As noted here and here in comments, there’s an extremely interesting development in Queensland state politics today - Indooroopilly MP Ronan Lee has defected from the ALP to join The Greens.
Lee has been something of a maverick during his time in Parliament, causing both Peter Beattie and Anna Bligh a few headaches, and having switched factional allegiance from one right wing faction - the Old Guard (”Labor Unity”) to the other - the AWU (”Labor Forum”). He might have expected ministerial promotion, particularly if Anna Bligh had had the determination and the support to put the broom through Cabinet that is needed - rather than just talking about “renewal” - but has had to content himself with the position of Parliamentary Secretary to the Attorney-General. Lee has been a very active local member, as his website demonstrates, and a position of some independence with regard to his party (Lee’s election paraphernalia and office signage have radically downplayed his ALP affiliation) must have assisted him in retaining a very marginal seat in traditional Western Suburbs leafy Liberal heartland he first won in 2001. Lee has also been outspoken on environmental and transport issues, and recently took a swipe at Anna Bligh for not being serious about green issues.
Lee’s defection is not necessarily unexpected, and as Dennis Atkins notes at Party Games, may not be unrelated to the difficulty of holding Indooroopilly if the LNP vote does improve in Brisbane. The Brisbane City Council Ward of Toowong - which overlaps with Lee’s seat - recorded a strong Green vote in March and as Atkins suggests, The Greens might be able to outpoll Labor and leapfrog the LNP vote - Liberals have come first on primaries in both 2004 and 2006.
While a Greens MP in the Queensland House should be a good thing for accountability and the policy debate, I have to say that my own personal view is that Lee should resign his seat and contest a by-election. I just don’t think that switching party affiliation is an ethical act in a system where most votes are party votes - Lee’s personal vote might be worth 2 or 3% but the fact remains that in Indooroopilly in 2006 40.46% of the electors supported the Labor candidate while The Greens were supported by 17.11% of the voters.
Update [by Kim]: Andrew Bartlett’s take. And Sam Clifford.
Bernard Keane in Crikey and Graham Young at Ambit Gambit weigh in.
The Qld Greens now hold about 1% of the seats in Queensland’s Legislative Assembly after winning about 8% of the statewide vote at the 2006 election. The idea that the Greens only won 17% of the vote in Indooroopilly, potentially going against the wishes of 40% of the seat’s voters ignores the fact that Greens voters in Queensland have gone without representation until now.
I’m glad that the party I belong to now has representation in Parliament. I’m glad there’s someone who will be able to stick it to the ALP over their terrible policies on transport, water, etc. where the LNP are either in lock step or don’t want to touch the issue for fear of a backlash.
I think Queensland can do much better than the ALP and the voters of Indooroopilly could do much worse than Ronan Lee.
What I would like to know is how many of Ronan Lee’s branch members will be following him over to the Greens.
Sam, is the contempt in which you apparently hold the electors of Indooroopilly something peculiar to you, or is it the attitude of Greens members generally?
Anyway, it’s a novel approach to Westminster liberal representative democracy: it’s OK to disenfranchise some people, as long as the bigger picture of My Party Getting A Seat is taken care of.
BBB
So let me get this straight, Mr Lee can keep his seat, but that seat will be on the cross benches? Like McGauran did?
I’m just having trouble accepting it as fait accompli, that Qld, the economy that is possibly more than any other in the world reliant on digging up and burning coal, ie one of the blackest economies there is, actually has a greens representative in its parliament?
Looks like it’s porcine airport time.
I take your numerical points about 40% vs 17% being hardly a close thing, but what happens if there is a tectonic shift out there in the western suburbs, and Ronan the Green gets 2nd past the post, and picks up anti-Anna Libs preferences en-masse?
Is there a book on Anna pulling the plug on Traveston? Anyone give me odds?
That logic’s a bit tortuous for me, Sam. The fact remains that Lee was elected - as a Labor member - on the existing single member system and he represents the electors of Indooroopilly and the electors of Indooroopilly alone. By all means argue for PR, but since we don’t have PR, it’s just not right to suggest Lee somehow represents any voters outside his own seat.
