Whither Goes Australia and the Greens
In Australia the centre-left has held onto a razor thin majority with the Labour and Green Parties so far winning the support of some 30,487 more first and subsequent preferences than the Liberal/National Coalition in the House of Representatives elections: 6,216,435 versus 6,185,948.
Once parliament meets the Labour government will only remain in power in the lower house with the support of three of four Independents and a Green MP. This will give them a one seat majority (after election of the Speaker) in the House of Representatives and, after July 2011 a four seat majority in the Senate.
This election began at the end of June when then Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, from Victoria State, ousted then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, from Queensland, over his refusal to back down from introducing a new 40 per cent mining tax.
Subsequently Prime Minister Gillard negotiated a 30 per cent tax rate with the largest mining companies and at the start of the election it appeared as if Labour had won back the support lost by Mr. Rudd over the introduction of the tax.
With the preferences counted from 93.2 per cent of the enrolled voters the Labour and Green parties have emerged with 49.8 per cent of all first preferences cast, with Labour subsequently holding 50.1 per cent of the of the two party preferred count (the count of second and subsequent preferences until all but the final two candidates are eliminated, where one candidate has 50 per cent + 1 or higher).
And this is the remarkable thing about this election. In contrast to the claim made by the centre-right "Coalition", that Labour has lost it's mandate to govern and bring in a mining tax, of the 676,801 first preferences lost by Labour, over 7 in 10 swung to the left of centre Green Party, while only slightly more than 1 in 4 swung to the centre-right Liberal and National "Coalition".
Thus while Labour has seen it's first preference support drop from 43.4 per cent to 38 per cent and the "Coalition" has seen it's support increase from 42.1 per cent to 43.6 per cent, the balance of power has actually swung to the Green Party who have gone from 7.8 per cent to 11.8 per cent.
And this is the most interesting point of the election, in that not only did the Leader of the Green Party, Bob Brown, state he supported the mining tax, in a National Press Club speech two days before the election, but he promised if the Party held the balance of power they would move an amendment to increase the tax by a further $2 billion that would go to increase education spending.
Further in Melbourne, left-wing labour lawyer Adam Bandt very nearly obtained more first preferences than Labour: 36.3 per cent: 38.1 per cent. Bandt, who promised to back a Labour government, ran on a Green Party platform that included legalizing gay marriage and improving the rights of asylum seekers. With prominent billboards displayed all over the city Bandt was elected with a final preference distribution of 56.1 per cent.
Thus, in this election while some in the electorate switched from Labour to oppose the mining tax and support the "Coalitions" more neo-conservative social and economic views, nearly three times more voters switched away from Labour to support the more radical interventionist point of view of the Green Party. For the first time in Australia, the Green Party has been placed in a position of pivotal power as to who forms government and what they do while there.
Overall the Green Party increase not only eclipsed the total obtained by the National, read "conservative", it is now greater than all minor parties and Independents combined: 1,458,998 versus 1,324,093.
In Metropolitan Australia support grew by 55.6 per cent (particularly in the poorer inner city seats, like the one Bandt ran in) and in Rural Australia by 42.2 per cent. In conservative rural South Australia first preference support grew by 87.3 per cent, in Queensland by 79.6 per cent, Northern Territory 67.2 per cent, Victoria 49.4 per cent, Tasmania 30.7 per cent.
Only in rural Western Australia did support and the swing to WA Nationals exceed the support and swing to the Green Party, and only in NSW and rural Queensland and the Northern Territories does support for minor parties (including the conservative Nationals) and Independents combined exceed Green Party support.
Further, an indicative of the future House of Representatives elections, in some senate races the Green's are now above 1 in 5 support in 10 per cent of the House of Representative Divisions and running second ahead of the Liberals in 5 and ahead of Labour in 2.
If Labour and the Green Party, with the support of three of four Independents accomplish half what is laid out in the accords below, then Australian parliamentary democracy will be better off than before.
1. Labour-Green Accord:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/documents/scribd.htm?id=36708980&key=key-19d07m28rwmyz7i74wn1
2. Labour-Wilkie Accord:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/documents/scribd.htm?id=36832825&key=key-y0tymdnljkwwglq28en
3. Labour-Oakeshott-Windsor Accord"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/documents/scribd.htm?id=37073744&key=key-1x89agpbzvzs64hvm9o1
Unlike Canada, Australians are used to minority parliaments where the Party with the most seats and votes does not always become government. In Tasmania in June the Liberals matched Labour for seats and obtained the most number of preferences.
After stepping down the Labour Premier was ordered to try and form a government by the Lieutenant Governor, who surmised that a Labour-Green accord was far more likely than a Liberal-Green one.
Two Green members now sit in cabinet and a Green is the Speaker of the House, after the Liberals decided to back a Green member over Labour.
In the Australian Capital Territory Labour has seven seats, the Liberals six and Greens four. The Greens have given Labour supply and confidence. Even more quirkier was South Australia in 2002 where the Labour Party lost a motion of confidence, but went on to form government because it invited one Independent to become Speaker, and one Independent and the lone National Party member to become cabinet members.
In 2006 Labour went on to form a majority government, but retained both the Independent and National member in government because that was what best worked and had been agreed to.
Imagine a House of Commons in Canada where the best and the brightest MPs formed government because that was who could get along and make government work, instead of the hide-bound partisan politics we face presently.
Imagine a Canadian Parliament where the most progressive MPs agreed to work together to support the best political agenda for the good of the country. Instead what we are witnessing in Canada is a refusal by either the Liberal or NDP Parties to acknowledge that only if they agree to work together with the Bloc Quebecois and Green Parties are we likely to have a majority government again. Only in Canada you say, pity.
Andy Shadrack is an Electoral Area Director in the Regional District of Central Kootenay and Chairs the Rural Affairs Committee and is Vice-Chair of the Association of Kootenay Boundary Local Governments. He taught political science in the BC Community College system from 1989 to 2005 and has been active with the provincial and federal Green parties since 1993.
Comments
Post new comment