Use Our Traffic Light Election Guide
Positive discoveries, achievements and activities that lead the way in solving the Climate Change crisis
America’s upcoming presidential election may be a crucial event in human history
Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race for president and recommendation of Kamala Harris for the job is epochal. Biden was OK for the environment but couldn’t defeat Trump. Harris has what it takes to demolish Trump and lead the battle against runaway warming.
Vote Climate One is working to inform Australians of the scientific facts relating to the ever growing climate emergency and what can be done politically to ensure that our governments actively join the battle to solve the emergency. We hope this will help drive a political revolution enabling this to happen.
Where scientifically validated facts are concerned, two weeks ago on the 20th of March the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) controlled by 195 nations of the world forming the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) published their dire forecast for our future climate. This report’s Summary for Policy Makers was signed off by the delegated representatives of every one of the WMO member nations. This summary report crossing many different scientific disciplines concludes some 6 years of some of the most stringently peer-reviewed scientific research ever published. In other words, the forecast is based on a vast array of solid and tested evidence, not just anecdotes and beliefs.
For a more detailed presentation of the IPCC’s research and writing process see Politics vs physical dangers and real death and Some fundamental issues relating to the science underlying climate policy: The IPCC and COP26 couldn’t help but get it wrong. The second article explains why the IPCC cannot avoid downplaying the extent and magnitude of the consequences from continuing global warming.
In other words, where the IPCC says our future is dire if we don’t stop global warming, the actual reality is likely to be even worse, i.e., involving social collapse and even possible/likely human extinction within a century or two. Hence, our warning on Vote Climate One’s cover page:
Humans triggered the climate emergency over a little more than 100 years. In this geological instant of time we burned prodigious quantities of safely sequestered fossil carbon accumulated over millions of years to produce and release the greenhouse gas CO₂ and, even more potent greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This was done more-or-less accidentally with the invention of primitive, Victorian era-based steam- technologies. However, even the low tech used and applied by billions of people significantly changed the composition of an entire planet’s worth of atmosphere so it traps more solar energy to significantly warm the whole planet. Today, we are continuing to dump still more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, heating the planet even more.
Given that humans only took a century to accidentally create the climate emergency using steampunk technology, surely, by working together and using our most up to date science and technologies, we should be able to solve the emergency. Unfortunately dogma and selfish greed promoted by special interests controlling the planet’s resources are working against stopping greenhouse gas emitting activities. This, unavoidably, becomes fraught with politics: internationally, nationally, state, and even at local council levels. Political revolutions will be required at all levels to favor climate action.
Where politics is concerned, for several decades at least, Australian Governments (federal, state, and even many local councils) have governed primarily to serve entrenched party-political dogmas and vested special interests. Parliamentary parties have worked to impose their dogmas on the nation’s citizens rather than listening to them. Special interests influencing the governments include multinational companies in the resource and fossil fuel industries, super-wealthy individuals, land-developers and religious groupings. Parties (and party discipline) tends to support the interests who support their campaigns and provide them with favorable media. Our Climate Sentinel News article provides a case study of Liberal government in NSW: Is Premier Perrottet a far-right puppet, or the puppet master?
Unfortunately, the uncoordinated actions of people alone, no matter how well motivated, cannot possibly organize, marshal, and control all the resources and technologies needed for effective action on the climate emergency. This requires the tools of and coordination by government. Effective action to stop global warming requires stopping industrial carbon emissions. This just isn’t going to happen as long as puppet governments guided by fossil fuel industries continue subsidizing their puppet masters and jailing protesters campaigning to stop emissions. Several Climate Sentinel News posts document such cases under the search term “puppet master“.
Vote Climate One concludes that the critical first steps in mobilizing effective climate action must be to: (1) inform citizens of the genuine reality of the climate crisis (i.e., via Climate Sentinel News); and (2) provide knowledge and tools to influence or replace parliamentary puppets of the special interests with MPs who will place citizens’ interests first (i.e., “Traffic Light Voting” and “Voting Guides“).
In other words, we aim to facilitate fundamental political revolutions in Australian parliaments: From ‘democracies’ guided by the greed of large special interests for profits and power; To a genuine democracies representing their citizens and being concerned with their health and well being.
In Australia’s political environment we think the best governments will be Labor in a minority (with labor more progressive than the usual opposition parties) where Greens and a diversity of greenish community independents hold the balance of power to prevent Labor from catering to vested interests.
In last year’s Federal election, the COALition majority government was decimated: replaced by a Labor government with a razor thin margin and a large cross bench with 14 green-light candidates.
COALition
Aust. Labor Party
Centre Alliance
Katter’s Australian
Australian Greens
Ind (Teal)
Ind (other)
2022
58
77
1
1
4
9
2
2019
77
68
1
1
1
3
1
-18
+11
(Sharkie)
(Katter)
+3
+6
(Gee + Dai Le)
(Majority ≥ 75): Labor 77 + Aston = 78; Red lights 61 – Aston = 60; Green lights = 15
Green lights include (Greens: 1 carryover and 3 new ones – replacing Libs in metro Brisbane) plus a swag of greenish community independents from 4 other states; Labor controls the lower house in majority but with a narrow margin. Several seats could easily go to independents in by elections.
