At this point - and through the next election and possibly the one after that - Labor can reasonably claim to be the “natural party of being most likely to be able to form a government”, but nothing more.
Well, I wish I'd read that article eleven and a half years ago ;)
It's hard to imagine that either the Greens or the Liberals getting their acts sufficiently together in the next 5-6 years to seriously challenge Labor... but it's not at all hard to imagine yet another ALP own goal.
I think it is less own goals than a conscious repositioning. I suspect Grundle is right in his latest:
"Labor’s decision to give the go ahead for the North West shelf gas project, licensed until 2070, pumping a lethal dose of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and destroying the 50,000 year old rock art at Murujuga, is of course a political, not an economic one. Few jobs will come from it, and the gas will go overseas. Its importance is to draw a line in the desert sand for Labor. It is decisively abandoning both green and indigenous commitments, and it is doing so in a way that is visible to the suburban mainstream. The slap in the face to the environmental and indigenous movements is deliberate and meant to hurt."
That is so true. It reminds me of 1987 and Hawke government's mini-budget (I think that's what it was called) in about May of that year. The measures were clothed as essential economic measures, but it was all about the politics - to prove how tough Labor could be on the disenfranchised. They cut the dole in half for young people, cut the single-parent pension once kids got to 16 (I think, and of course, Gillard cut it further), sold some public services. I forget what else. It was stomach-churning then and the Woodside decision is now.
1. 'and where the ability of a hostile media to sway the electorate has been shown in election after election at state and federal level to have evaporated completely, and what do we get?'
That may well be the case - but does NewsCorp still dictate policy to Labor? Will wait & see if the Aug 2022 meeting of L. Murodoch + Albanese, Wong, Marles takes place.
2. So, maybe this is why we should keep talking about the collapse of the Liberal Party, and force ourselves to watch things like that Four Corners program, because it reminds us what self-delusion looks like and where it can lead.
Absolutely, duopoly is so deluded that can not see what is happening with LNP / Labor share of votes dropping with each election. ABC 4Corners for instance just perpetuates the cult of the 2party system. Why, why, why?. Any ideas? Cheers
NewsCorp definitely still have sway amongst the political class, but that's about it. In terms of helping the Libs, though--they certaintly support them, but the last election shows that that is very much double edged sword. Anyway, the point is, Labor can happily ignore them if they so choose.
I think that's part of the danger with all this, that such decision making drives that sort of cynicism. I know I feel it. It's hard not ot be cynical and they certainly are. For me personally, just something else to guard against.
Agree 100%. Although emotions are the foundation of what we do it cannot be allowed to drive us. Today my Jewish partner is off to a support Palestine gathering.
Tim - quite marvellous - this analysis, horrible - but the truth of where we are at. The north-west shelf - throwing one of the oldest examples of petroglyphs in the world under polluting destructive fall-out - throwing Boyle and McBride into prison for truth-telling - fair makes me sick. Fawning all over the Zionist genocidal mates - over there and here within Australia. Labor principles? What are they? and the reference to Animal Farm - said it all - the ALP and the former Dutton-led LNP - where was the genuine difference - just like AUKUS...
Robbing our world of its birthright, as it were - for the vested interests of shareholders most of whom live in foreign lands while the traditional caretakers are totally denied their heritage. It is such a shocking piece of vandalism I don't know where to direct my expression of outrage - the ALP in this one instance proves your point about Animal Farm. What does the Minister for Indigenous Affairs think - or is she gagged by the ridiculous concept of "cabinet solidarity"... and isn't that a kind of blackmail situation - keep your mouth shut or you'll lose your ministerial salary/etc.
I have forwarded it to Ministers: Pat Conroy and Penny Wong. I love that the writer - another Tim - hammers the point that our PM would never lie - for heaven's sake he grew up in public housing with a single mum - and people with that pedigree never lie - we all "know" that. I've also sent it rather wider afield here in Australia and points abroad...thanks for the link...
The elephant in the room is the earnings we receive through the sale of our carbon resources. The other elephant is the earnings we forgo because the original contracts we drew has so many freebies that the carbon extraction companies pay either no or minimal taxes.
That blows my mind as much as anything: that even from an entirely hard-headed dollar point of view, we give this stuff away. It's insane on that level alone.
The ALP were very lucky Dutton was so on the nose. A half-competent Liberal leader would have ensured a minority Labor government at best. That would have been my (and I take it your) preferred option. As for the Greens, they might have been their own worst enemies in the lead up to, and the campaign itself, but Labor were stupid, I think, to rubbish their positive efforts the way they did.
