The Greens And Labor – Allies Or Enemies?

In Why Labor Should Savour Its Greens, former investment banker and economist Brad Orgill reviews the Greens’ major economic, social, and environmental policies; and argues that progressive voters, and the nation as a whole, deserve an aligned ALP–Greens platform incorporating the best elements of each. On Tuesday 13 August, Brad Orgill joined Cassandra Wilkinson in a discussion for The Sydney Institute over the ideas to challenge the next generation.

THE GREENS AND LABOR – ALLIES OR ENEMIES?

BRAD ORGILL

Thank you Gerard, Anne and The Sydney Institute for the opportunity to introduce my book Why Labor should savour its Greens. 

A little over twelve months ago, the ALP embarked on an electoral strategy of differentiation which included attacking the Greens and labelling them extremist. Early this year, the relationship deteriorated further with the Greens publicly chastising the ALP for having breached, in their view, the terms and spirit of the 2010 federal governing agreement. Many in the Greens now want no association with the ALP and the reverse is also the case. These positions are, in my opinion, short sighted and detrimental to the cause of genuinely progressive politics.

It’s clear to me that the Greens policy platform is not extremist, nor “loopy” and that, if examined with an open mind to policy rather than politics, the platform would make sense to many Australians. It is also obvious to me that historic ALP values and the Greens’ platform need not be in conflict.  If Ben Chifley were alive today, a man who ignored the restrictions of his church, introduced widespread social reform, defended the downtrodden and was entirely comfortable with nationalising public utilities, I believe he would find much in common with the Greens.

The rise of the Greens and the fracturing of the relationship between the parties is a de-facto fourth split of the ALP and follows on from the upheavals of 1916, 1931 and 1955.  The latter was especially damaging and, even a decade late, in the mid 1960s the ALP support base was narrow and especially limited in its appeal to younger voters, to women and to recent immigrants.

Labor in the 1960s was seen as the party of trade unions and the blue collar worker but out of touch with a changing society. Whitlam and, later, Hawke dramatically broadened the party’s appeal. Absent Kevin Rudd’s personal popularity, the ALP is now on course to return to a narrower support base.The rise of the Greens is, in my opinion, a reversal of the broadening of the ALP that occurred in the 1970s and 1980s.

When I first entered financial markets it was as an equity analyst. Despite ultimately leading UBS, in Asia and Australia, my core skill is as an analyst.  Most of my book is spent analysing the Greens policy platform in the context of the big picture issues of today: increasing income and wealth inequality, rising corporate power, wasteful government spending, unprecedented growth of mining fossil fuels in conflict with climate change, government and religious control of individual freedoms, illegal warfare and a rapidly changing fourth (media) estate.

Post retirement from UBS I went back to University, travelled and took on things that interested me such as serving on a panel with the Lowy Institute and an appointment by Julia Gillard to independently investigate the Building the Education (or school halls) stimulus program. It was this exposure to government amidst the 2010 election campaign that caused me to look carefully at each of the three party’s policy platforms. I started a blog and a section on it titled “The Platform Project” which helped me to crystallise my own views on individual policies.

As I examined my own thinking and analysed the issues I found that my views on most environmental and social policies – on climate change, mining, sustainability, euthanasia, on the right to affordable housing, high quality public education, marriage equality, animal rights and various others – aligned fairly closely with the actual Greens policy platform.

In my book, I set out my analysis and the arguments why I think the Greens policies make sense. This is not just opinion, but also judgement based on analysis. For example: my views on climate change and environmental policies are informed by my study of a Masters in Environmental Science & Law. I have also been informed by direct observation and research into how other countries including the US, Norway, The Netherlands, Switzerland and Singapore have approached various policy issues.

I shall just give you a flavour of how I approached the analysis and the content of my book. Within the big picture issue of “Inequality”, I table how we are becoming more unequal and entrenching poverty. One per cent of Australians today have 20 per cent of our nation’s wealth and the top 20 per cent has 60 per cent or all wealth. This trend is continuing as globalisation puts downward pressure on middle class incomes, our taxation policy favours those with capital, a sub-optimum mandate to setting interest rates has left us with excessive housing costs and a decline in our public education system is cementing privilege. I set out why I think extreme inequality undermines the reality of a democracy and diminishes economic growth. I revisit in my book Franklin D. Roosevelt’s vision for a second bill of rights to deliver economic democracy, examine the impact of our immigration policies on job creation and touch on the plight of Australian farmers.