In the 1 April (April Fool’s day!) by-election in Aston (Ferntree Gully – Rowville in eastern Melbourne), in a 6.44% swing, Labor gained another ex-safe Liberal seat. This is the first time since 1920(!) that any party in power has won a seat in a Federal by-election anywhere in Australia. Only 3 out of 32 booths in the once safely Liberal Aston had a majority of Liberal votes.
Liberals are left holding only 2 of 23 seats in Inner Metro Melbourne (Deakin and Menzies), 3 of 7 Outer Metro (Casey, LaTrobe and Flinders), and 0 of 3 Regional Metro areas (Bendigo, Ballarat, and Geelong).
COALition
Aust. Labor Party
Greens
Pauline Hanson’s
Jacqui Lambie
United Australia
David Pocock
Lidia Thorpe
15
15
6
1
1
1
1
31
26
11
2
2
1
1
1
Majority > 38: Labor 26; Red lights 36; Green lights 13 — (Labor + green lights) = 39
Where Labor has only 26 seats compared to 36 seats for the red lights, the green lights clearly hold the balance of power in the Senate. David Pocock (community independent) and Lidia Thorpe (elected as a Green) must be included along with the Greens party to give Labor a majority. David Pocock’s vote is critical in decisions where the red lights are unanimously against.
In our analysis of the results, Vote Climate One’s Traffic Light Election Guide was accessed hundreds of thousands of times during the pre poll and election day voting period – which might have helped some candidates over the line to either second place (allowing preferences to be distributed to them) to pass the 50% two party preferred winning position. In the ACT Vote Climate One funded distribution of paper versions of the Guide in a few of the suburbs — where Pocock did statistically better than in suburbs we didn’t cover. This may have been a significant component in the winning margin.
Since the Federal Election we have had state elections in Victoria and NSW.
The Victorian Parliament has more resistant to revolutionary change because of the many barriers to Greens, minor parties and independents crafted into the electoral laws designed to favor the major parties. Victoria allows ‘group voting tickets’ for election to the Legislative Council and secretive backroom ‘preference trading’ among the mobs. Combined with this, Victoria’s heavyweight restrictions on campaign contributions and funding gravely hamper independents and minor parties’ abilities to campaign compared to major parties’ major funding.
The Assembly (lower house) ended up with Labor holding 56 seats, Liberals with 19, Nationals 9 (red lights = 38), and Greens 4; where a majority is < 45. None of the 120 independents or candidates from 16 minor parties won a single seat. Labor’s 11 seat majority in the lower house combined with party discipline does little to hinder autocratic government from the Labor side.
On the other hand voting for the Legislative Council turned out well for green-light candidates. MLCs serve for 4 year terms, with all seats contested in each state election.
For Legislative Council Elections in Victoria, the state is divided into 8 geographically defined electoral regions, with 5 members representing each region, for a total of 40 members. Elections are determined by ‘optional preferential voting‘. Voters have a ‘single transferable vote‘, which may be used either
The use of group voting tickets enables upper house elections allows voters’ intentions to be rorted in many ways as described by Glen Druery, the ‘Preference Whisperer’. However, despite all of this, after the 2022 election, green-light MLC’s on the cross-bench with 7 votes hold the balance of power.
Labor
COALition
Greens
Animal Justice
Derryn Hinch’s
Fiona Patten’s
Labor DLP
Legalize Cannabis
Liberal Democrats
Pauline Hanson’s
Shooters, Fishers, F…
Sustainable Aust.
Transport Matters
2022
15
14
4
1
0
0
1
2
1
1
1
0
0
2018
18
13
1
1
3
1
0
0
2
0
1
1
1
change
-3
+1
+3
-3
-1
+1
+2
-1
+1
-1
-1
Labor 15, Greens 4, Cannabis 2, Animal Justice 1 (22); vs red-lights: Libs 8, Nat 6, Lab DLP 1, Lib Dem 1, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation 1, Shooters & Fishers 1 (18). With 21 needed for a majority in the upper house, Greens are clearly in the balance of power.
Given that Labor is already relatively progressive on climate action, a green light majority on the cross bench may be in a position to block favorable treatment of Labor’s fossil fuel special interests, and to encourage strong action to shut down fossil fuel emissions. Victorians need to keep a close watch on their representatives and make sure via letter bombing, phone calls, and personal visits to electorate offices that they stay on the job to stop global warming!
The NSW State election was held a week ago (1 April), but like Victoria the NSW’s election laws work against minor parties and independents. However, Vote Climate One may have had a bit more influence here. Liberal/Nationals were soundly defeated and Labor is in, but with a definite minority government. Labor is two short of a majority pending possible recounts. (The Liberals held the seat of Ryde by only 50 votes when the last of the postal votes were counted on 8 May).
On the Labor/green-light side, Labor 45; Greens 3 (Ballina – thanks to the repeated extreme flooding events, plus Sydney electorates of Balmain & Newtown); and 3 green-light independents – one of them backed by Climate200, for a total of 51; where 47 votes are required to pass legislation.
There are also 2 orange-light incumbent independents with significant green credentials.
Note, for the count here I have reclassified Michael Regan (Wakehurst), listed orange light before the election. Due to time constraints our analysis missed his strong record of climate actions as Mayor of Northern Beaches Council and the fact that he was supported by Federal teal MPs, Zali Steggall (Warringah) and Sophie Scamps (Mackellar).
On the Lib/Nat red-light side there are 25 Libs; 11 Nationals and 4 independents (1 ex Lib and 3 ex shooters/fishers/farmers) for a total of 40.
