Bob Brown resigns as Greens Leader - Milne elected leader

[Inferno]

Interesting. Tassie Greens leader Nick McKim has ruled himself out as the replacement Senator, which is surprising, because he has long been regarded as the anointed successor. People are now talking about Peg Putt (former state leader) and Greg Couter (the Greens candidate in Denison in 2010).

So, new party room will be as follows:

Milne (Tas) - Leader
Bandt (Vic) - Deputy
Di Natale (Vic)
Siewert (WA)
Ludlam (WA)
Hansen-Young (SA)
Wright (SA)
Rhiannon (NSW)
Waters (Qld)
Unknown (Tas)

Probably a good call by McKim, wouldn't exactly be the best thing or the best look for the leader of a party in coalition government who's also Deputy Premier to run off when a better job is up for grabs. Highly likely he'll be in Canberra at some point though. I got the impression from a few articles that Peter Whish-Wilson is favourate.

Siewert, Waters and Milne are genuine environmental activists. The others are more focused on social issues. In that sense, I don't really expect Milne to stay at the head of the party for too long. Her expertise isn't in the areas that most of the party room are most concerned with, and she doesn't have the personal cachet of Bob Brown.

I dare say the only reason she was elected unopposed is because Bob made it clear she was his anointed successor. Once he's out of the way, we'll see the real rearranging of chairs.

I don't think that being focused on the environment in what is still an environmental party, and having a position on the environment that most if not all people in the party share is grounds to remove a leader. Outside of Rhiannon and maybe SHY I don't think they're stupid enough to start leadership infighting a la Democrats unless Milne was failing anyway.

 

[volcboy]

I'm not predicting that the Greens will implode but I do think that this will be the beginning of a shift in the control and philosophy of the party away from the traditional 'greenie Greens' like Brown and Milne. Will that hurt or help them in the greater scheme of things? Personally I think the former.

You may have overlooked that the Greens in each state represent the primary concerns of their supporters. Here in Tasmania, the environment is still front and center, so more 'traditional' environmentalists are elected. However, in Melbourne, the so-called 'latte sippers' (educated inner-city types) are more interested in social issues, hence the election of Adam Bandt and Richard Di Natale on platforms of pro-gay marriage, refugee and other social issues. NSW is NSW (I don't go there if I can help it).

I don't see a large fallout from Brown retiring, especially because he will continue to campaign and be visible in the media and in support of candidates. I do see issues around the leadership further into the future as more Greens are elected to parliament, which is likely even if their polling decreases by 1-2% at the next election, thus changing the current party room numbers and ideological makeup.

FWIW, I think Milne will surprise some people. She doesn't come across very well in the media, and will get a tough run with journalists (what middle aged female politician doesn't?), but she is a smarter politician and tougher than some people on the SRP board give her credit for. She won't be easily rolled by the young upstarts from the North Island.

 

[mick ryan]

Not bad for a bloke his age :)- but at the moment the only woman (Penny Wong included) I reckon deserves to be in parliament is Kathy Jackson -




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...lliamson-to-quit/story-e6frg6nf-1226325925993


A woman I can agree with - on so many levels !!!!!

Doesn't hold a candle to Tommy Hafey who is 2 decades plus his senior

 

[Caesar]

You may have overlooked that the Greens in each state represent the primary concerns of their supporters.

That's precisely the issue I'm alluding to. The traditional Greens power states of WA and Tas have vastly different concerns to the Greens coming out of SA, Vic and NSW. With Brown gone, they are one step closer to controlling the federal parliamentary party and with that comes a fairly significant change in direction. Will WA and Tas cop that? The Greens better hope they do, because they need the low-population states to vote Greens in the upper house to keep their number of MPs up.

This the problem with a party whose power base is in the Senate. The parliamentary party isn't ever going to be properly representative of the concerns of its constituents.

FWIW, I think Milne will surprise some people. She doesn't come across very well in the media, and will get a tough run with journalists (what middle aged female politician doesn't?), but she is a smarter politician and tougher than some people on the SRP board give her credit for. She won't be easily rolled by the young upstarts from the North Island.

It is all about the numbers, and IMO she doesn't have them. Bob Brown's patronage is the only reason she's sitting in that chair.

 

[maelcoluim]

It is all about the numbers, and IMO she doesn't have them. Bob Brown's patronage is the only reason she's sitting in that chair.

To be fair she is by far the most experienced Green politician after Brown having been in the Senate since 2004 and in the Tasmanian parliament between 1989-98 (leader from '93). It's been pretty obvious that Brown's being grooming her for leadership for a few years now, but that doesn't necessarily mean she lacks the support of her partyroom.

 

[11sjw]

Good decision IMO. Keeps the party controlled by the more moderate sections (ie not Rhiannon) and might help him increase his profile when he's got a difficult challenge ahead of him to hold on to Melbourne.

But what can a deputy do when faced with...

Senator Milne, 58, a central player in the framing of the carbon tax package and a former Greens leader in Tasmania, is a hardline environmentalist. While her colleagues insist she is a good negotiator, some in Labor view her as an ideologue.

Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/national/milne-fires-up-as-brown-quits-20120413-1wz3t.html#ixzz1rzgmmpdE
​

 

[Old Skool]

How many of you anti-carbon tax people thought the tax situation was proper prior to the carbon tax?

I have hunch that the whole thing is just a policy lightning rod for masking small minded parochialism.

 

[Eagle87]

How many of you anti-carbon tax people thought the tax situation was proper prior to the carbon tax?

I have hunch that the whole thing is just a policy lightning rod for masking small minded parochialism.

What does the question even mean?

I mean "the tax situation was proper"... WTF?

 

[Parker100]

This might stop The Greens in the short term but they are completely different to The Democrats. The Democrats had a policy where it was far simpler to topple a leader and the entire party base could vote for the leadership. A leadership challenge in The Greens would look more like a traditional leadership challenge.

The real problem that they will face is infighting. They have two groups in the party which will want to control policy out of party and it might become bloody. I honestly think that the environmentalists will lose grip on the party sooner rather than later and you will see a party focused more on social issues and social democracy.

That might be a blessing but it certainly also has the potential to become a curse.

 

[Old Skool]

What does the question even mean?

I mean "the tax situation was proper"... WTF?

There tends to be a heavy Liberal representation in the anti-carbon tax camp.

Were these people happy with the pre-existing tax arrangement before the Australian people threw out the libs?

 

[Caesar]

How is that relevant to anything?

 

[RIOLIUSTAR]

The greens have never been relevant, but with Milne driving the ship I can see a democrats implosion coming.

Another Scrot Destroyer is our little elf Milney

 

[Eagle87]

There tends to be a heavy Liberal representation in the anti-carbon tax camp.

Were these people happy with the pre-existing tax arrangement before the Australian people threw out the libs?

What the hell has that got to do with anything at all?

 

[Parker100]

The greens have never been relevant, but with Milne driving the ship I can see a democrats implosion coming.

Another Scrot Destroyer is our little elf Milney

Really?

You might not like then but to say that they are not relevant is completely delusional.

 

[Old Skool]

What the hell has that got to do with anything at all?

It's a question. It doesn't have relevance until it has an answer.

 

[cancat]

Bob Brown's autobiographer, James Norman, has an opinion piece in The Age with the banner

None of the Greens leader's achievements came easily

​

850 words later he hasn't named one achievement.


And this quote from Brown illustrates what a hypocrite he is.

The prime minister has never, ever been given a mandate by the people of Australia to go to war with Iraq. The prime minister has abused the terms of freedom and democracy in his own country.

​

Where is the mandate for the carbon tax or gay marriage? Yet he has no problem pushing his agenda onto the people of Australia.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...into-his-political-sunset-20120414-1x0e6.html​

 

[PottSie2]

It's a question. It doesn't have relevance until it has an answer.

Yoda. Is that you ?

 

[Eagle87]

It's a question. It doesn't have relevance until it has an answer.

Are you high?

How does a persons view on "pre-existing tax arrangements generally" impact on their opinion of the carbon tax?

I mean it's a new tax. It removes nor reforms other taxes. It's also a question posed in a thread about Bob Brown ...

I love lamp.

 

[Old Skool]

The left-right paradigm is strong in this one.

Dry Rot actually had the mental faculties to comprehend and answer the question.

Then he mysteriously deleted all his posts.

 

[Caesar]

I deleted them, because they consisted of the two of you abusing each other.

You would probably get a better response to your question if you explained your reasons for asking, and how the answer may inform the topic under discussion. Smug pseudo-Socratic ramblings do nothing except get people's backs up.

 

[Eagle87]

The left-right paradigm is strong in this one.

Dry Rot actually had the mental faculties to comprehend and answer the question.

Then he mysteriously deleted all his posts.

Well I guess we'll have to accept that is true given the lack of evidence.

And as far as mental faculties go, perhaps you'd need to move to a different board if only "smart" people can post here.

The issue is the relevance of the question. I could postulate on its meaning but within the context of this thread it has none ...

Perhaps you could clarify what you were looking for and how it has any relevance to the thread and those of us who understand tax for a living and actually grasp how this carbon tax works in practice can decide whether to inform you or not ...

Alternatively you could start ranting about the police in here too and everyone could see just how out there you really are?

Cheers

 

[Old Skool]

Okay, let me present this in very basic terms.

Brown = Gillard in power = compliance to bolshie green policies = carbon tax = poor government.

a) agree
b) disagree

If you chose "a", were you happy with the taxation status quo prior to the Labor Party gaining power?

 

[Caesar]

...and why would that have a bearing on anything? Policies are evaluated on their own merits.

You may as well say 'if you chose (a), is your birthday in a month beginning with J?'.

 

[Old Skool]

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=21151394&postcount=2

 

[Caesar]

I'm just asking you to explain your line of reasoning. You don't appear interested in that.

You want people to engage with you, you need to have an open discussion. That involves elaborating on and justifying your position, rather than just posting narrow socratics and expecting people to kowtow to them.