Politics
The making of a Teal
Two weeks ago on this roundup we linked an ABC Breakfast interview with Simon Holmes à Court, who was speaking about the Teal phenomenon, and was promoting his book The big Teal. On Late Night Live he has a longer (35-minute) interview with Phillip Adams – How Climate 200 & the Teals took the 2022 election by storm– covering in much more detail the mechanics and tactics in getting a well-supported strong independent on to the ballot paper.
In part it’s about Simon Holmes à Court’s own political journey, including his work as a fundraiser for his local member, Josh Frydenberg when he ran the Kooyong-200 campaign for the Liberal Party. It’s about the people who have helped him make a transition to Climate-200, including Barry Jones, John Hewson, Julia Banks, and Rob Oakeshott. But it’s mainly about the hard and unglamorous work of building a solid campaign that relates well to the community. A good candidate is essential, and while a suitable candidate is not easy to find, there are people who can be persuaded to run – people who want to provide their communities a voice in parliament, but who are not prepared to make the political bargains that political parties impose on their candidates.
Adams and Holmes à Court describe a process that could be a guide for independents and their supporters. The movement didn’t just spring up in this most recent election. It actually goes back some years to Cathy McGowan’s 2013 successful campaign in Indi, but it was given a technological opportunity with the arrival of household video conferencing capacity when the pandemic provided Zoom a mass outlet. Adams and Holmes à Court believe that, thanks to excellent candidates and their armies of volunteers, Australia has dodged a bullet – the hyper-partisan conflicts that are tearing apart the USA and other vulnerably-constituted democracies.
Watch out for teals in next month’s Victorian election.
Another integrity issue: spending on elections
By the time there is any serious analysis of political parties’ expenditure on the 2022 election we may already have had the 2025 election.
That is, unless there are changes to our electoral laws, requiring real time disclosure of spending by political parties, candidates, associated entities and third parties.
That’s one of thirteen recommendations by the Centre for Public Integrity which has just published its analysis of the 2019 election, which, by its estimate, involved $300 million in electoral expenditure. In round numbers that comprises $70 million by Labor, $120 million by the Coalition, $90 million by Palmer’s United Australia Party and the rest by all others: A farewell to arms – the case for Commonwealth expenditure caps Part 1. Early indications are that even more has been spent on this year’s election.
Most of its other recommendations are for campaign spending caps, and the final recommendation is for increased funding of the Australian Electoral Commission to manage additional educative, enforcement and compliance duties that such changes would entail.
The persecution of Julian Assange is an assault on free speech and democracy
Jennifer Robinson, the Australian human rights lawyer representing Julian Assange, gave a powerful address – Julian Assange: free speech and democracy – at the National Press Club on Wednesday.
She stressed to the Press Club audience of journalists and human rights advocates that she was addressing them about their own work, because the persecution of Assange is a persecution of journalism and an assault on free speech.
She made the strong point that the question whether Assange is or is not a journalist is not relevant to the case. By convention “journalistic activities” are protected, not “journalists”, and Assange in his work was engaged in journalistic activities. She spoke of Assange’s high ethical standards of journalism.
Her address covered many details of Assange’s persecution – the CIA attempt to kidnap and kill him, the probable intervention by then CIA Director Mike Pompeo to block a pardon, the harsh and humiliating conditions to which the British “justice” system has subjected him, and numerous miscarriages of justice. Assange is unwell (how could anyone who has suffered Assange’s experience over the last 12 years be in good health?), and if the legal process continues, with its drawn-out appeals over many years, Assange is unlikely to survive. She calls his ordeal “punishment by process”.
Therefore it is imperative that a political solution is found. The Australian government has made strong and successful interventions in cases of others unlawfully imprisoned – Peter Greste, Kylie Moore-Gilbert and others. Unlike the Coalition the present government has at least made some strong statements on Assange’s case, and is hinting that it is pursuing the matter through quiet backchannel diplomacy. Everyone concerned with the fundamental freedoms that define a democracy should keep up pressure on our government.
(The link above is to the one-hour session on ABC iView. The ABC has edited extracts from her speech on its website.)