This leaves NSW with a Labor minority government with Greens + green-light independents with a strong hold in the balance of power.
The NSW Legislative Council has 42 members, elected by proportional representation in which the whole state is a single electorate. Members serve eight-year terms, which are staggered, with half the Council (21) being elected every four years. 22 votes are required for a majority.
From ABC News’s Legislative Council Preview – NSW Election 2023:
All registered parties are listed ‘above the line’ on the ballot paper. All candidates running in the election for a party (as listed above the line) are listed for that party in preference order below the line. Unaffiliated independent candidates are only listed below the line.
A single ‘1’ above the line is formal and counts for the chosen party but has no preferences for other parties. If they wish, a voter may show a second, third and so on preference for other parties above the line. These preferences are implied to be preferences for candidate of each group as printed on the ballot paper.
If a voter wants to re-order a party’s candidates, pick candidates from different parties, or vote for candidates in any group without a voting square above the line, they must vote ‘below the line’ by numbering boxes for candidates. Electors must complete 15 preferences below the line for a formal vote. DO NOT number a sequences that crosses the ballot paper line.
Coalition
Labor
Greens
Pauline Hanson’s
Shooters, Fishers, +
Animal Justice
Cannabis
Lib Democrats
7
8
2
1
1
0
1
1
15
15
4
3
2
1
1
1
In the Legislative Council 22 votes form a majority, and there are now 15 Labor, 6 green lights (4 Greens, 1 AJP, 1 Cannabis), totaling 21 votes, versus 21 red light votes (Coalition 15, Pauline Hansons’s 3, SFF 2, Lib Dems 1).
Note: According to the ABC on 9/04/2023, as this is being written:
Based on trends in the present count, only 6 on the cross bench will be green lights. In other words, Vested interests working through normally cooperative red lights in the upper house, may still have some ability to block important legislation on climate action.
Noting that the Liberal Democrats and Shooters, Fishers are farther to the right and dogmatic on energy policy and climate action than the Liberal Party, we must hope that the Liberals in the upper house will follow the lead of green lights in the lower house on climate legislation.
Voters concerned to see serious action on climate need to stay alert to what their representatives in both houses are saying and doing. Make sure they know via letter bombing, phone calls, and personal visits to electorate offices that they must stay on the job to stop global warming!
Insofar as our limited resources allow, we will endeavor to keep Australian voters up to date with the latest news on the still growing climate emergency (i.e., why we need action) and what our governments are doing to solve it. Towards this end, we will be establishing an email service you can subscribe to, and publish contact details for all federal and state parliamentarians so you can send them hearts and flowers or brick bats depending on how well they are addressing needs for climate action.
It seems to have taken the clear thinking of Greta Thunberg, then a 16 year-old school girl, who concluded school was pointless as long as humans continued their blind ‘business as usual’ rush towards extinction.
In other words, wake up! smell the smoke! see the grimly frightful reality, and fight the fire that is burning up our only planet so we can give our offspring a hopeful future. This is truly the only issue that matters. Even the IPCC’s hyperconservative Sixth Assessment Report that makes it clear we are headed for an existential climate catastrophe if we don’t stop the warming process.
In Greta’s words, “even a small child can understand [this]”.
People hope for their children’s futures. She doesn’t want your hopium. She wants you to rationally panic enough to wake up, pay attention to reality, and fight the fire…. so all of our offspring can have some hope for their future.
In our present situation where most governments still support and even fund fossil fuel production and use, the most effective actions we can take as individuals is to revolutionize our governments to prioritize action on climate change above all other things. Nothing else matters if we have no future….
If we can get climate savvy governments in power soon enough, we may be able to mobilize enough action to survive our accidental disruption of Earth’s Climate System so our kids and grandkids inherit a world they can live in…
As I discuss further below, the judge’s finding in the Violet CoCo case raises the hope that people are beginning to realize how undemocratically oppressive New South Wales governments have become — because voters have allowed them to remain in office.
My featured article from the Saturday Paper reports the results of serial protester Violet CoCo’s District Court appeal against her brutally totalitarian jail sentence (15 months, 8 months minimum) under the new anti-protest law for protesting government inaction on climate change. Her crime was blocking a one-lane on-ramp to the Sydney Harbour Bridge for less than a half hour to raise public awareness of the climate crisis that threatens all of humanity with mass extinction from global warming due to fossil fuel emissions.
In 2022, the law was rammed through Parliament in less than a week with with Labor’s support, despite calls from a coalition of almost 40 civil society organizations to scrap it. Premier Perrottet and Labor’s leader, Chris Minns, (both members of their parties’ religious right wing factions) both expressed to the press how pleased they were with the draconian nature of the sentence.
Are these the kind of leaders you want to follow in NSW?
by Royce Kurmelovs, 18/02/2023 in The Saturday Paper
In an exclusive interview, climate activist Violet CoCo, who won her appeal against a jail sentence this week, details what she has learnt about the ‘theatre’ of politics:
…District Court judge Mark Williams read his ruling this week on whether or not Violet CoCo would serve a 15-month prison sentence for blocking the Sydney Harbour Bridge during a protest…
Four months earlier, Magistrate Allison Hawkins described CoCo as “childish” and “emotional”. In sentencing her, she relied particularly on submissions by police that alleged CoCo’s protest had blocked an ambulance.
