Climate change is the "pivot point" of Australian politics: party allegiances are ded

JeanLucGoddard

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2018
10,439
24,445
AFL Club
North Melbourne
In the UK Brexit is the lens by which the ongoing struggle between the economic winners of the last forty years (metropolitan, tertiary educated, professional employment, internationalist in outlook, welcome immigration and diversity coz good food, hotties etc) and the losers (manual or "sunset" industries and locations, lack of access and/or willingness to engage in tertiary education, see, usually correctly, immigration and "diversity" as directly threatening their personal economic situation) in the neo-liberal western politico-economic structures.

Now many traditional Labour voters are pro-Brexit who will vote for literal Tories, many Remainers were classic soft liberal Tories. All is upside down.

In the US Trumpism has provided that same lightning rod that has destroyed the old reliable party structures - Trump won by turning blue collar ex Democrats Republican, the old "patrician" Republican party of the Bushes was killed stone dead by Trump.

In the Australian election (and lead up) we saw Liberal seats abandon the party for climate change candidates either fully like Warringah, or partially like Wenwtorth, Kooyong and Higgins. On the flipside traditional Labor union blue collar votes went to the Libs over mining jobs and Adani and the associated climate change politics. But it was essentially the same dynamic as UK and US playing out but with climate change as the lens, well off educated metropolitan v "left behind" blue collar regions.

Discuss.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Present Not Past

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2010
7,178
4,999
Sydney
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Chicago Cubs
Climate change has to be sold to the public correctly.
For example, fighting climate change will make Australians wealthy.
Australian scientists are the leaders in fighting climate change.
The patents that are developed in Australia will lead to billions of dollars flowing into the economy.
Let's get behind our greatest minds in Australia with the money they need to do their job.

Billions have flowed into cancer research because everyone is affected in some way by cancer.
Well everyone is going to be affected by climate change.
 

JeanLucGoddard

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2018
10,439
24,445
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Climate change has to be sold to the public correctly.
For example, fighting climate change will make Australians wealthy.
Australian scientists are the leaders in fighting climate change.
The patents that are developed in Australia will lead to billions of dollars flowing into the economy.
Let's get behind our greatest minds in Australia with the money they need to do their job.

Billions have flowed into cancer research because everyone is affected in some way by cancer.
Well everyone is going to be affected by climate change.
Yep, agree.

Have to turn the science into emotion that allows people to accept the change that's needed.
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Climate change has to be sold to the public correctly.
For example, fighting climate change will make Australians wealthy.
Australian scientists are the leaders in fighting climate change.
The patents that are developed in Australia will lead to billions of dollars flowing into the economy.
Let's get behind our greatest minds in Australia with the money they need to do their job.

Billions have flowed into cancer research because everyone is affected in some way by cancer.
Well everyone is going to be affected by climate change.
That sort of R&D is not really Australia's strong point though is it?

In Australia's top 25 exports professional services comes in 10th at 1.4% and I doubt there are many patents generated there. Technical & other business services comes in 14th at 1.3%. Telecom & IT comes in 18th at 1%.

And these figures are from 2016. Universities, the CSRIO and similar other institutions are receiving less support now than they were then.

Australia has no interest in being an innovative nation and less interest in being a leader at anything.

1558412553424.png
 

GoldenSky

Premiership Player
Jun 6, 2006
3,812
791
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
It is conservative to want to do things as naturally and cheaply as possible. So why wouldn't we want all of our energy needs coming for free from the sun? Less cost, less mess. Very conservative thing to do. And it will be done.

Only issue is cost. Are we the Greens, rushing out in 2001 to buy a $10,000 plasma TV? Or are we the Coalition, smart enough to wait a few years and pick up a $1,500 plasma TV in 2009?

My emissions policy: re-direct ALL funds sent to rorter interest groups and green groups etc. and use that to build the world's largest solar farm. Easy.
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
In the UK Brexit is the lens by which the ongoing struggle between the economic winners of the last forty years (metropolitan, tertiary educated, professional employment, internationalist in outlook, welcome immigration and diversity coz good food, hotties etc) and the losers (manual or "sunset" industries and locations, lack of access and/or willingness to engage in tertiary education, see, usually correctly, immigration and "diversity" as directly threatening their personal economic situation) in the neo-liberal western politico-economic structures.

Now many traditional Labour voters are pro-Brexit who will vote for literal Tories, many Remainers were classic soft liberal Tories. All is upside down.

In the US Trumpism has provided that same lightning rod that has destroyed the old reliable party structures - Trump won by turning blue collar ex Democrats Republican, the old "patrician" Republican party of the Bushes was killed stone dead by Trump.