And as for neolaborism, Andrew Hastie said it all on that Four Corners episode, when asked about net zero (or was it nuclear?) that lowering elecricity prices for taxpayers was the most important thing for a government to focus on.
And yes, a marvellous analysis. Note "On some level, though, all this was already known and factored in, and I don’t think Dutton was never going to win" ; that should read "I don't think Dutton was ever going to win" of course.
There is certainly a very strong wind blowing and Labor will soon get the idea that we will not stand for this disgraceful abandonment of climate change action by allowing Woodside to control his government .We will wait to see what strict conditions have been put into that acceptance of wrecking of our greatest tourist attraction .If Woodside say they will be able to act correctly then it will be up to us to speak the word that Australia is a climate vandalism and best not to visit as more people work in tourism than mining and their jobs are at risk .
It is going to be interesting to see the details, for sure, and then see how this plays out. I think they are underestimating the damage this will do to their standing, such as it is. But as I said, this is how they are choosing to spend their political capital: appeasing capital.
On election night in 2022, Labor was heading for a minority government... but at 9pm when the WA results started showing a massive swing from blue to red (as a result of the Coalition's failures), a Labor majority became the result.
This was exactly my fear in 2025 - that the Coalition would be so uncompetitive that Labor would win a majority. The result was a blue to red swing across the nation this time, generally speaking.
And despite this big win, the gas project approval demonstrates yet again that Labor are only in it for themselves. The two parties aren't the same, but they're both the problem.
So the challenge for progressives has turned from challenging an incompetent Coalition to challenging a competent Labor. How can voting for another party or an independent become the preferred choice for the everyday Australian?
The trend is in that direction--away from the majors--however 2025 played out. At this stage, I think the issue is for independents and the like to be able to organise on the appropriate scale. I think it brings us against the limits of the independents model. More to say on this soon.
Yes, and the other issue that independents are up against seems to be the ability for communities to self-organise when people are flat-out trying to stay afloat. This is an inequality of access issue... that I think you're already aware of.
It's a great shame that we don't have a Jesse Price or a Kate Hulett or a Peter George in this current parliament, not only to diffuse the idea that the independents push is all 'teal', but to show people an alternative to Labor.
I'll be interested in what you have to say on independence post-election, and for that, I'm also wondering if the 'Voices of' practices of listening, kitchen table conversations, and writing reports on community priorities has been undervalued? Have independent campaigners been too hasty to jump into campaigns? I don't know if this concern is merited because each campaign in each seat is different, but I'm wondering if the impartial evidence-base (of dissatisfaction with the status-quo and shared visions for better representation) could have been built more strongly?
It's no coincidence that Voices Of type candidates have emerged in rich electorates. Time and money are huge factors that need to be addressed. Models like Climate200 may be part of the solution; maybe not. They generate very mixed feelings amongs independent groups.
While it’s true the hostile media no longer determines which brand of Coke/Pepsi neoliberalism gets up at each election, it’s increasingly evident they still determine the policy recipe - docile support for ongoing fossil fuel extraction (with polite golf clapping for net zero on the side), acquiescence with the Zionists and their genocide (with a side order of raised eyebrows from Penny), white anting of attempts to bring greater accountability and transparency to lobbying and donor rules (with a dash of NACC to make it look like they are doing something). The predictable, unimaginative and formulaic Four Corners post-mortem on the Coalition implosion also underscored the media’s vested interest in the tweedle dumb and dumber two-party system continuing. For News Corp, it maintains their control of the agenda irrespective of which brand dominates the House of Reps. For the rest, like the ABC, it just makes politics easier to cover (which explains the ubiquity of ‘Peter Dutton says’) and spares journalists from asking the more difficult questions you have put here, Tim. The fact is we in ended up with a hugely dominant ALP because of the vagaries of the preferential voting system and the sheer unelectability of the gormless dills and Star Wars cantina cast of monsters on the other side. In the meantime, a significant progressive consensus in support of effective action on climate change from Teal independents in former Liberal seats, from Green supporters and from what remains of the ALP Left is completely unrepresented in the new government’s agenda. Something big still has to break and the election has just put off what I predict will be a demographic reckoning.
Glad you said this: yes, 4-Corners was completely stuck in the 2-party mindset. Even now! And completely agree, a reckoning is coming. A government can't be this contemptuous of key elements of its support without consequences. But as I said to DD, we have also been brought up against the limits of the community independents model.