Well, again, danny, members are elected for a parliamentary term. A lot may change in electoral opinion during that term. There might be any number of members who are now sitting on the green benches in George Street without the support of sufficient electors to re-elect them. But that’s life, it’s how it works. The parliament’s composition reflects the decision of the electors on one day in 2006. If Lee wants to test whether sentiment has shifted, he should resign and recontest his seat.
As I said, many of us may wish for a different system, but I still believe that within the logic of the system we have, Lee has done the wrong thing. Party switching or resignation from a party while retaining a seat as a general practice is highly problematic - one only needs to refer to two words - “Mal Colston”. The fact that Lee’s defection may have positive results for the quality of debate in Queensland parliament doesn’t obviate its irresponsibility *literally - not a value judgement*. You can’t applaud a breach in the nexus between election and representation when you like the result and condemn it when you don’t. Principle has to be consistent regardless of partisan or even objectively justified views of the outcome.
BBB, I don’t hold the electors of Indooroopilly in contempt at all. Perhaps you should construct a strawman with a bit more to it. Sure, Lee was elected as a Labor MP but Indooroopilly is quite a Liberal area, overlapping a lot with the BCC ward of Toowong and the federal seat of Ryan (both held by Liberals for most of their existence). Indooroopilly electors know that Lee is not a party line ALP man and his environmental and transport policies have been on display for some time now.
I’m a big fan of proportional representation systems and have posted about them on my own blogs and in comments here. Are you suggesting that we should aim to disenfranchise no-one and move to a system of direct democracy or are you simply having a go at me for celebrating the first electoral victory that the Queensland Greens have ever had? It’s never okay to disenfranchise people, so we should aim to have an electoral system that disenfranchises as few people as possible. Proportional representation systems do such a thing.
Perhaps you don’t see a problem with Rosa Lee Long representing One Nation in parliament with less than 1% of the statewide vote while the Greens went unrepresented from 2006 until now with 8% of the statewide vote.
Queensland’s electoral system is absolutely dreadful; a de facto first past the post system with no upper house.
Sam, but as I’ve been suggesting, supporting a PR system is very different from supporting an unethical decision which takes place under the rules of the existing system. There really isn’t any way to argue that Lee should not - as a representative elected by the voters of Indooroopilly in 2006 under the single member system that existed then and exists now - should not resign his seat if he finds for whatever reason he is unable in conscience to maintain the party affiliation under which he put himself forward to those electors.
I can’t help but agree with you, Mark, despite my elation.
Sounds a bit like the debate we were having here on May 19th.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/05/19/guest-post-by-sam-clifford-the-borgs-not-the-only-new-kid-on-the-block/#comment-468731
“Sure, Lee was elected as a Labor MP but Indooroopilly is quite a Liberal area, overlapping a lot with the BCC ward of Toowong and the federal seat of Ryan (both held by Liberals for most of their existence).”
Wait, the argument is now that Indooroopilly has an ALP MP, but even still the electorate is quite Liberal, so it’s OK for the representative to associate, post-election, with the Greens. I’m not sure what else to describe that as, other than contempt. It ignores the relevant electors to an even greater degree than I had thought, on the basis that voters in other places will feel good because the outcome is similar to an outcome that they think would result from a hypothetical voting system in which no-one participated.
Mark is absolutely right: by all means argue for the system of your choice, but try not to advocate a fraud on the citizenry along the way.
BBB
He leaves the AWU and joins the Greens!!
.
What happened? Did he break his toe with all that head-kicking or something? I know he couldn’t sleep at night with all the knives in his back. He couldn’t afford to have his conscience removed?
I honestly didn’t think it would happen, steve; it looks like you were right. If Lee has been accepted by the party (which he has) then he is bound by the party’s constitution and charter.
If he’s that confident that his electorate want a Green member, he should resign and contest the resulting election as a Green.
As far as suggesting that he would somehow be constrained by “the party’s constitution and charter”, I’d just ask him how he felt about the Labor party versions of the same thing.
fucking rats…
On the other hand, he’s going to lose Indooroopilly, but he can spend some state mail allowance working on a senate position.
The problem for Ronan Lee at the next election is that the recent redistribution takes a chunk of Toowong out of the Indooroopilly electorate and hands it to the Mount Cootha electorate. Toowong tends to be where the younger voters reside.