In the Australian election (and lead up) we saw Liberal seats abandon the party for climate change candidates either fully like Warringah, or partially like Wenwtorth, Kooyong and Higgins. On the flipside traditional Labor union blue collar votes went to the Libs over mining jobs and Adani and the associated climate change politics. But it was essentially the same dynamic as UK and US playing out but with climate change as the lens, well off educated metropolitan v "left behind" blue collar regions.

Discuss.
I would like someone to explore who the ALP represent.

50 years ago it was clear they were the party that represented the "Labor movement" - working classes and unions.

This is from the Australian parliament website;

  • The number of union members in Australia has declined from around 2.5 million in 1976 to 1.5 million in 2016. During the same period the union member share of all employees (or union density) has fallen from 51 per cent to 14 per cent.
  • Young workers are much less likely to be union members than older workers and casual and/or part-time employees are less likely to be union members than full-time workers and permanent employees.
  • Industry union density is strongest in Education and training and Public administration and safety.
  • The biggest increases in union membership over the last decade and a half were recorded by the Police Federation of Australia (PFA) (up 92 per cent), Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) (up 84 per cent), and Independent Education Union of Australia (IEUA) (up 35 per cent).
51% down to 14% is massive. Huge.

And of that 14% most of them are in education, training, administration and safety. That is a completely different image to what we would associate with a union member from 40 years ago.

So the traditional ALP base is gone. And they rarely won office when that base was strong.

Now they are trying to rebrand themselves as a progressive party but Australia is not a progressive place. We are way too complacent and as the LNP have just proved, it is way too easy to present a case of 'business as usual' instead of any sort of 'change' no matter how dysfunctional or even outright corrupt you have behaved.

So who do the ALP represent? Right now the right would say it is the inner city chardonnay sipping wannabe's and they would probably be right.
 

JeanLucGoddard

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2018
10,439
24,445
AFL Club
North Melbourne
It is conservative to want to do things as naturally and cheaply as possible. So why wouldn't we want all of our energy needs coming for free from the sun? Less cost, less mess. Very conservative thing to do. And it will be done.

Only issue is cost. Are we the Greens, rushing out in 2001 to buy a $10,000 plasma TV? Or are we the Coalition, smart enough to wait a few years and pick up a $1,500 plasma TV in 2009?

My emissions policy: re-direct ALL funds sent to rorter interest groups and green groups etc. and use that to build the world's largest solar farm. Easy.
You make a good point - conservation should be a natural conservative thing to do (its in the name)

But are the current Coaliton actually a conservative party? Hmmmmm, I dunno.

Your emissions policy overlooks the fact that the biggest rorter interest groups are those the Coalition just fought to protect - both industries and individuals only kept afloat or in the standard they'd become accustomed to via public handouts (coal industry demanding subsidy, franking credits, negative gearing etc)
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
It is conservative to want to do things as naturally and cheaply as possible. So why wouldn't we want all of our energy needs coming for free from the sun? Less cost, less mess. Very conservative thing to do. And it will be done.

Only issue is cost. Are we the Greens, rushing out in 2001 to buy a $10,000 plasma TV? Or are we the Coalition, smart enough to wait a few years and pick up a $1,500 plasma TV in 2009?

My emissions policy: re-direct ALL funds sent to rorter interest groups and green groups etc. and use that to build the world's largest solar farm. Easy.
Except conservatives will not do this. They will build coal fired power stations. With zero consideration for the cost because they will be doing it with your money.
 

JeanLucGoddard

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2018
10,439
24,445
AFL Club
North Melbourne
So who do the ALP represent? Right now the right would say it is the inner city chardonnay sipping wannabe's and they would probably be right.
The inner city chardonnay sippers are best represented by the Greens or independents.

Labor lost because it tried to be a little bit of everything to everyone and ended up being nothing to anybody.
 

JeanLucGoddard

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2018
10,439
24,445
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Except conservatives will not do this. They will build coal fired power stations. With zero consideration for the cost because they will be doing it with your money.
That's why I struggle to agree the current Coalition is "conservative".

The Nationals are the biggest socialists going, and the Libs are basically reactionaries.

Morrison has natural conservative instincts, but throws them out the door to get elected.

For example, franking credits - this is not a policy a true conservative could support in any way.
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
That's why I struggle to agree the current Coalition is "conservative".

The Nationals are the biggest socialists going, and the Libs are basically reactionaries.

Morrison has natural conservative instincts, but throws them out the door to get elected.

For example, franking credits - this is not a policy a true conservative could support in any way.
Retaining franking credits or abolishing them?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

GoldenSky

Premiership Player
Jun 6, 2006
3,812
791
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Except conservatives will not do this. They will build coal fired power stations. With zero consideration for the cost because they will be doing it with your money.
If coal is cheaper than solar at this point then yes we should.

