Is this the end of the Greens? The post-WA Election Bump

Remove this Banner Ad

The Greens in Victoria joined the Liberals in the upper house to block the development of new public housing in Ashburton. An interesting call one day ahead of the Northcote by-election.

Talk the talk, do the Greens, but they don't walk the walk.
 
Dixie Flatline said:
The Greens in Victoria joined the Liberals in the upper house to block the development of new public housing in Ashburton. An interesting call one day ahead of the Northcote by-election.

Talk the talk, do the Greens, but they don't walk the walk.
Click to expand...

Can you explain what this decision means? I've got nothing wrong with the Greens siding with either of the major parties on principle.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

MC Bad Genius said:
Can you explain what this decision means? I've got nothing wrong with the Greens siding with either of the major parties on principle.
Click to expand...

The State Government had taken control of the planning process to build a mix of public housing and private apartments on public land. The local council dominated by the Liberals opposed this development.

The liberals and greens combined to give planning control over the site to the Council knowing full well the Council will block the development.

This despite the fact the Greens campaign on affordable housing.
 
But the Greens' housing spokeswoman Ellen Sandell said the party would not support privatising publicly owned estates while the increases to public housing were so minimal.

She said that the government had "refused to discuss [the Markham] proposal with us and we have serious concerns about their plan to sell off [other] public estates to private developers".

"It's time the government comes to the table to discuss a way forward to significantly increase public housing," she said, adding that revoking the Ashburton case "does not stop the public housing renewal program".
Click to expand...

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/c...ject-others-now-in-doubt-20171117-gznf9q.html

So they have their reasons then.
 
If I recall correctly some of these private public housing units aren't truly public housing. They are given an expiry date of 10/20 years then flogged off.
 
There’s always some honorable reason for whenever the Greens side with the Libs, whether it’s knocking back the ETS or rejecting more housing for the country’s poorest.

They’re so pure of heart.
 
MC Bad Genius said:
Their basic argument is that they won't support privatising public housing if the net increase of public housing isn't high enough (and obviously they've deemed 10% not high enough). That seems to suggest it is more about sticking to their guns rather than being a political powerplay.
Click to expand...
Their basic argument is to resist development in all forms.

Unless it’s “sensible”, which means does not affect their property prices.
 
King Brown said:
There’s always some honorable reason for whenever the Greens side with the Libs, whether it’s knocking back the ETS or rejecting more housing for the country’s poorest.

They’re so pure of heart.
Click to expand...

If the Greens are not pragmatic they are lambasted for being too idealistic/not adult enough to participate in politics.

If the Greens are pragmatic, and want to prevent s**t policies getting through, they are attacked for not being 'pure of heart'.

Sounds like you just don't like the Greens.
 
samFFC said:
If the Greens are not pragmatic they are lambasted for being too idealistic/not adult enough to participate in politics.

If the Greens are pragmatic, and want to prevent s**t policies getting through, they are attacked for not being 'pure of heart'.

Sounds like you just don't like the Greens.
Click to expand...

There is a certain poster here that continuously bumps this thread over non-issues that seems to be more desperately hoping (in vain) for the fall of the Greens at the next election.

They are here to stay, at least for the short to medium term future. All this manufactured 'outrage' over Lee Rhiannon or stopping some housing developments are less effective than Anthony Mundine in stopping the Green Machine.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

samFFC said:
If the Greens are not pragmatic they are lambasted for being too idealistic/not adult enough to participate in politics.

If the Greens are pragmatic, and want to prevent s**t policies getting through, they are attacked for not being 'pure of heart'.

Sounds like you just don't like the Greens.
Click to expand...
I don't care whether they are pragmatic or idealistic. I think they're bad for the country, and bad for the side of politics that can legitimately keep a rein on capital. And they have a proven track record of being so.

The Labor party is the only party that has consistently supported an emissions trading scheme / carbon tax. The Greens opposed it, and then set about hamfisting the delivery of the carbon tax and delivering the country Tony Abbott. Their role in this is underplayed by their moron supporters, who never take ownership of the fact that the Greens bad politics set climate mitigation back a decade.

Their opposition to this development (it's never 'sensible' in their view) fits with their broader view. They'll be pragmatic or idealistic when it matters to their overall NIMBYist view of the world.
 
King Brown said:
I don't care whether they are pragmatic or idealistic. I think they're bad for the country, and bad for the side of politics that can legitimately keep a rein on capital. And they have a proven track record of being so.

The Labor party is the only party that has consistently supported an emissions trading scheme / carbon tax. The Greens opposed it, and then set about hamfisting the delivery of the carbon tax and delivering the country Tony Abbott. Their role in this is underplayed by their moron supporters, who never take ownership of the fact that the Greens bad politics set climate mitigation back a decade.

Their opposition to this development (it's never 'sensible' in their view) fits with their broader view. They'll be pragmatic or idealistic when it matters to their overall NIMBYist view of the world.
Click to expand...

Not true.
And even if it was, so what?
The Greens are the only party that have consistently supported SSM.
The Coalition are the only party that have consistently supported the GST.

Parties can change over time, to reflect a changing world, changing body of evidence.
We had a much stronger market-based climate policy under Gillard with support of Greens than we would have under Rudd.
 
samFFC said:
Not true.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is true.
We had a much stronger market-based climate policy under Gillard with support of Greens than we would have under Rudd.
Click to expand...
That lasted two years, after the Greens had sided with Tony Abbott to undermine the political capital of the ETS, which was at its maximum in 2009. By 2011, when the carbon tax was introduced, it has lost all goodwill from the public, and the deal between Gillard and Brown was seen as dirty, unfairly or not.

Next thing you know, Abbott gets elected and we have no climate mitigation policies. Thanks Greens!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
How the coalition can win the next Victorian election
2 3
Replies
69
Views
3K
peetoo
peetoo
N
Tas Tasmanian Election 2024
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
203
Views
6K
Father Jack
Father Jack
HurleyHepsHird
It is time to end the consultancy gravy train and rebuild the public service
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Demonic Ascent
Demonic Ascent
Aristotle Pickett
Vic The joke that is the Victorian Liberal Party.
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
135
Views
6K
Saint
Saint
Geoff
The Joke that is the West Australian Liberal Party
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
Geoff
Geoff
G
LNP will win the next federal election. Bookmark it.
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
131
Views
4K
Father Jack
Father Jack
nut
The slippery slope of private health
Replies
5
Views
577
Cap
Cap

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top