In the chapter on the rise of corporate power and the state of union representation, I look at the implications for democracy and the balance of power between the state and big business. I also comment on the impact of privatisation on government funding. Properly channelled and moderately regulated, corporations are super effective allocators of resources and they make a major contribution to lifting global living standards and to delivering us products that we need and want. The evidence though suggests that market capitalism, industries and individual corporates are not generally self regulating and that therefore a strong regulatory framework as envisioned in the Greens polices is appropriate. Limiting both corporate and union donations to political parties as advocated by the Greens appears to limit untenable conflicts of interest.

The Greens policies on our natural resources are that they must be managed to accord with principles of intergenerational equity, biodiversity conservation, respect for traditional owners and that we must consider climate change and the precautionary principle. Specific measures include a prohibition on uranium mining, no expansion of coal mining and a moratorium on coal seam gas until we have proved up the science. The Greens would also create an insurance fund for land rehabilitation and stop mining in national parks and reserves.

I think it’s hard to believe in climate change and not conclude that we have to leave the majority of our coal reserves in the ground. The biggest portion of CO2 emissions arise from electricity generation and we power almost all of this with coal. We are per capita, the highest or next to highest emitter in the world.  More generally, questions I explore include: Why rush our mining development? Common sense in managing a finite resource suggests carefully planned extraction to maximise revenue. Why also are we happy for 75 per cent of the mining industry to be owned by foreigners and not impose a tax on super profits?

I dedicate substantial sections of my book to economic policies and to government spending. I have been afforded a relatively unique opportunity in that, post a private sector career I have been able to witness first hand the implementation of various major government programs. I am a board member of the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, joined the board of NBN Co late last year, am a member of the Regional Development Australia Fund Advisory Panel, was asked to negotiate with Sky and the ABC on the Asia network tender and investigated, independently the BER program.

As a nation we spend over $500 billion per annum across the three tiers of government. There is an opportunity to save $50 billion of this, but we need to bridge the current gaping chasm between the political class, the public service and business expertise.

The ALP and the Greens both need to strengthen their economic credentials. While the ALP has lost its Hawke/Keating economic credibility, the Greens challenge is to

deepen their economic policies and understanding of global market capitalism and consistently demonstrate the practical attainability of their polices. A strong regulatory framework to protect the environment and a genuinely progressive social policy platform does not need to result in a high taxing high spending government.

I make the argument in my book that in assessing the far right’s blunt critique of the Greens, we should treat with scepticism their economic and rationalist arguments. It is neo-liberal economic policies that delivered us the GFC and climate change and neo-liberal austerity policies that are failing to deliver us co-ordinated global economic recovery. The most pressing issue in my opinion is how can progressive political parties sustainably ensure they deliver value for money government. Much more focus is required on the day-to-day effective running of the business of government than on wide-sweeping policy reform and grand initiatives. Value-for-money government does not need to be an oxymoron and such is entirely consistent with the principles of Green sustainability and ALP values.

In government, the ALP has drifted to the right and in practical terms it is hard for most voters to differentiate ALP versus Coalition social and environmental policies. Most voters, in an event, place more importance on a government’s economic management and economic policies. We have had a two or three track economy for the past five years. Job security has been diminishing and there has been a rising amount of underemployment. Costs of living; the costs of the essentials have been increasing at an alarming rate and the government has appeared impotent. Many voters reminisce fondly upon the economic stewardship of Howard/Costello.

In all likelihood, the Coalition will win this election on perceptions of economic management. They should be in for six years but could be there for a decade. In mounting an effective opposition in the years ahead, the ALP will need to unite those on the progressive side of politics.

During 2014, it appears likely that Bill Shorten will lead Labor. Today, Bill effectively heads the Victorian Unity (right wing) faction of the party. Of this faction’s eight goals, seven are entirely consistent with the platform of the Greens and the eighth merely speaks of the need to balance electoral realities with ideal policy positions. Bill Shorten’s Young Labor Unity faction goals are even closer to the Greens, given that they publicly call for dental care to be part of Medicare, legalisation of same sex marriage, decisive action on climate change and a humane approach to those seeking asylum. If you were to put the Greens and this Young Labor faction in the same room you couldn’t pick them apart.

I believe there is deep voter appeal to a genuine policy platform that offers a “Third Way”, being fiscal conservative and competency in the day to day business of government, together with genuinely progressive social liberalism and high environmental protection.  Malcolm Turnbull is the most popular politician in Australia because he is viewed as authentic; generally telling us what he honestly thinks and also because his views are essentially “Third Way”.  If the ALP wants to reverse its structural decline within the hearts and minds of Australian voters, it needs, in my opinion, to chart this course. Constructing a simple but durable alliance with The Greens is part of that challenge.