If however the $x applied by government to the coal mine was instead applied to solar, in such a way to make solar cheaper than coal, then that should definitely be done. But it doesn't at this stage in time.
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I think you are trying too hard to weave climate change into the narrative of what happened in this election.
Climate change was a key issue though. It is one of a handful of issues that the LNP prosecuted to wedge Labor over the cost to peoples hip pockets.

Climate change (environment tax), franking credits (death tax), negative gearing (property tax), electric cars (car tax) was the LNP's scare campaign that convinced Australians to vote with 'business as usual'.
 

Chameleon75

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2013
5,447
8,733
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
To workers climate change policy = economic reform, and economic reform = job losses and reduced pay and conditions.

Labor lost blue collar workers by the start of the 90’s, the economic reforms of the 80’s benefited factory owners who offshored operations taking advantage of 3rd world wages, middle class boosted their standard of living with the influx of cheap consumer goods, but blue collar workers picked up the bill with factory closures, the new jobs in the service sector didn’t pay the same, there was chronic long term unemployment in over 50’s that didn’t dissipate until the mid 90’s when they transitioned from the dole to the pension.

As a result when you speak of reform blue collar workers interpret that as job losses. Hence Hewson losses on a platform of reform, Howard nearly looses in 98 with taxation reform viewed as fightback II and pretty much shelved a reform program until workchoices which sees him turfed out despite good economic conditions at the time. And since then anyone who proposes climate reforms is finished.

If anyone proposes a climate policy you cannot adopt a policy of setting a target and leaving up to the market to decide. Especially since the gfc workers trust in the market is a low point. You need to demonstrate that these new green jobs actually exist, support provided to retrain, and just as importantly that they pay a living wage, you’re not raising a family on barista salaries. Also there’s little point in having a battery factory in say Dandenong if the job losses are in Queensland, you need to demonstrate availability of these jobs in the areas where the dislocation will happen.

Even then it’s going to be hard to get trust, workers are not stupid they know that without government subsidies any factories will be offshored anyway.

I cannot see meaningful progress being made unless the government drives it and addresses the above.
 

Chameleon75

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2013
5,447
8,733
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
I would like someone to explore who the ALP represent.

50 years ago it was clear they were the party that represented the "Labor movement" - working classes and unions.

This is from the Australian parliament website;

  • The number of union members in Australia has declined from around 2.5 million in 1976 to 1.5 million in 2016. During the same period the union member share of all employees (or union density) has fallen from 51 per cent to 14 per cent.
  • Young workers are much less likely to be union members than older workers and casual and/or part-time employees are less likely to be union members than full-time workers and permanent employees.
  • Industry union density is strongest in Education and training and Public administration and safety.
  • The biggest increases in union membership over the last decade and a half were recorded by the Police Federation of Australia (PFA) (up 92 per cent), Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) (up 84 per cent), and Independent Education Union of Australia (IEUA) (up 35 per cent).
51% down to 14% is massive. Huge.

And of that 14% most of them are in education, training, administration and safety. That is a completely different image to what we would associate with a union member from 40 years ago.

So the traditional ALP base is gone. And they rarely won office when that base was strong.

Now they are trying to rebrand themselves as a progressive party but Australia is not a progressive place. We are way too complacent and as the LNP have just proved, it is way too easy to present a case of 'business as usual' instead of any sort of 'change' no matter how dysfunctional or even outright corrupt you have behaved.

So who do the ALP represent? Right now the right would say it is the inner city chardonnay sipping wannabe's and they would probably be right.
Unions were damaged by the accords of the 80’s, if their not improving pay and conditions what’s the point.
 

RupieDupie

Guru
Jun 30, 2017
4,228
3,445
AFL Club
GWS
That sort of R&D is not really Australia's strong point though is it?

In Australia's top 25 exports professional services comes in 10th at 1.4% and I doubt there are many patents generated there. Technical & other business services comes in 14th at 1.3%. Telecom & IT comes in 18th at 1%.

And these figures are from 2016. Universities, the CSRIO and similar other institutions are receiving less support now than they were then.

Australia has no interest in being an innovative nation and less interest in being a leader at anything.

View attachment 677925
You have the truth of it. Australia went from a country that invented wi-fi to having to buy a 5G network off the Chinese. We were the 7th country to launch a satellite (3rd from own country). We invented solar car racing (IMU) and solar hot water. We also invented the clothesline. Australians have had more Nobel Prize winners than China (but this was all for work done before John Howard came into power).