The obvious thing for the community independents to do now would be to turn themselves into a formal party and achieve a reverse takeover of what remains of the moderate end of the Liberal Party, but I’m not sure that would resolve anything. The issue seems partly to be that the age when Capital vs Labour was the key dividing point in politics is past. The major parties are now really nothing more than career vehicles for ambitious individual politicians carving a bridge between past lives as staffers and future lives as well-remunerated consultants/lobbyists with fat parliamentary pensions and an open invitation to Q&A panels. Neoliberalism is now clearly dead though the major parties, including Labor, perform ritual charades that it is still alive. If there is a dividing point in our politics, I think it is Old vs Young - more of the same (extractive industries, security/defence industry big media, banks, sports-gambling lobbies) dictating policy or an embrace of sustainability, accountability, transparency, foreign policy independence and a longer view than a three-year electoral cycle. For now, Australia remains a carbon state and is really the last frontier for that industry, which why they have such a death grip on our system.
Funnily enough, I am just rereading Mark Davis's Gangland (for something I might be working on) and of course, that is entirely predicated on the idea of Old vs Young. It's an incredible book, and as per your comments, I think it has contemporary relevance.
On the idea of the indies forming a party, I'm instinctively against that: the whole idea of a party as a vehicle for political action is not just on the nose, but maybe past its useby date, for reasons you mention. Still, maybe there can be some informal alliance and shared resources amongst them all that gives them some ballast against the party machines and the insitututional biases. They definitely need to evolve in that sort of direction.
I'm very nervous about that idea, because it's a significant downgrade in terms of independent politics.
It's also questionable in terms of what problem it is trying to solve? Independents are already quite competitive in lower house seats, but the idea of independence does need exploration beyond 'teal' ideas to allow more political ideas that matter to a more diverse range of communities. The main problem with independents at the moment is that there's no parallel in the Senate - that's surely the main area where a targeted Senate-only community-based party might be of value?
Senate rules make it harder I think. You need party status to get a spot above the line and it makes a big difference. I think it probably contributes to the instability of parties like ON and Jacqui Lambie, with candidates quitting all the time. BUt take your basic point.
I’d forgotten about Gangland. Oddly enough, much of the generation he complained about (the classic 1945-55 boomers) are now into their dotage. But that mentality lives on in younger bodies. ScoMo is Gen-X for instance. And the Liberal Party keeps governing as if that generation and the one before are still in power. In other words, the ‘Old vs Young’ framework more correctly refers now not to the people themselves but the sclerotic system that makes real change impossible.
I'd forgotten too that part of the argument he makes is that former lefties became the new reactionaries, as they grew older, and started pining for the "centre" they had once criticised. It's really interesting, and again, as you suggest, happening in a similar way now.
Beautifully put Tim. I love your balloon analogy. Labor's hatred of the Greens reveals so much about them. When do they speak about corporate tyrants in this vein? Never.
Spot on Tim. I think we will see a further drop in major party primary votes but as to where it slows, I don't know.
All I know is that I need to keep having the conversations about major parties & how they are relics, powerful relics still, but relics nonetheless for the next couple of years & then if Zoe Daniel runs again, get back out there and with all those other wonderful humans who volunteered for her, consign Tim Wilson to the political dustbin of history.
One hopes that our young people will support greens and independants over the next few years as trust in politicians has reached an all time low .
Labor is demeaning itself when it will not considér that it must pass the senate unless it betrays the people and votes with liberals on planetwrecking policies as mentioned .
At this point - and through the next election and possibly the one after that - Labor can reasonably claim to be the “natural party of being most likely to be able to form a government”, but nothing more.
Hard to see them not holding onto a majority in 2028, for sure. But then again, I just don't think that sort of certainty holds anymore. Remember this from 2013: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-24/dunlop-future-of-politics/5041314
Well, I wish I'd read that article eleven and a half years ago ;)
It's hard to imagine that either the Greens or the Liberals getting their acts sufficiently together in the next 5-6 years to seriously challenge Labor... but it's not at all hard to imagine yet another ALP own goal.