“You have halted an ambulance under light and siren,” Hawkins said. “What about the person in there? What about that person and their family? What do they think of you and your cause?”
Only, the ambulance never existed. New South Wales Police Force had been so eager to make their case, they had embellished their account with what Williams described as a “false fact”. Reviewing the evidence, he said: “How did that find its way in?” [my emphasis]
Footage recorded by Channel Seven of the protest, played for the court by Crown prosecutor Isabella Maxwell-Williams, was set aside. An assertion that CoCo had been motivated more by scorn at the treatment of her partner in a separate protest rather than climate change was also rejected. So, too, was any suggestion the protest was “not peaceful” or that CoCo should be punished harshly based on her “criminal history”.
Williams upheld CoCo’s appeal. Convictions were recorded for blocking the bridge, resisting arrest and using a flare, but no jail time was imposed. CoCo was given a 12-month conditional release order.
Read the complete article….
A couple of weeks ago my article, “Is Premier Perrettet a far-right puppet, or the puppet master?“, detailed evidence on the public record showing how Dominic Perrottet’s current “Liberal” government represents the culmination of an infiltration of the NSW Liberal Party started more than 40 years ago by a Slovenian Nazi fascist propagandist by the name of Lyenko Urbanchich (wanted after WWII by Yugoslavia as a war criminal deserving the death sentence).
Lyenko successfully planted, co-opted and mentored helpers in the Ethnic Branch and Young Liberals, including David Clarke (MLC 2003-2019). Together Lyenko and Clarke also established themselves in the State Executive of the Party.
Clarke added hard-right Opus Dei Catholicism (Clarke became a “Co-operator”) to Urbanchich’s fascism. In turn they recruited several of the Perrottet brothers who had been immersed from birth in this sect. Their parents John and Ann were/are both self-acknowledged “supernumerary” members of Opus Dei). Some of the brothers, including Dom were schooled at Redfield College (overseen by Opus Dei pastors); and even through their Law/Commerce degrees at Sydney University the brothers lived in UNSW’s Warrane College, also established by Opus Dei. Dominic is now state Premier and brothers Charles and Jean Claude (at least) came through the Young Liberals are still involved in the nefarious branch stacking and other highly dubious politicking by hard-right Liberals.
Damien Tudehope was first elected to Parliament in 2015 after playing musical chairs in the seats of Baulkham Hills, Ryde, and Epping, sometimes as an apparent placeholder for Perrottet. One of his tasks on being elected for the first time was to Chair the Parliamentary Committee on the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
In 2018 Tudehope surrendered his lower house seat of Epping to Perrottet (because Perrottet wanted to shift there because it was “closer to home”), and was given a safe upper house position in return. In this repetition of musical chairs, David Clarke retired from Parliament to free the winnable space on the upper house ticket for Tudehope).
Alex Hawke is another David Clarke protege (MP from Mitchell, NSW, in the Australian Parliament 2007-present) from a strong Anglican background. Hawke’s presidency of the Young Liberals was one of the things being celebrated at Dominic Perrottet’s infamous 21st birthday party where Perrottet costumed himself as a uniformed Nazi. Hawke defected to Morrison’s Hillsong crowd around 2009 and is now considered to be a traitor by the Opus Dei religiofascists. The resulting Hillsong vs Opus Dei holy war for control of the NSW Liberal Party and government continues until today.
Do you want to be governed by these kinds of people and their ideals?
Today’s Saturday Paper’ also features “A brief history of Liberal Party scandals“. This outlines the incredibly long list of voluntary and forced resignations of Liberal premiers(!) and other politicians driven by ICAC investigations. “By sheer number of resignations, the NSW Coalition government goes to next weekend’s election as one of the most scandal prone in history.”
However, even this isn’t the whole story of Coalition government. The corrupt Liberal/Coalition government followed a scandalous Labor government: and then, there is the extensive “‘Fraud, money laundering’: Inside the Hillsong papers“, where a cache of leaked financial documents appears to document staggering misconduct and outrageous spending by leaders of the ‘church’ backing Scott Morrison’s motley crew.
The big issue here is that political parties who impose party discipline on elected members almost unavoidably end up reflecting party dogma and beliefs rather than working towards considered solutions to real-world problems. Where one party has a majority to govern in its own right, this makes it easy for leaders controlling the dogma and belief to become quite authoritarian and autocratic.
In states where unelected party apparatchiks and organizers (‘storm troopers’) beholden to a charismatic leader can gain control over nominations to safe seats (e.g., like in NSW), such thugs can control who can be elected, and continue controlling them after they are elected. Depending on the ‘Leader’s’ motivations and sanity, this control can easily lead to authoritarianism and outright despotism. Given that most charismatic leaders are psychopathic narcissists lusting for power, dictatorship is the common outcome. Basically this is how Adolf Hitler took over Germany, Vladimir Lenin took over the Russian Revolution, Vladimir Putin took over Russia (again) after Perestroika and Glasnost, Xi Jinping is taking over of China from what was a slightly democratic Communist Party; and how Donald Trump has been trying so hard to take over America by outright insurrection and rebellion.
In Australia our democracy is still strong enough to block and remove potentially fascist leaders and their political followers from our governments and political parties. We do this by ensuring that no one party has enough parliamentarians to govern in its own right. Both Liberal and Labor need to be downsized to the point that the balance of power is held by community independents genuinely working to represent the communities that have elected them rather than by sheepish puppets of a major party controlled by a charismatic leader supported by a cadre of thugs.