But it seems when it comes to the modern Australian way to improve R&D and this comes in the form of telecommunication companies increasing the cost of telecommunication for no discernible improvement in service, power companies increasing the cost of power for no discernible improvement in service, banks increasing interest rates out of cycle etc, Barnaby Joyce's water deals, Adani's backdoor deals, $443M for a charity... It seems all this money, tax breaks, reach-arounds etc we are giving to big business and for environmental improvement has led to no discernible improvement...

I wonder why corruption, monopoly and degeneracy has led to no growth and improvement?
 

QuietB

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2008
22,394
26,408
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Unions were damaged by the accords of the 80’s, if their not improving pay and conditions what’s the point.
Were they though?

As you have stated in your other post above off shore manufacturing has done a lot more damage to the Australian labour force than anything else.

Ultimately the west has no interest in nation building or looking after their people.

Everything has been reduced to a transaction - everything. Including elections.

Edit - I should not say the west. But certainly the USA, Australia and Britain.
 

Chameleon75

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2013
5,447
8,733
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Were they though?

As you have stated in your other post above off shore manufacturing has done a lot more damage to the Australian labour force than anything else.

Ultimately the west has no interest in nation building or looking after their people.

Everything has been reduced to a transaction - everything. Including elections.

Edit - I should not say the west. But certainly the USA, Australia and Britain.
Unions and the alp collaborated with business to set in place reforms that ultimately offshored jobs and reduced pay for the remaining factory jobs, it has damaged both of them in respect to workers trusting them.
 

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Mar 3, 2005
23,324
8,045
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Climate change was a key issue though. It is one of a handful of issues that the LNP prosecuted to wedge Labor over the cost to peoples hip pockets.
Well sure. But there's a difference between saying it is a key issue, and that it is the defining issue.

The Australian political landscape has been due for a realignment for a while, I don't think that is news to anybody. Ever since Hawke came to power, the relevance of our postwar union/anti-union political blocs to your average voter has steadily declined. We see that manifesting itself with the steady splintering of the primary vote on both sides of the aisle. I am sure we will see the major parties shift and align along different axes, and no doubt differentiation on environmental policy will continue to form part of that.

However, the idea that we will see a social 'pro/anti-climate action' schism is incredibly unlikely, if only because it doesn't effectively define a demographic or a philosophy any more than 'pro/anti-economic growth'.

The whole Brexit/MAGA analogy in the OP is incredibly tenuous and problematic for a bunch of reasons, but I won't go into that.
 

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 27, 2014
29,646
25,359
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
West Ham, New York Giants
On "identity", many people who should be in a union today simply don't view themselves as working class regardless of the fact their income says otherwise. Chicks flogging makeup at Myer, IT grunts, whoever. Air conditioned workplace and dressing properly means they can't see they're at the bottom. Also the casuals and part-timers doing what used to be full-time jerbs think they're "passing through" or "lol not doing this forever". Suddenly 5 years go by, they're still there, being underpaid.
 
Last edited:

Johnny Karate

Club Legend
Apr 13, 2015
1,124
2,874
AFL Club
Melbourne
The time for climate legislation was 2009/10. Were it not for Rudd’s hubris, Turnbull’s truculence, Abbott’s opportunism and the Greens’ obstinance we wouldn’t be debating the science behind anthropomorphic climate change, a decade on.
We could be world leaders in renewable energy production, research and development as well as climate adaptation/mitigation advocacy. But clearly the game of thrones played by those across the political spectrum was worth it.
 

RupieDupie

Guru
Jun 30, 2017
4,228
3,445
AFL Club
GWS
The time for climate legislation was 2009/10. Were it not for Rudd’s hubris, Turnbull’s truculence, Abbott’s opportunism and the Greens’ obstinance we wouldn’t be debating the science behind anthropomorphic climate change, a decade on.
We could be world leaders in renewable energy production, research and development as well as climate adaptation/mitigation advocacy. But clearly the game of thrones played by those across the political spectrum was worth it.
Yep, and the Chinese don’t sit around watching Andrew Bolt all day, wondering what his views are
 

its free real estate

fyfe > dangerfield
Jul 30, 2018
8,995
11,045
AFL Club
Fremantle
The time for climate legislation was 2009/10. Were it not for Rudd’s hubris, Turnbull’s truculence, Abbott’s opportunism and the Greens’ obstinance we wouldn’t be debating the science behind anthropomorphic climate change, a decade on.
We could be world leaders in renewable energy production, research and development as well as climate adaptation/mitigation advocacy. But clearly the game of thrones played by those across the political spectrum was worth it.
The Greens were the real turd in the punchbowl for that little episode. Repeated those efforts with the convoy.
 

Top Bottom