The Indooroopilly electorate has moved more towards the Liberal Blue Ribbon areas of the Western suburbs.
Antony Green reckons that the new margin is 2.7% following the redistribution.
If he’s that confident that his electorate want a Green member, he should resign and contest the resulting election as a Green.
.
Thereby costing taxpayers money? The Indooroopilly constituency will be able to express itself at the next election. There are certain ethical questions raised by this sort of behaviour certainly; do we vote for members or parties. I’m a little surprised. I remeber Indooroopilly as a safe Liberal seat back in the day. Was I mistaken? Means: Valley of the leeches.
.
On the other hand, he’s going to lose Indooroopilly, but he can spend some state mail allowance working on a senate position.
.
Qld got its senate back?
It isn’t an electoral triumph by the Greens, Sam, it’s the defection of a member who was elected on the basis that he represented the ALP.
As Darin says, if he thinks that becoming a Green is acceptable to his electorate, he should test this at a by election.
“Qld got its senate back?”
Nice….
I wish they would…
Update [by Kim]: Andrew Bartlett’s take.
From the Andrew Bartlett link…
“where the views of an elected Member are in conflict with the Queensland Greens policy, then the elected member may vote in accordance with their conscience.”
From Sam…
“If Lee has been accepted by the party (which he has) then he is bound by the party’s constitution and charter”
LOL
Mark -
Interesting ethical questions of course. But let’s throw this one in. What about a party that runs on a platform asserting certain intentions without any intention of keeping them? Now this is typical behaviour these days. In fact, and I’m sorry, this kind of behaviour is, in my experience, not only tolerated but lauded in the ALP in general and amongst the AWU in particular.
.
To take an example at some distance from local politics let’s consider the building of the Skye Bridge. This was one of those wonderful PPPs in which we the taxpayers pay to build it and then it gets handed to a company to charge us to use it.
.
The British Labour Party explicitly rejected the Conservative Party’s plans to charge tolls and the rest when Blair was running for election. They were full of shit. They not only continued to endorse this most nefarious stealing of public money for the benefit of the very dodgy Bank of America but they conspired to use police enforcement to squelch dissent and disregarded the rule of law in combating the surprisingly effective activism.
.
The obligation on the part of members of the British Labour Party would be to resign from the party. People vote for a policy platform. They signal a preference for certain policy directives over others. When politicians deliberately mislead the electorate as Paul Keating repeatedly did, then their backbenchers are obliged to cross the floor. They don’t because politics attracts more than its fair share of selfish pricks.
.
I don’t know the whole story but if this fellow is that most rare of creatures an active local member he’s probably reading what the electorate wants better than us. He might have done something unethical, but he might’ve done just the opposite.
.
Naturally the ALP’s culture will assemble an arsenal of mud launching artillery to throw at him. They’ll call him disloyal, hell the ALP’ve called me disloyal and I’ve never joined ‘em (I’d rather stick needles in my eyes). But whatever. I for one am sick and tired of having politicians ignore the interest of their constituency in favour of their private sector pals on the basis that they’ll be able to use their agitprop machine, their skullduggery and the disheartening fact that the alternative are the same pack of arseholes to fleece us yet again.
.
But naturally, soul-searching self-examination will be completely absent as usual. We’ll just have the usual self-righteous, chestbeating, fingerpointing nastiness.
.
BTW Does anyone know when Tony Blair’s reveal all memoir The World Would Have Been So Much Better If I’d Been Drowned At Birth is coming out?
I’m not sure what your point is Darin? The two statements are totally consistent as far as I can see.
I know the rigid straightjacket of major party discipline in Australia - amongst the tightest of any democratic nation in the world I believe - makes it hard for some people to comprehend the right of a conscience vote, but it is commonplace in many other countries.
I can’t speak for the Greens, but the wording of their constitution looks very similar to the same provisions that were in the Democrats’ constitution for so long. I would assume that Ronan Lee’s accepting of the constitution and charter of the Green Party means he recognises the right/responsibility the constitution contains for him to vote according to his conscience - which seems far more preferable to me than MPs voting against their conscience.