Where party MPs in ‘Safe seats’ can count on being reelected by ‘rusted on’ members of the Party they have no motivation to do anything for their electorates. Their positions are not risked if they work to force party dogma down everyone’s throats. Only where the seat is genuinely marginal do incumbents pay much attention to what their electorates actually want.
Only if you vote for someone else to actually win the seat (e.g., a community independent) can you count on replacing the party puppet with someone committed to listen to your needs and wants.
In the following election, if you still want to vote for your old party, you are far more likely to be presented with someone who knows that they will have to work for you – rather than the party leader – if they want to be elected, and then stay in office.
Vote Climate One is driven by the ever-increasing flood of solid scientific evidence that humans are totally altering our planet’s atmosphere and ecosystems in ways that is triggering a global emergency that will lead to planet-wide economic and ecological collapses and our possible/probable extinction over the next century or so. Some of the rapidly growing evidence for this is documented in our Climate Sentinel News. Failed states, dying coral reefs, and towns that remain unrepaired following climate disasters show these collapses are already beginning….
“We need to treat the climate emergency as a global war we are on track to lose unless we can focus our efforts on the only task that matters — reversing global warming. If we fail here no other tasks matter — our species will soon end up extinct no matter how we arrange the deck chairs on the burning ship.”
For this reason Vote Climate One is working to encourage and help voters replace dud and corrupt parliamentarians (who ignore our daily realities to serve their own greed and the desires of their leaders and special interest puppet masters) by electing others who place the evidence-based needs of their local communities first. These needs may range from working to bring climate change under control, to the often related issues of emergency management, water, transport infrastructure, telecommunications, better health services, or even just integrity in government.
Our Traffic Light Voting System seeks to assess every candidate in every electorate of your state as to how they are likely to respond effectively to the climate emergency — or your local needs…. We have only given our green-light ranking to candidates where we have found good evidence that they can be trusted to work for your community rather than their own or others’ greed and special interests. We provide a lot of detail on many of these candidates so you can make up your own mind how you want to preference them.
Our Convenor, Rob Bakes, explains in his home-made video how easy it will be to use our election guide when it comes time to fill in your ballot papers.
“The protest in April 2022 saw an entire citybound lane [actually a one-lane on-ramp] shut down on the Sydney Harbour Bridge during the peak rush hour. (9News)” Wow! The evidence from this photo actually shows that traffic on 7 lanes of the Bridge is flowing normally. Perrottet’s implication in justifying the outrageous sentence, that the whole City was in gridlock, was a bare-faced lie – fake news supporting the application of autocratic power.
As noted in my many posts to Climate Sentinel News, it is becoming increasingly evident that humanity on our only planet faces near term extinction if we don’t manage to stop and reverse the global warming process we have started through our profligate burning of fossil fuels. Their emissions are preventing the Earth from radiating away excess solar energy. This imbalance between incoming and outgoing heat energy causes the world to grow warmer. Unfortunately the problem is global and can only be solved on a global scale through the cooperation of governments – which makes it unavoidably political.
The difficulty of solution is only compounded by the fact that the unimaginably rich global fossil fuel industry has been fighting for decades to disrupt and stop effective actions against global warming/climate change to protect their sources of income from the burning of fossil fuels causing the emissions. Even the supposedly most ‘democratic’ governments have been corrupted so they represent the patrons and special interests (mostly fossil fuel industry related) who support and fund major political parties. This influence is so strong that I have been deeply pessimistic that our governments would ever be able to work effectively to combat climate change and stop our progress along the runaway warming road to extinction.
However, the results of Australia’s May 21 Federal Election provide evidence that Australia has begun to transform its government into one truly representing the substantial majority of voters who want action on climate change to be prioritized above any other issue. Finally there is scope for some genuine optimism that our government(s) will actually work seriously to resolve the climate issues.
I explain my reasons for optimism in the presentation I’m launching here, “The Teal Tsunami started in Indi“, as a place holder for Part 2 of my intended 4 part series, “Emergence and proliferation of pro-climate community voices“; and what I hope is an approachable summary of the whole ‘Teal Tsunami’ project the explores the transformation..
As suggested by this post’s featured image above, the presentation explores why the “Voice for Indi” community action group emerged in the Victorian federal electorate of Indi, and how it proceeded in the 2013 election to amaze everyone by replacing the hard line Liberal Party incumbent, Sophie Mirabella, with a climate friendly ‘community independent’, Cathy McGowan.
McGowan’s 2013 win was even more amazing considering that Mirabella had held the ‘safe’ Liberal seat since 2001 (4 terms).
In the presentation I observe that Cathy’s win in Indi represents the epicenter that triggered the spreading and growing ripples of political change I am calling the Teal Tsunami that are in the process of fundamentally transforming the nature of Australian democracy.
In addition to summarizing the facts of what happened in Indi, I also try to present an approachable summary of the four part Teal Tsunami project:
The presentation is published as an hypertext in PDF format. It was drafted using MS PowerPoint and converted to Adobe’s PDF format that preserved all of the internal and external linking capabilities used in the original draft. Scrolling up or down to read the document.