I think it is less own goals than a conscious repositioning. I suspect Grundle is right in his latest:
"Labor’s decision to give the go ahead for the North West shelf gas project, licensed until 2070, pumping a lethal dose of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and destroying the 50,000 year old rock art at Murujuga, is of course a political, not an economic one. Few jobs will come from it, and the gas will go overseas. Its importance is to draw a line in the desert sand for Labor. It is decisively abandoning both green and indigenous commitments, and it is doing so in a way that is visible to the suburban mainstream. The slap in the face to the environmental and indigenous movements is deliberate and meant to hurt."
https://guyrundle.substack.com/p/spec-305-north-west-shelf-albo-drives
Oh, I wasn't talking about that - more just the general vibe of "pride goeth..." the ALP is currently displaying
That is so true. It reminds me of 1987 and Hawke government's mini-budget (I think that's what it was called) in about May of that year. The measures were clothed as essential economic measures, but it was all about the politics - to prove how tough Labor could be on the disenfranchised. They cut the dole in half for young people, cut the single-parent pension once kids got to 16 (I think, and of course, Gillard cut it further), sold some public services. I forget what else. It was stomach-churning then and the Woodside decision is now.
Tim that is one of the most prescient things I've ever read. You should be proud of that one.
Yeah, it holds up well, which is nice to be able to say. Cheers.
Bravo TD, well written, well argued.
Just 2 things:
1. 'and where the ability of a hostile media to sway the electorate has been shown in election after election at state and federal level to have evaporated completely, and what do we get?'
That may well be the case - but does NewsCorp still dictate policy to Labor? Will wait & see if the Aug 2022 meeting of L. Murodoch + Albanese, Wong, Marles takes place.
2. So, maybe this is why we should keep talking about the collapse of the Liberal Party, and force ourselves to watch things like that Four Corners program, because it reminds us what self-delusion looks like and where it can lead.
Absolutely, duopoly is so deluded that can not see what is happening with LNP / Labor share of votes dropping with each election. ABC 4Corners for instance just perpetuates the cult of the 2party system. Why, why, why?. Any ideas? Cheers
NewsCorp definitely still have sway amongst the political class, but that's about it. In terms of helping the Libs, though--they certaintly support them, but the last election shows that that is very much double edged sword. Anyway, the point is, Labor can happily ignore them if they so choose.
After rhe Woodside decision the cynic in me thought, 'why bother complaining about the Gaza genocide when you're out to kill the planet '
I think that's part of the danger with all this, that such decision making drives that sort of cynicism. I know I feel it. It's hard not ot be cynical and they certainly are. For me personally, just something else to guard against.
Agree 100%. Although emotions are the foundation of what we do it cannot be allowed to drive us. Today my Jewish partner is off to a support Palestine gathering.
Tim - quite marvellous - this analysis, horrible - but the truth of where we are at. The north-west shelf - throwing one of the oldest examples of petroglyphs in the world under polluting destructive fall-out - throwing Boyle and McBride into prison for truth-telling - fair makes me sick. Fawning all over the Zionist genocidal mates - over there and here within Australia. Labor principles? What are they? and the reference to Animal Farm - said it all - the ALP and the former Dutton-led LNP - where was the genuine difference - just like AUKUS...
Did I write - "one of the oldest" - sorry! I meant: THE oldest petroglyphs in the world - by far!
One of the oldest representations of a human facce--the oldest, as you say--and we are going to blow it up. It's breathtaking.
Robbing our world of its birthright, as it were - for the vested interests of shareholders most of whom live in foreign lands while the traditional caretakers are totally denied their heritage. It is such a shocking piece of vandalism I don't know where to direct my expression of outrage - the ALP in this one instance proves your point about Animal Farm. What does the Minister for Indigenous Affairs think - or is she gagged by the ridiculous concept of "cabinet solidarity"... and isn't that a kind of blackmail situation - keep your mouth shut or you'll lose your ministerial salary/etc.
Just to underline what BS the justifications are: https://timinclimate.medium.com/fact-check-woodsides-north-west-shelf-extension-isn-t-needed-to-firm-the-australian-grid-af2aae4fb492
I have forwarded it to Ministers: Pat Conroy and Penny Wong. I love that the writer - another Tim - hammers the point that our PM would never lie - for heaven's sake he grew up in public housing with a single mum - and people with that pedigree never lie - we all "know" that. I've also sent it rather wider afield here in Australia and points abroad...thanks for the link...
It's great to have that sort of data set out so clearly. It just demolishes the official rationalisation.
Blow Wind Blow this planet is running short on time
The elephant in the room is the earnings we receive through the sale of our carbon resources. The other elephant is the earnings we forgo because the original contracts we drew has so many freebies that the carbon extraction companies pay either no or minimal taxes.
That blows my mind as much as anything: that even from an entirely hard-headed dollar point of view, we give this stuff away. It's insane on that level alone.
