Pressure is building to put Senator Brown in the leader’s debate this Sunday. There's online opportunities for you to be involved in this, as well as writing Letters to the Eds. Some points on this are below.
*** PUT SENATOR BROWN IN LEADERS DEBATE ***
- Australia is a vibrant democracy. We pride ourselves on hearing different points of view.
- The Australian Greens put forward alternative policies that more than a million Australians voted for in 2007.
- This election The Greens are the clear third party.
- If ALP/Coalition are confident in their party’s policies and their ability to debate, they should be willing to include Senator Brown in the debate.
- Many other democracies around the world include smaller parties in their political debates. The inclusion of the Liberal Democrat leader, now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg in Britain was credited with making for a much more open, informative and interesting debate.
*** LETTERS TO EDs ***
*** ONLINE DISCUSSIONS ***
Senator Bob Brown has his cranky pants on because the Greens are not
included in the leaders’ debate between Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott.
According to Brown, the Greens should get a go on Sunday as the potential
balance of powerpuffs in the Senate...
Post a comment online in support!
Post a comment online in support!
***
Perhaps the lack of bold vision for Australia in the election campaign
thus far can be understood by looking at what happened to Kevin Rudd. He
was the last mainstream political leader to stand before the country
making bold promises about the future, and look where he ended up. But
where are the voices agitating for the traditional left issues in this
campaign? The signal issue in this is on asylum seekers. Where are the
powerful voices seeking an end to mandatory detention? Progressive
activist group GetUp! hasn’t issued a media release on the matter for
weeks. What about MPs who object to offshore processing? Why aren’t they
out there complaining that the official stated policy of both Australian
political parties involves mandatory detention?
Again, post a comment online in support!
***
7PM Project's "Who do you want as PM?" poll currently has Bob Brown at 68%!
*** YOU CAN ALSO START OR CONTRIBUTE TO DISCUSSIONS AT ***
*** OTHER NEWS ***
GREENS leader Bob Brown reverted to his doctorly ways - or moved backwards
in Gillard-speak - while waiting to be grilled by 774 ABC Melbourne's
morning host, Jon Faine, yesterday. A bloke fainted in the lift, someone
yelled ''Call an ambulance'' and Senator Brown dashed to the patient and
reached out his comforting hands. The patient bounced back, possibly the
first miracle of the election campaign. An ABC staffer asked the senator
if he wanted to be invoiced but he happily said it was on the house...
11 comments:
Dear Editors (Aus, Courier Mail, Age, SMH),
This morning I voted in an online poll being conducted by the 7:30 Project which currently has Bob Brown, the Leader of the Australian Greens,
running at 67%.
I would like to see some honesty in politics and in public debate.
The Greens have the solutions we need for a positive future, the old parties have empty promises and slogans. Please let us see Bob Brown in a vibrant discussion on policies.
Give Bob Brown a say in the Public Debate!
Sincerely
Resident from the electorate of Flynn.
If debate was ABC and not 7 would Bob Brown be in?
I understand the ABC is required to give equal airtime to all parties, so I'm wondering, if the leaders debate was on ABC and not Ch 7, would Bob Brown be included? And actually why is a commercial station allowed to host the debate if they only give time to the 2 majors?
Australia is a vibrant democracy - we supposedly pride ourselves on hearing different points of view. The Australian Greens put forward alternative policies that more than a million Australians voted for in 2007 and in this election The Greens are the clear third party.
If Gillard and Abbott are confident in their party’s policies and their ability to debate, they should be willing to include Brown in the debate. Many other democracies around the world include smaller parties in their political debates. The inclusion of the Liberal Democrat leader, now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg in Britain was credited with making for a much more open, informative and interesting debate.
Posted at: http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=114&m=100331&ps=50&dm=2
Posted on The Punch:
You’re justifying excluding the Greens from the debate because they’re not being heard? You might as well do the big parties’ bidding and declare that they don’t deserve people to vote for them because they’ve never won government before. Or that the fact that they’re small and don’t have as much taxpayers’ money to throw at campaigns as the Liberals and ALP means that they don’t deserve to be taken seriously.
All three lines are transparently self-serving, clearly about making it impossible for a third party to /ever/ properly challenge the established duopoly.
Hopefully fair-minded voters will see through it.
I do love the way the big parties want it both ways - they complain that the Greens don’t receive enough scrutiny and then deny them the opportunity to be grilled, such as on a national debate.
The question is: do the Greens consistently and articulately advocate and vote for progressive policies in parliament? If the answer is yes (and I’d say it is) then they are by far the best representatives for progressive voters. All the misinformation campaigns are designed to safely contain progressive votes within the ALP where they can be safely ignored by the ALP Right.