However, I do share the unease some have expressed about MPs switching parties mid-term without resigning their seat. Meg Lees did this to the Democrats of course. Cheryl Kernot never gets enough credit for refusing to do the same when she quit the Democrats - at significant financial cost to herself too. In the Senate there isn’t even the justification of saving the taxpayers the cost of a by-election, plus the added fact that it is clearer that people are voting for the party, as the majority put their vote in the party’s box above the line, rather than besides the candidate’s name.
However, in the end the voters in Indooroopilly will weigh this up when they decide how to vote next election. Kris Hanna got re-elected in Mitchell in SA, despite him switching from Labor to the Greens and then from the Greens to Independent, all in the one term!
Darin, the Greens don’t have reproductive rights in their charter, it’s in the policies. There’s a difference; one’s a set of guiding principles and rules (charter, constitution) the other is a platform which may change over time.
Sam, I have to agree with BBB here. By your own logic, had Lee joined not “your party” but the LNP, you would have shrugged and barely mentioned it I suppose.
Well, I suppose my point is that if there is a general exemption from party policy on conscience grounds, then there is no real burden on the elected member to follow party policy at all.
I accept that this is the only way that things should work in practice. Nobody in an elected position should be required to vote against their conscience.
If, however, they were elected running for a party, they should either vote in line with party policy or resign. A resignation on principle would provide them with an opportunity to find out whether they enjoy the support of their constituency.
The LOL was more aimed at Sam’s statement that Greens members would be bound by their constitution and charter. If they have a conscience vote on all matters, their elected members are not bound at all.
Andrew E, the LNP don’t have an under-representation problem.
Darin, a party member who consistently votes against party policy due to conscience issues would probably find themselves disendorsed no matter which party they belonged to. Unless, that is, the local branches like what the MP is doing.
Thanks Darin - it’s probably too far off-topic to go on too much about conscience votes versus caucus solidairty. However, in short, obviously if you found yourself consistently voting against your party’s policy, you shouldn’t be in that party (and you’d be unlikely to be (re)endorsed). But it is unrealistic to suggest that everyone can agree 100% with 100% of policies, which in effect is what is demanded with the current situation where a person is expected to resign from the party (and to be totally pure, their seat) if there is one party decision they believe is fundamentally wrong.
In addition, as is outlined in Adiren’s comment, many governments ignore some of the policies their party went to the election on. What is an MP bound to support 100% of their party’s policies meant to do then.
Also, in parliament you often have to vote on issues which are not precisely covered by official party policy. One approach is to then bind every MP to support the position that the majority of their colleagues support (which wouldn’t matter in Ronan Lee’s case anyway as he is now the only Green MP), but that does risk people being bound to majority decisions that might be reached as a result of many factors other than the policy merits of the issue (e.g. factional deals, pre-selection threats, promises of promotion, keeping key donors happy, etc).
Sam, the LNP does have an under-representation problem.
Just under 38% of the primary vote at the 2006 election for 25 of the 89 seats - about 29%.
The Libs won 8 out of 89 seats - around 11% - but received 20.1% of the statewide vote.
http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/state2006/results/summary.html
Any single member system - particularly in optional preferential where just vote 1 becomes entrenched and a lot of seats are effectively won on first past the post - by definition under-represents the losers and over-represents the winners.
So Andrew E is quite right - if a Labor member defected to the LNP you’d have to defend it on the same grounds.
And it would be just as indefensible, I’d hasten to add.
Lee should resign his seat.
I stand corrected, Mark. Today is just not my day, is it?
Maybe not, Sam! I can understand the excitement, but I guess passion needs to be balanced with logic and reason too!
“One approach is to then bind every MP to support the position that the majority of their colleagues support (which wouldn’t matter in Ronan Lee’s case anyway as he is now the only Green MP)…”
But is he beyond the reach of the 11 faceless women and men of the Queensland Greens? Can someone get a shot of Lee waiting outside Horan Street?
BBB
As both the Die Grunen and Der Mitteleuropa ‘Gott-mit-uns’ ALP are both run on exactly the same monarchical grounds, I, for one, don’t see any controversy.