Well articulated (again), Tim. You write what I feel. Thanks.
The ALP were very lucky Dutton was so on the nose. A half-competent Liberal leader would have ensured a minority Labor government at best. That would have been my (and I take it your) preferred option. As for the Greens, they might have been their own worst enemies in the lead up to, and the campaign itself, but Labor were stupid, I think, to rubbish their positive efforts the way they did.
And as for neolaborism, Andrew Hastie said it all on that Four Corners episode, when asked about net zero (or was it nuclear?) that lowering elecricity prices for taxpayers was the most important thing for a government to focus on.
And yes, a marvellous analysis. Note "On some level, though, all this was already known and factored in, and I don’t think Dutton was never going to win" ; that should read "I don't think Dutton was ever going to win" of course.
Thanks, I'll fix that.
There is certainly a very strong wind blowing and Labor will soon get the idea that we will not stand for this disgraceful abandonment of climate change action by allowing Woodside to control his government .We will wait to see what strict conditions have been put into that acceptance of wrecking of our greatest tourist attraction .If Woodside say they will be able to act correctly then it will be up to us to speak the word that Australia is a climate vandalism and best not to visit as more people work in tourism than mining and their jobs are at risk .
It is going to be interesting to see the details, for sure, and then see how this plays out. I think they are underestimating the damage this will do to their standing, such as it is. But as I said, this is how they are choosing to spend their political capital: appeasing capital.
On election night in 2022, Labor was heading for a minority government... but at 9pm when the WA results started showing a massive swing from blue to red (as a result of the Coalition's failures), a Labor majority became the result.
This was exactly my fear in 2025 - that the Coalition would be so uncompetitive that Labor would win a majority. The result was a blue to red swing across the nation this time, generally speaking.
And despite this big win, the gas project approval demonstrates yet again that Labor are only in it for themselves. The two parties aren't the same, but they're both the problem.
So the challenge for progressives has turned from challenging an incompetent Coalition to challenging a competent Labor. How can voting for another party or an independent become the preferred choice for the everyday Australian?
The trend is in that direction--away from the majors--however 2025 played out. At this stage, I think the issue is for independents and the like to be able to organise on the appropriate scale. I think it brings us against the limits of the independents model. More to say on this soon.
Yes, and the other issue that independents are up against seems to be the ability for communities to self-organise when people are flat-out trying to stay afloat. This is an inequality of access issue... that I think you're already aware of.
It's a great shame that we don't have a Jesse Price or a Kate Hulett or a Peter George in this current parliament, not only to diffuse the idea that the independents push is all 'teal', but to show people an alternative to Labor.
I'll be interested in what you have to say on independence post-election, and for that, I'm also wondering if the 'Voices of' practices of listening, kitchen table conversations, and writing reports on community priorities has been undervalued? Have independent campaigners been too hasty to jump into campaigns? I don't know if this concern is merited because each campaign in each seat is different, but I'm wondering if the impartial evidence-base (of dissatisfaction with the status-quo and shared visions for better representation) could have been built more strongly?
It's no coincidence that Voices Of type candidates have emerged in rich electorates. Time and money are huge factors that need to be addressed. Models like Climate200 may be part of the solution; maybe not. They generate very mixed feelings amongs independent groups.
So accurate Tm. Reading this depresses me and enrages me in equal measure. Keep on!
While it’s true the hostile media no longer determines which brand of Coke/Pepsi neoliberalism gets up at each election, it’s increasingly evident they still determine the policy recipe - docile support for ongoing fossil fuel extraction (with polite golf clapping for net zero on the side), acquiescence with the Zionists and their genocide (with a side order of raised eyebrows from Penny), white anting of attempts to bring greater accountability and transparency to lobbying and donor rules (with a dash of NACC to make it look like they are doing something). The predictable, unimaginative and formulaic Four Corners post-mortem on the Coalition implosion also underscored the media’s vested interest in the tweedle dumb and dumber two-party system continuing. For News Corp, it maintains their control of the agenda irrespective of which brand dominates the House of Reps. For the rest, like the ABC, it just makes politics easier to cover (which explains the ubiquity of ‘Peter Dutton says’) and spares journalists from asking the more difficult questions you have put here, Tim. The fact is we in ended up with a hugely dominant ALP because of the vagaries of the preferential voting system and the sheer unelectability of the gormless dills and Star Wars cantina cast of monsters on the other side. In the meantime, a significant progressive consensus in support of effective action on climate change from Teal independents in former Liberal seats, from Green supporters and from what remains of the ALP Left is completely unrepresented in the new government’s agenda. Something big still has to break and the election has just put off what I predict will be a demographic reckoning.