For readers unfamiliar with the hypertext concept, some instructions about how to use the links in the documenet may be useful:
I’m a population and evolutionary biologist by training, and worked for the last 17½ years of my professional career as an engineering knowledge management systems analyst and designer for Tenix Defence that was for part of the time Australia’s larges defence engineering contractor, as I solved its real-world problems in knowledge management, together with a trio of remarkable PhD students and other collaborators, I began studying how it worked as a complex living system and assembling this knowledge into a theoretical understanding of knowledge-based organizational systems (publications of this work are accessible via my personal web site Evolutionary Biology of Species and Organizations – see List of Publications and Essays and Sketches.
On ‘retiring’ in 2007 I began working full-time on a study of the coevolution of humans and our technologies I summarized in a series of presentations in 2015 under the title “Human Origins, Cognitive Technologies, and Futures“. The book itself was never finished because its chilling conclusion was that no-one would be left to read the book because the damages to Earth’s climate caused by our new technologies would soon doom us to near-term mass extinction.
From around 2015 it was clear that effective political action would be needed if we were to have any hope of solving the climate emergency, and I explored several approaches. In the 1980’s when my Australian wife and I returned to Australia, she worked several years for the Liberal Party’s Victorian Secretariat including being a member of one of the Party’s policy committees and we took part in a variety of Party activities as the Fraser and Hamer governments gave way to their ‘drier’ right-wing extremists. Both of us worked for Tenix from 1990 and were far too busy for politics.
However, in 2015 when the Liberal Party was clearly the problem I joined the Greens and my wife joined the Labor Party as active members hoping to change things. Where our local branches were concerned we were both welcomed to participate in both branches, where it became clear for their various reasons that neither was going to be able to act effectively against climate change. Together with several progressive friends we then tried to establish a local Extinction Rebellion group to push for climate action until it became clear that the organization lacked the know-how for making the required political changes. Several of us (along with others) then formed Vote Climate One to see if we could facilitate electing the right people to change the existing parties from within towards effective climate action.
In following and reading the ‘news’ for our Climate Sentinel News it has become apparent that Voice for Indi has assembled and is actively propagating the necessary know-how to revolutionize our political system so that members of our local communities concerned to fight climate change are able to transform our Parliament from a ‘democracy’ of the special interests to one in which community members can actually participate in the democracy so it represents their needs and wants rather than the special interests, many of whom are not even people or citizens of the country.
Voices for Indi is already broadcasting its know-how via the Community Independents Project, but this needs to be advertised even more widely to all of Australia and the world, as I am hoping to do via this publication.
Any help my readers can offer to further circulate the work will be greatly appreciated. I am also open to any comments or suggestions readers may wish to make via this post, or other avenues.
The featured image is of Slide 23 from my presentation “The Teal Tsunami started in Indi”, introduced by this post. The diagram is a map of the flows of knowledge surrounding the emergence of Voice for Indi. This small community action group comprising 12 people determined what the citizens of the electoral district of Indi wanted from its MP in Federal Parliament. When the Voice determined that their sitting member wasn’t concerned to achieve these results, they selected, campaigned for, and elected their own candidate — replacing the 4 term incumbent candidate from the dominant Liberal Party in one of the ‘safest’ Liberal seats in the country. The map is used to explain how this was done.
I cannot refute your comments, and have to agree that you are probably correct in your beliefs. Looking at the…
I do not believe the human species possess enough intelligence and ability to build consensus to reduce the potential for…
The results of the 21 May 2022 federal election looks like the beginning of a fundamental revolution in the way politics is done in Australia. Not only has our Parliament shifted from close to a decade of domination by the conservative and reactionary Liberal and National Party Coalition to a more progressive Labor government, but the whole nature of Parliament may be changing. What has been a ‘representative’ democracy dominated by political parties primarily representing the parties’ donors and special interests, may be shifting towards a ‘participatory’ democracy based on independent parliamentarians selected by local communities, and who negotiate with, are endorsed by, and actively represent those communities. Most of the new ‘community independents’ are economically conservative like liberals (generally designated by blue), but more like the Greens in their humanitarian and environmental interests. Hence their designaton as ‘teals’.
In a series of posts I will explore the genesis of the revolution I am calling the ‘Teal Tsunami’: considering the historical circumstances of its origins; the sources, nature, and evolution of the knowledge accounting for the successful election of their candidates; and a theoretical framework for understanding the underlying dynamics of knowledge-based community action groups.
The historical extent of this tsunami so far is illustrated in the following two images showing time lines of particular lower house electorates.
The first major wave (Fig. 2) of the rising tide of the tsunami in the 2022 election just passed removed a significant fraction of then then present and future leadership of the Liberal Party from what had been some of the previously ‘safest’ seats in the Liberal heartland. As I will argue and demonstrate in the series, this success is fueled by a shared body of knowledge developed, tested, and proven by the first generation of teals Cathy McGowan, Helen Haines, Allegra Spender, and even earlier prototypical community independents, Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, and Andrew Wilkie (Figs. 1 & 2). (Note: the roles of shared knowledge and election funding facilitating this result will be detailed in subsequent Parts of this review)
The following Google Sheet details all the teal candidates (elected and otherwise) who ran for the 2022 election and whose campaign funding was assisted by seed and matching funds from the Climate200 organization. All the elected candidates are shaded in teal blue.
Fig. 3. Teal Candidates in the 21 May Election for the Australian Parliament. (Click this link to download a the full legible Google Sheet presenting the data.)
NOTES
Almost all the teals, whether elected or not, are remarkable women.