Now had this cheese-eating rat joined those gnats on the other side…well that would be disgusting, inhuman insect-like ravening…not only Judgment Day for labor rats, but also the Day of the Locusts as predicted in Revelation.
Revelation 9:3 Then out of the smoke came locusts upon the earth, and power was given them, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
Well parliament sits this week, and being the only Green in Parliament, does he even have to show up?
Mark, and coffee needs to be balanced with sleep!
Ronan was VERY lucky to avoid scrutiny, of the Shephardson kind, of some of his pre-parlimentry political activities.
He went from the Right straight to the Greens? Is there a discontinuity there, or are the Labor factions not what they used to be?
Not what they used to be!
Lee was only a member of the AWU opportunistically as it were. But at state level, there’s really not much ideological difference now (though some left and right members are obviously lefter and righter respectively than others - but not so much among the parliamentarians and apparatchiks.)
Being a Green I’ll acknowledge being biased on the question of whether members changing parties should resign their seats, but I don’t think its anything like clear cut that it should always happen. Here’s a few points in random order:
* I gather its more common in some other countries (eg Canada) than here, and doesn’t seem to attract the same demands that people stand down.
* Consideration should be given, at least in part, to whether the candidate won purely on the party vote, or whether their personal popularity was significant. Everyone says that its surprising Lee held what would be normally such a safe Liberal seat, even in the Beattie landslides. It seems clear his popularity was a factor, and I notice that during the last campaign the Libs accused him of “campaigning as a defacto independent” or words to that effect. Also note that he was behind on primaries and Green preferences pushed him over.
* If a party is elected on particular policies and then breaks those policies, should a candidate who wants to stick to them resign? Not saying this is applicable in this case, but its relevant to the general question. Arguably it is the rest of the party that should resign and recontest.
* Also, what about an MP who was being personally victimised or bullied by their own party in a manner that in a different employment context would enable them to win a workplace harassment suit? I have nothing to suggest this is the case here, but its certainly happened, and I think where it does a candidate is quite entitled to resign from the party and sit either as an independent or with another party.
* Voters tend to hate by-elections. (Personally I love ‘em, but that’s just me). Even some who might not agree with Lee’s decision might prefer that he just did it than put them to through voting again.
* Period of time served is also an issue. Let’s say it was 3 months to the election. Would you seriously say that Lee should cause a by-election in that case? While I was thrilled when Hanna came across, I was a bit troubled that he had served only about a quarter of his term as a Labor MP. In this case more than 2/3s of Lee’s term is complete, so if the Labor voters who backed him don’t like it, they don’t have to suffer for that long.
* I agree the case is stronger in the Upper Houses. As Andrew B noted, the cost factors/annoyance of by-elections are not there, and outside Tasmania, the party vote trumps the personal by two orders of magnitude at least.
“* Voters tend to hate by-elections. (Personally I love ‘em, but that’s just me). Even some who might not agree with Lee’s decision might prefer that he just did it than put them to through voting again.”
And Anna Bligh would also surely be thankful that there is not a by-election right now given it would likely highlight how deeply unpopular her government is….te he he!
If MPs are elected purely as representatives of a party, then they should resign from parliament if they change parties. This is especially true if their decision results in a change in the control of parliament (as occured after the 1983 Qld state election or when Mal Colston became an independent).
If an MP is elected purely as an individual, it doesn’t matter what party they join.
Ronan’s election is probably only slightly due to a personal vote and mostly due to the party support. His election was very unusual - remember that Labor had never held the state seats of Indooroopilly or Toowong, or the BCC Wards of Indooroopilly (Sallyanne Atkinson’s old Ward), Taringa (Denver Beanland’s Ward), Walter Taylor or Toowong, before Ronan won Indooroopilly in 2001. Denver Beanland almost lost Toowong in 1989 but was saved by a strong Liberal vote in East Indooroopilly.
Ronan’s change of party won’t change control of the Legislative Assembly so, on balance, he doesn’t need to resign.
Ronan would be aware that the best Greens vote was ~25% in Mt Cooth-Tha in the 1995 election at which the Greens concentrated a lot of effort into Drew Hutton’s campaign in a campaign in which there was a big protest vote against the Goss govt. I would guess that the Greens would have the best chances of winning in Mt Coot-Tha, South Brisbane, Brisbane Central or the sunshine coast hinterland.