Very well said Mr Denmore.
Glad you said this: yes, 4-Corners was completely stuck in the 2-party mindset. Even now! And completely agree, a reckoning is coming. A government can't be this contemptuous of key elements of its support without consequences. But as I said to DD, we have also been brought up against the limits of the community independents model.
The obvious thing for the community independents to do now would be to turn themselves into a formal party and achieve a reverse takeover of what remains of the moderate end of the Liberal Party, but I’m not sure that would resolve anything. The issue seems partly to be that the age when Capital vs Labour was the key dividing point in politics is past. The major parties are now really nothing more than career vehicles for ambitious individual politicians carving a bridge between past lives as staffers and future lives as well-remunerated consultants/lobbyists with fat parliamentary pensions and an open invitation to Q&A panels. Neoliberalism is now clearly dead though the major parties, including Labor, perform ritual charades that it is still alive. If there is a dividing point in our politics, I think it is Old vs Young - more of the same (extractive industries, security/defence industry big media, banks, sports-gambling lobbies) dictating policy or an embrace of sustainability, accountability, transparency, foreign policy independence and a longer view than a three-year electoral cycle. For now, Australia remains a carbon state and is really the last frontier for that industry, which why they have such a death grip on our system.
Funnily enough, I am just rereading Mark Davis's Gangland (for something I might be working on) and of course, that is entirely predicated on the idea of Old vs Young. It's an incredible book, and as per your comments, I think it has contemporary relevance.
On the idea of the indies forming a party, I'm instinctively against that: the whole idea of a party as a vehicle for political action is not just on the nose, but maybe past its useby date, for reasons you mention. Still, maybe there can be some informal alliance and shared resources amongst them all that gives them some ballast against the party machines and the insitututional biases. They definitely need to evolve in that sort of direction.
Mr Denmore, that is succinct! Thank you.
I'm very nervous about that idea, because it's a significant downgrade in terms of independent politics.
It's also questionable in terms of what problem it is trying to solve? Independents are already quite competitive in lower house seats, but the idea of independence does need exploration beyond 'teal' ideas to allow more political ideas that matter to a more diverse range of communities. The main problem with independents at the moment is that there's no parallel in the Senate - that's surely the main area where a targeted Senate-only community-based party might be of value?
Senate rules make it harder I think. You need party status to get a spot above the line and it makes a big difference. I think it probably contributes to the instability of parties like ON and Jacqui Lambie, with candidates quitting all the time. BUt take your basic point.
Wonderful post, Mr. D.
I’d forgotten about Gangland. Oddly enough, much of the generation he complained about (the classic 1945-55 boomers) are now into their dotage. But that mentality lives on in younger bodies. ScoMo is Gen-X for instance. And the Liberal Party keeps governing as if that generation and the one before are still in power. In other words, the ‘Old vs Young’ framework more correctly refers now not to the people themselves but the sclerotic system that makes real change impossible.
I'd forgotten too that part of the argument he makes is that former lefties became the new reactionaries, as they grew older, and started pining for the "centre" they had once criticised. It's really interesting, and again, as you suggest, happening in a similar way now.
Well, I am still voting Green, at age 88. How do I collect a useful collection of lefties?
Beautifully put Tim. I love your balloon analogy. Labor's hatred of the Greens reveals so much about them. When do they speak about corporate tyrants in this vein? Never.
Thanks, Brendan. The animosity towards the Greens is just about defining at this stage, isn't it? Un aide-mémoire can be like that.
Apropos of nothing - but have you all seen this? https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1253439383153220
Oh Dear. He’s quite mad isn’t he?
It definitely appears so
I am without speech. 🫢
I am not allowed to read this one ...
Spot on Tim. I think we will see a further drop in major party primary votes but as to where it slows, I don't know.
All I know is that I need to keep having the conversations about major parties & how they are relics, powerful relics still, but relics nonetheless for the next couple of years & then if Zoe Daniel runs again, get back out there and with all those other wonderful humans who volunteered for her, consign Tim Wilson to the political dustbin of history.
One hopes that our young people will support greens and independants over the next few years as trust in politicians has reached an all time low .
Labor is demeaning itself when it will not considér that it must pass the senate unless it betrays the people and votes with liberals on planetwrecking policies as mentioned .