At least the Greens offer us real hope of a representative voice in Parliament.
On The Punch
Agree, Jeremy. Nicely put.
And refuting above, I’m quite familiar with Greens policy on climate change (carbon tax @ $23 per tonne etc.), asylum seekers (on-shore processing, close xmas Is, grants based support fund etc.), amongst other things.
If you go to Greens MPs site http://greensmps.org.au/ you can see they’re making at least 2/3 media releases a day, which may explain why the ABC (which is required by its constitution to give equal weight to all political parties) is referencing the Greens so often.
This very much unlike commercial media who has no such requirement and clearly no such interest.
Thanks for the article, there’s some really good points. I just think its not correct in most of them.
Posted on The Punch
Definitely should be included in the debate but aren’t because the major parties are fearful of giving the Greens a strong voice.
I think the Greens are certainly doing a good job campaigning, everyday they are announcing new policies, they have broad range now.
They are in the position when they are still attacked by the existing powers like the major parties and the media as being ‘a wasted vote’. The Australian editorial ran that line earlier in the week.
If you want to see the groundswell of support for the Greens come to the electorate of Melbourne. This election will put the Greens on the map and front and centre in the voter’s minds, from here on they will be a force to be reckoned with.
Dear Editors (SMH, Age, Aus, Courier Mail)
Dear Editor
I do not understand how the Federal Leader's debate can be moved so as to not coincide with Masterchef yet it can fail to include the leader of the clear third party in Australia, the Greens. The Greens put forward alternative policies that more than a million Australians voted for in 2007 and if Galaxy polls are to be believed, up to 15% of Australians are considering voting Green at this election. The only explanation is that Gillard and Abbot are not confident in their own policies and debating skills - that said, that's no reason for not allowing true democracy to take place.
Yours sincerely
Bonner Resident
Posted on The Punch
Oh shock, horror, lock away the silverware and lock the door the Daily Terror has found the secret agenda of the Greens through the persistence and talent of its intrepid reporters by ..... wait for it ...... drum roll please ... loud crash of a cymbal ..... googling the Greens website and finding information that has always been on the public record.
The Greens need to be included in the leader’s debate for the simple reason that they are highly relevant what will happen in federal politics in the next electoral term. This might also serve to counter some of the Murdoch bullshit.
Posted on The Punch
Yeah, I know, how DARE the Greens suggest that perhaps we should be looking beyond selling our dirt on the cheap to the rest of the world and instead capitalise on our highly-educated population to develop industries that aren’t reliant on praying that commodity prices hold up. God forbid that they suggest that we could lead the world in the development of state-of-the-art renewable energy generation rather than having the highest per-capita emissions in the world. Wouldn’t it just be awful if they restricted unpaid overtime so Mums and Dads around Australia could get home in time to see their kids, or at least be properly compensated if they are forced to stay at work. And don’t get me started on their transport policies. Just because high-speed rail works as a cheap, effective, low-pollution transport alternative everywhere else doesn’t mean we’d do it here, right? Not to mention wanting to give people effective rapid transit system options to get to and from work so we’re insulated against massive rises in fuel prices.
I mean, that’s just CRAZY.
Posted at http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/election/devils-inside-hidden-green-agenda/comments-fn5zmod2-1225894722878
What is wrong with everyone saying Greens policies are "frightening"? And you seem to be lobbying the "red on the inside" as if it should be an insult when really what you are saying is that the Greens are for social equality. Social equality? How dare they?!?!! The lunatics!!! And for peets sake they are not talking about closing down all those industries you rattle off Andrew, they are talking about economic sustainability and environmental and global responsibility. I guess it goes without saying that all you Liberal voters out there don't care about society and environment as long as you can earn the big bucks and have a great big fat super to retire on. Well there's a considerable proportion of our population who don't get that luxury thank you very much and the Greens are speaking out for those people. So keep flouting your "me, me, me" ideals. That's just fine, you're entitled and good luck to you and your kids and grandkids. But I for one am glad there's someone out there on the left who actually gives a damn about those less fortunate than you and me.
POsted on http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/state-labor-plans-to-counter-greens/story-e6freuzi-1225894279051
Exactly! The greens are a threat to the status quo because people are tired of the same old glibness from their leaders and want to hear from a party who is actually standing up for them, social equity, economic sustainability and global and environmental responsibility. Sound like anyone from the Labor or Liberal camps? I think not!
A newspoll survey question on it showed 73% of Australians want Bob Brown in the debates.
Consider tweeting and re-tweeting that figure as much as you can.
Post a Comment