 0:13:47.800
<v Speaker 3>was the party of Bob Brown, he said, they fucking

0:13:47.840 --> 0:13:50.120
<v Speaker 3>hated us just as much. That's a quote I should add.

0:13:50.120 --> 0:13:52.440
<v Speaker 3>That's not my obscenity, you know, he said, when Bob

0:13:52.480 --> 0:13:54.559
<v Speaker 3>stood up and took on George Bush in the Parliament,

0:13:54.600 --> 0:13:58.520
<v Speaker 3>remember famously, when he was a lone voice protesting against

0:13:58.520 --> 0:14:01.400
<v Speaker 3>the way we treated the refugees on Tampa, the same

0:14:01.400 --> 0:14:03.080
<v Speaker 3>people were out there trying to smash him. It was

0:14:03.080 --> 0:14:05.360
<v Speaker 3>the same criticism, you know, that the Greens were too

0:14:05.440 --> 0:14:09.319
<v Speaker 3>hard lined, that they were too inflexible. So Dina Tali

0:14:09.400 --> 0:14:12.080
<v Speaker 3>actually sees this election as a bit of a glitch.

0:14:12.480 --> 0:14:15.000
<v Speaker 3>The way he interprets it and the way he said

0:14:15.000 --> 0:14:17.360
<v Speaker 3>some people had explained it to him was that people

0:14:17.400 --> 0:14:20.240
<v Speaker 3>were so scared of a Dutton prime ministership that they

0:14:20.320 --> 0:14:23.800
<v Speaker 3>chose to vote Labor, you know, and Bob Brown, he

0:14:23.840 --> 0:14:26.000
<v Speaker 3>made the point to me that Labour actually only received

0:14:26.040 --> 0:14:28.920
<v Speaker 3>thirty four percent of the first preference vote and that

0:14:29.000 --> 0:14:32.520
<v Speaker 3>its huge majority was built very much on the preferences

0:14:32.520 --> 0:14:36.560
<v Speaker 3>from Greens and from Teals, all of whom are far

0:14:36.600 --> 0:14:40.800
<v Speaker 3>more progressive in particularly on climate and the environment than Laborers.

0:14:41.520 --> 0:14:46.320
<v Speaker 3>So the government Labor needs the Greens. As much as

0:14:46.360 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 3>they might hate the fact that they do, they still

0:14:48.400 --> 0:14:51.640
<v Speaker 3>need the Greens. And I would also make the point that,

0:14:51.720 --> 0:14:54.320
<v Speaker 3>you know, what goes up must come down in politics

0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:58.560
<v Speaker 3>as in everything else, and governments inevitably disappoint. So it's

0:14:58.720 --> 0:15:00.720
<v Speaker 3>entirely possible that by the time time of the next

0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:02.960
<v Speaker 3>election some of the shine will have come off the

0:15:02.960 --> 0:15:06.080
<v Speaker 3>Albanesi government and some of those rep seats the Greens

0:15:06.120 --> 0:15:08.920
<v Speaker 3>either lost or narrowly missed out On could very well

0:15:08.960 --> 0:15:12.520
<v Speaker 3>be back in play. But in the meantime, I just

0:15:12.600 --> 0:15:15.640
<v Speaker 3>think that they've probably made a wise choice in Larisa Waters,

0:15:16.040 --> 0:15:18.640
<v Speaker 3>because it's going to be very hard for Labor for

0:15:18.680 --> 0:15:22.560
<v Speaker 3>Anthony Alberanzi to portray the Greens as angry, you know,

0:15:22.920 --> 0:15:26.320
<v Speaker 3>as people are looking at the open, friendly face of

0:15:26.400 --> 0:15:27.200
<v Speaker 3>Larisa Waters.

0:15:28.320 --> 0:15:30.880
<v Speaker 2>Well, it's been a pleasure looking at your open friendly

0:15:30.960 --> 0:15:35.000
<v Speaker 2>faces today. Thanks mate, Thanks for joining us anytime.

0:15:35.120 --> 0:15:41.280
<v Speaker 3>Cheers.

0:15:48.040 --> 0:15:51.960
<v Speaker 2>Also in the news, Anthony Alberanzi has joined other world leaders,

0:15:52.200 --> 0:15:55.880
<v Speaker 2>royals and pilgrims at the inaugural mass of Pope Leo

0:15:55.960 --> 0:15:59.640
<v Speaker 2>the fourteenth at Saint Peter's Square in Rome. Pope Leo

0:15:59.720 --> 0:16:03.280
<v Speaker 2>is the first American pontiff in the history. Born in Chicago,

0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:06.520
<v Speaker 2>the sixty nine year old was elected after a conclave

0:16:06.600 --> 0:16:10.960
<v Speaker 2>that lasted just over twenty four hours. And the Liberal

0:16:11.000 --> 0:16:14.320
<v Speaker 2>Party is divided over climate, according to senior front bencher

0:16:14.440 --> 0:16:18.800
<v Speaker 2>Anne Ruston. Speaking on Insiders, Ruston said it's no secret

0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:22.160
<v Speaker 2>people in the party don't agree on net zero. Leader

0:16:22.160 --> 0:16:25.200
<v Speaker 2>Susan Lee has committed to review the Liberal Party's entire

0:16:25.200 --> 0:16:29.480
<v Speaker 2>agenda as right wing members intensify their push to scrap

0:16:29.520 --> 0:16:34.120
<v Speaker 2>the target. Senator Jacinta nampenjimper Price has blamed that zero

0:16:34.200 --> 0:16:38.240
<v Speaker 2>for causing the cost of living crisis. Meanwhile, Senator Alexantik

0:16:38.480 --> 0:16:41.480
<v Speaker 2>said the target should be abandoned in order to appeal

0:16:41.560 --> 0:16:46.880
<v Speaker 2>to the electorate. Dumping the target would end bipartisan political support.

0:16:47.400 --> 0:16:51.320
<v Speaker 2>Are Michael Williams, This is seven Am. Daniel James will

0:16:51.360 --> 0:17:02.160
<v Speaker 2>be back tomorrow. Thanks for listening.

0:17:00.880 --> 0:17:01.520
<v Speaker 4>At one