As a personal aside, Ronan Lee was an inspiration for the Labour Victory Front. “Long live the eight-legged spider!” I recall student meetings in the early-mid 90s at QUT at which Ronan wore an aqua-coloured suit.
Yep, Sacha, maybe I should have put in a disclosure - Ronan was the original Comrade #1 for our little hoax. I should scan in some of the posters some time - I still have them all!
Lee was AWU-faction ALP. The Greens can have him. Are you Greenies sure you want his social views?
Yep, there’s a problem for The Greens to be sure. If a conscience vote on abortion comes up, it’s hard to separate out the one Greens MP following his conscience from the party - because he’s it as far as state parliamentary politics is concerned.
How did he vote on the stem cell bill?
He was! “Comrade Lee” - it always reminded me of a character in Naked Lunch. He inspired a movement! I still have the Little Blue Book - required reading. “Comrades, we must engage in self-criticism!”
I disagree with Sam - the fact that the Greens won a certain percent of the vote doesn’t mean that they should necessarily have a certain fraction of the total parliament. Personally, I’m in favour of a majority choosing a government, which doesn’t necessarily happen in a system of single member electorates (e.g. 1995 Qld and NSW, & Federal 1990, 1998). However, given a system of single member electorates, there is not necessarily a connection between overall support for a party and how the parliament is constituted.
Sam’s argument is that the single member system is inadequate. As it can lead to to governments being chosen in a parliamentary system that aren’t supported by a majority of voters, I agree. But this doesn’t mean that it’s ok for elected MPs in a single member system to change parties with the effect that “under-represented” parties (according to a PR system) have more MPs.
The funniest thing was when ISO people couldn’t discern whether whether the LVF posters were genuine.
To answer my own question in manner of Kevin Rudd, Ronan Lee voted against the stem cell bill on October 11 2007.
The best way to get the division list is to search “stem cell” in this archive for 2007:
http://parlinfo.parliament.qld.gov.au/IsysHanSimp.htm
I haven’t been through the whole Hansard record of debate to see if he spoke.
“the urgent need for embryonic stem cell research are not compelling”
Interesting, Tyro. If I lived in Indooroopilly, I’d certainly have some difficulties voting for an anti-choice MP. The sort of “pro-life” propaganda he’s spouting in that extract is also worrying from the pov of understanding science compared to alarmism.
I wonder how much of a background check The Greens did on Lee, and whether these sorts of issues were discussed. They’ve got a very big stake in his success now, and in the absence of any other elected members, he’s going to have a lot of influence in shaping public perceptions of The Greens in Queensland.
Also
and
see http://parlinfo.parliament.qld.gov.au/isysquery/99e9d40d-c247-4406-9bea-8647b9a3eb84/3/doc/Ronan%20Lee%20spk%20Indooroopilly%202007_10_10_119.pdf#xml=http://parlinfo.parliament.qld.gov.au/isysquery/99e9d40d-c247-4406-9bea-8647b9a3eb84/3/hilite/
What leadership role will he play in the Qld Greens?
Good question, Sacha.
Kim’s right in saying he’ll be the public face of The Greens now. How that meshes in with Senate candidates, and indeed the organisational leadership is a very interesting question.
The role he plays could be quite interesting if his views and those of Greens voters are quite different on some key issues (although being different on one key issue may be considered a personal quirk).
Another point is that parties have cultures which outsiders have to deal with when they join.
Bob Brown:
http://greensmps.org.au/blog/first-greens-mp-qld
MLA’s are elected to represent an electorate NOT a party.
There is no obligation to join/remain in/side with any party.
We all know this, hence plenty of jaw-jaw here about resignation or otherwise.
But no real life resignation. That seem to be quite rare among party-jumping MP’s.
How often have party-jumping MPs resigned from parliament? Cherryl Kernot did it in 97.
I would also point out that Lee would have had considerable financial backing for his election campaign from the ALP - probably receiving more support than was available to the entire Greens party across the State.