That this Teal Revolution is well and truly under way is shown by the fact that the number of climate friendly community independents sitting in Parliament more than doubled in this year’s election at the expense of the Coalition who had controlled government for some 9 years. The teal’s result combined with Labor’s win against the Liberals was a clear signal that voters generally wanted a change to move the pendulum enough to flip many marginal seats. Even given the general swing, the teals decimated leaders’ heartland seats that Labor could never have touched (and turned several more of the seats from safe to marginal).
Where the lower house of Parliament is concerned, Labor won two more seats than the required 75 to form government in its own right, while losing some votes overall (-0.7%). The Coalition was cut by 19 from 77 seats (a majority) to 58 by Liberal losses to Labor, Greens and independents. Only 4 of the remaining Liberal seats were won on first preferences (Barker, Cook – Morrison’s seat, Farrar, and Mitchel; Nationals won 2 seats by first preferences; and QLD LNP won 1. Essentially, the entire Liberal Party is now ‘marginal’. Also, with the elimination of most ‘moderate’ Liberals, Peter Dutton, probably the most hated Liberal still in Parliament, emerged as Leader of the gravely wounded Opposition. This has interesting implications for the next election! By contrast, Labor managed to win 8 seats on first preferences.
The “Cross Bench” more than doubled. The Greens only increased their total national vote by 1.6% but gained 3 new seats in Queensland’s heartland, for a total of 4. Ten of the independent candidates who were elected were assisted by Climate 200 and have promised to prioritize climate action are classified here as ‘teals’ (socially progressive but economically conservative, designated by italicized names). Six “independents” were reelected: Katter, Lambie, Wilkie, Sharkie, Steggal, Haines (4 teals are italicized) – Seven independents were newly elected: Li, Scamps, Tink, Spender, Daniel, Ryan, Chaney (6 are teals). Three more teals (Alex Dyson – WANNON Vic, Caz Heise – COWPER NSW, and Nicolette Boele – BRADFIELD NSW) finished second on first preferences where incumbents failed to gain a majority. Excepting Andrew Wilkie, an ex-intelligence officer reelected for the 5th time, all teals are mothers – several from health professions, a majority have postgraduate qualifications in their professions and are CEO’s, Directors, or Managers of significant enterprises. Mothers would be used to unruly children & cleaning toilets ! – (Labor’s Dr Anne Ali has similar qualities: PhD, Professor at Edith Cowan Uni, researching radicalization, violent extremism and counter terrorism. / mother of 2).
The present article focuses on events leading up to the 2013 Australian Federal Election, especially as it culminated in the emergence of the Voice 4 Indi community action group and their selection, endorsement, and election of one of their founding members, Cathy McGowan in NW Victorian electorate of Indi, one of the safest rural Liberal Party electorates in Australia. As will be detailed in Part 2, Cathy was reelected for two terms, and successfully passed on the community independent baton, to Helen Haines, who was also returned for a second term in this year’s election.
In many ways, McGowan was the prototypical teal. She and the evolving Voice 4 Indi group passed on their successfully tested and re-tested working knowledge to support most of the subsequently established “Voices for ..” community action groups. The body of practical knowledge covers how to involve large communities in the selection, funding, and guidance of candidates and then how to help their endorsed candidates win their elections.
Part 2 of this series will explore how this knowledge emerged in the formation of the Voice 4 Indi community action group and its candidate, Cathy McGowan’s election and reelection to Parliament.
Part 3 will then explore how the successful paradigm established by the Indi group facilitated the establishment of more ‘Voices of ….’ groups whose endorsed candidates have gone on to win several more seats in Parliament – decimating the Liberal Party ranks of present and likely future leadership. This is probably only a foretaste of a much greater revolutionary wave to come with the next federal election.
In Part 4, I will present a theoretical framework for understanding the transformative revolution the teals are making towards replacing government representing political parties’ special interests and patrons, with a ‘participatory democracy’ of government. This is where no party has a majority and government decisions require involvement and assent from ‘community independents’ reflecting the thoughtful wants of the groups they are endorsed by and represent. In the last election, several of the losing Liberals wailed that having independents in the balance of power was a recipe for chaos and catastrophe. Countering this is the fact that the Gillard Minority Government was one of the most successful governments in Australian history measured by the amount of legislation passed in a term or the number of bills passed (see Hung Parliament: Chaos vs Independent Thinking).
Time-lines of several electorates (Figs 1 & 2) highlight the growing importance of community independents in the in the changing nature of the Australian Parliament in the 21st Century. The story begins with the Liberal/National Coalition Government under PM John Howard becoming increasingly ‘dry‘, as Thatcherite economics, business and their special-interest donors were prioritized ahead of improving the lives of ordinary citizens (to say nothing of how this has been egged on by the growing power of the Murdoch media and their friends). The Sydney Morning Herald’s, 2021 Explainer, Who’s who in the Liberals’ left, right and centre factions? that to me provides evidence for a progressively growing shift in the Party from community representation to factional dogmatism.
Citizens’ concerns over the retreat from humanism and community representation in Coalition government under John Howard probably led to the 24 November 2007 election giving Labor a Parliamentary majority under Kevin Rudd.
Driving the point home that Australians were fed up with Drys and John Howard: Howard was defeated in his own seat of Bennelong by the well known and respected ABC journalist, Maxine McKew. She joined the Labor Party in 2006 after retiring from the ABC and was living with her long-time partner, Bob Hogg, National Secretary of the Labor party from 1988-93.