So if he’s defected and the Greens have accepted him, than it surely is only fair that a large proportion of the money spent electing him be paid back to the ALP. (I’m willing to concede that this should be pro rata, as he did serve time as an ALP member, and to knock off the money the ALP would have received for his primary votes).
If you were really pure and upright, you’d also factor in the untold hours of volunteer time put in by local ALP members - I would hazard a guess that the number of ALP volunteers in his seat outweighed local Greens by probably 10 to 1.
If the ALP isn’t compensated, then surely the Greens are profiting by Lee’s deceptive behaviour?
From the Green’s site linked above;
“Now with Ronan becoming our first Greens member, hundreds of thousands of Greens supporters in Queensland have a real say on the floor of Parliament.”
Yep. too bad about the voters of Indooroopilly.
Kim,
Interesting, Tyro. If I lived in Indooroopilly, I’d certainly have some difficulties voting for an anti-choice MP.
Just FYI, at the national and I think most state levels, all Green MPs have had a conscience vote on stem cell research because the Party does not have a clear policy on it in most instances, and recognises it as an extremely complex scientific and moral question. This is compltely different from pro-choice policies, which all Green parties in Australia have - it’s a core part of the AG platform I’d argue - and no Green MP to my knowledge has ever been given or would be countenanced a conscience vote on abortion rights. I’m also not sure how you get from anti-stem cell to anti-choice from the above quote?
Having said all that, I am always extremely dubious about Party defections, and last time this happened for the Greens in SA it was not a good result. I’ll remain sceptical on this one. I think the Qld Greens are a tad more maverick than other state Green parties - which is kind of understandable given the politics of that state - so I’ll be watching with interest how this one plays out.
Methinks Mr Lee knows he is dead meat at the next state election so he is positioning himself for bigger things, namely, numero uno on the Greens Senate ticket at the next federal election, where he will be in with a real chance, especially if it’s a double dissolution.
It’s his stated position, I understand, myriad.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24451391-601,00.html
Sam Clifford:
http://publicpolity.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/ronan-lee-joins-the-greens/
Thanks for that Kim - and ugh. Well I’m not at all relaxed.
one look at the charter of the Greens, let alone policies, shows that having an MP who is anti-choice is completely antithetical to Greens policies and principles.
The Queensland Greens appear to be a different beast from the Tasmanian Greens, myriad. Having said that, I’m also disappointed in Bob Brown’s seemingly casual dismissal of the importance of an anti-choice stance.
Especially when the Greens were being fought in 2004.
http://www.cathnews.com/news/402/70.php
Oh dear.
Interesting link, steve.
I’m predicting Ronan will jump seats too, and stand for the Greens in South Brisbane, where an “It’s Personal” narrative could add just the required edge to an already quite plausible set of numbers, IM
hO, for a Get Rid Of Anna Now (G.R.O.A.N.), South-Brisbane-is-the-new-Bennelong, Libs lay-back-and-think-of-queensland-just-preference-greens strategy.Queensland Greens could do with a bit of a transplant of some dingo into them.
Mr Lee will know how politix is played for real, no-holds-barred Peel Street style, and can maybe get them wised up, like Bob and Christine are, but only after after fighting their way in, on no-one’s coat-tails or brand.
They need less Bilby, and more Antichinus.
The Qld Greens have a history of attracting strange people. An anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage Labor MP from an AWU background defecting to them? - why not! I used to be a member of the Greens and I remember in the ’90s they had some pretty strange people connected to the gun lobby in their ranks. Then in 2004 they had the big factional split with the Grassroots Greens who advocated that Peak Oil be the main electoral platform.
Yes, they do have a fairly unique and colourful culture. So we may see Ronan Lee yet again jumping ship after a few months of attending their State Council meetings when he is faced with the reality of who he has actually jumped into bed with.
He may also get a bit freaked out when he realises that organisation also isn’t their strongest point and that their membership and support base in reality is so low that they have problems staffing all the booths - even in prominent inner city electorates like his. The only reason they do so well in South Brisbane is because so many hippies live there and its not too hard for them to walk down the road on election day to help out.
Also heard a rumour that Qld Greens membership is in danger of falling below 500. They have been emailing all sorts of people to get them to renew/rejoin including some of the old Grassroots crew. Lots of prominent members, including founding members and their former web master resigned last year.
Lee has probably already committed political suicide by turning his back on the ALP voters in Indooroopilly. However he could have saved himself a lot of agony and just become an independent. The Greens certainly do not have the resources to save his career!
And then there’s the “Beyond Left and Right” Third Way mob in the Qld Greens.
And the anti-union small business boosters like Anne Boccabella.
“Methinks Mr Lee knows he is dead meat at the next state election so he is positioning himself for bigger things, namely, numero uno on the Greens Senate ticket at the next federal election, where he will be in with a real chance, especially if it’s a double dissolution.”
I thought Larissa Waters was hoping to be the next Senator. Mr Lee may have to grow some claws if he is hoping for the Senate.
The huge cat fight that raged through the Qld Greens between the National Convenor Juanita Wheeler and Waters for the #1 Senate position in the last Federal election was sordid to say the least. Was dubbed the battle between Beauty and the Beast by some onlookers. Ended with Beauty winning, with much help from her team of besotted male admirers, and the Beast taking her bat and ball and resigning as National Convenor.
Well, It’s certaintly put the cat amongst the pidgeson a bit at least.
What would the ALP strategists be thinking this morning? Its a seat that based on recent polling is gone at the next election (I’d still say, wait for it) but now it has a Greens incumbant who has at least tried to get out in the community, It may come down to what they fear more another LNP member or a former ALP member who has some insight on their playbook and would set a dangerous precedent if more Left-leaning issues come up.
The LNP on the other hand must be just about sick of ‘independent poachers’ in seats that they should in a normal cycle be holding, all we are changing is the word ‘independent’ for ‘Minor Party’. But who knows what’s going on in the LNP hive-mind at the moment, they still might be thinking destroy the Liberal Western Faction, winning Indooroopilly may not have been high on their priority list, who knows what is though?
It may not yield a good result, but at least the race will be interesting.
PinkyOz.
The LNP really don’t have any choice about winning Indooroopilly, I’d say PinkyOz. If they can’t take a marginal seat in Brisbane under 3% with a traditional Liberal base, then they may as well give up.
btw, danny @ 68, I know you’re not an Anna fan, but that’s crazy talk, dude! Anna’s no John Howard. Some people might be disillusioned with her, and others might be tired of the ALP in government, but there’s hardly a huge impetus of anti-Anna sentiment per se out there.
I strongly suspect the Greens/protest vote in South Brisbane is as big as it’s going to get. Last time around, they were in third place - by a substantial margin - to the Libs and Bligh won it on primaries.
http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/state2006/results/district73.html
And Lee’s no Maxine McKew. The socially conservative Catholic thing is hardly a good look in South Brisbane, as you must know. And if he were fool enough to run there, you can bet it would become an issue.
Kim, the Greens Charter applies to all Greens parties, not just Tas - the link probably confused you ’cause it’s just where I found the quickest link. And as the Australian Greens Constitution says, to disagree with the charter is to call into question one’s membership of the party.
The Australian Greens are also signatories to (not to mention influential in the drafting of) the global greens charter
My understanding, and I’m sure of many other green members, is that our elected reps do not have a conscience vote on abortion rights, unlike stem cell.
glad not to be in Qld while this one plays out.
Thanks, myriad.
It could get interesting because there’s something of a push for abortion law reform in Queensland at the moment.
“And then there’s the “Beyond Left and Right” Third Way mob in the Qld Greens.”
I think you’ll find Bob Brown is one of those as well, Kim. “politics of left and right versus politics of the future” was the slogan for the United Tasmania Group in 1972, and the Germans took up “neither left nor right but in front” in the late 80s
Maja, you seem to know less than half of a bunch of stories, and I don’t propose to correct you on all of them here. But it is a complete fabrication to say that at any time in the last, I don’t know, at least five or six years, that the Qld GReens had less than 500 real, valid, financial members on the books. Last year we shifted all memberships to be renewed on the same date,instead of throughout the year. As a result there has been a lot of correspondence out of the party office with reminders and followups and so on, but only to people who were, you know, current members who hadn’t renewed. You’ve clearly got a bone to pick with the Greens. How about you get that off your chest instead of making up gossipy half-truths?