While in Parliament, McKew was a totally loyal follower of he Labor Party line. In retrospect, it would seem that her election was due more to the fact that she was a credible alternative to Howard for those voters tired of the dry conservatism of the Coalition, than a foretaste of a revolution to come. She lost in the 2013 Election because she offered the electorate nothing more than a rubber stamp for a chaotically under-performing Labor Government under Kevin Rudd. Bennelong was returned to the Liberals in the 21 August 2013 election through McKew’s loss to the well known tennis professional, John Alexander who presented a much milder and human brand of Liberalism than Howard had done.
Also in the years before the 2010 election, and giving a foretaste of what was to come in 2013, three already established and socially progressive politicians were elected at different times to Federal Parliament as independent MPs: Tony Windsor (10/11/2001 – 05/08/2013) and Rob Oakeshott (06/09/2008 – 05/08/213) from safe National Party regions in mid-northern NSW, and Andrew Wilkie (21/08/2010 – ) from marginal and mostly urban southern Tasmania.
Tony Windsor‘s political career began in NSW state politics, where he initially intended to run for the National Party representing Tamworth. However, he was dropped by the NP and was elected to the seat as an independent, which he held from 1991 to 2001, when he ran as an independent for the federal electorate of New England, which he held from 2001 until his retirement for health reasons in 2013. In 2016 he re-contested the seat against Barnaby Joyce, but Joyce won comfortably.
Rob Oakeshott also began his political career in NSW state politics as an NP representative in 1996. While in the NP he held several ministerial portfolios, but split from the party as an independent in 2002 over his increasing dissatisfaction with the NP’s social conservatism. Nevertheless, Rob won the 2003 state election with 70% of the primary vote, showing that the community was clearly happy with how he represented them! He retained the seat in 2010 almost as easily. In 2008 Oakeshott resigned his state seat and ran for the Federal seat of Lyne, winning around two-thirds of the primary vote, which he retained in the 2010 election. He retired before the 2013 election. In 2016 he ran for Cowper (which included part of Lyne in a redistribution), and turned the seat marginal although he did not win. He ran again, unsuccessfully, in the 2019 election.
Andrew Wilkie started his professional career as an Army officer, becoming an intelligence officer in the Office of National Assessment. In 2003, in the lead-up to the Iraq War, he resigned from the ONA because he was concerned with the humanitarian consequences of going to war and disagreed with Howard’s push to join the invasion. He stood as a Greens candidate for Bennelong, running against the PM, John Howard in the 2004 Election – achieving nearly 17% of the primary vote. In the 2007 election he stood at second on the Greens Senate ticket for Tasmania, behind Bob Brown, where the Greens failed to win the second quota required to achieve Wilkie’s election. He resigned from the Greens in 2008, citing their lack of professionalism. He then ran in 2010 as an independent in the state seat of Dennison of Hobart, where he narrowly lost; and then in the 2010 federal election for the federal seat of Dennison (same boundaries) where he narrowly won on distribution of preferences.
In a 2010 interview by the ABC, Hobart Mercury columnist Greg Barns described Wilkie’s political situation:
Mr Barns says Mr Wilkie’s public and private battles with some of the institutions he is involved with do not reflect a difficult character, but show that he is a true independent.
“I know Andrew Wilkie very well. I’ve known him now for three or four years and talked policy with him,” he said.
“He’s a deep thinker, he’s a person of great integrity, and I think people of that sort of integrity, it’s not surprising that they might move from an organisation to an organisation.
“I think that’s what that shows about Wilkie – not that he’s a difficult character, simply that he is a person of integrity and he’s finally I think found his natural home, which is to be a true independent.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20100829044014/http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/26/2994143.htm
Wilkie was reelected in each subsequent election where today he still represents the community in the Division of Clark (renamed & slightly redistributed Denison).
Despite winning a clear majority of seats in the 2007 election, over the term in Parliament Labor then failed to convince the electorate that they were any better than the Coalition.
Following Wikipedia’s summary, Rudd’s 2007 government ratified the Kyoto Protocol, offered a Parliamentary apology to the “Stolen Generation” and organized the somewhat farcical Australia 2020 Summit (of the 962 recommendations of the summit, only 9 would be adopted). In economic policy, his government re-regulated the labor market by rescinding the Howard government‘s dryish Workchoices reforms and responded to the Global Financial Crisis with a large (and successful) stimulus spending program. Rudd also dismantled the three pillars of the Howard government’s inhumane asylum seeker processing system – offshore processing, temporary protection visas, and turning back unauthorized boats at sea.
Tony Abbott replaced Malcolm Turnbull as the Liberal Party’s Leader of the Opposition in a spill on 1 December 2009. This gave him the maximum opportunity over the following years to give effect to his dogmas and represent his special interests by continuously attacking climate science and all things Labor both on the floor of Parliament and in the press.
Also, on the Labor side, Rudd’s autocratic, abrasive and chaotic leadership style, especially where the Government’s responses to climate issues were concerned, eventually led to a spill motion in the Labor Caucus. Rudd resigned before the spill vote and called for a vote on the leadership. His deputy, Julia Gillard was elected on 24 June 2010 (she received 71 votes to Rudd’s 31). She called an early Federal election for 21 August 2010. This resulted in a ‘hung’ Parliament where Labor and the Coalition each won only 72 seats – 4 short of the 76 required for a clear majority. Gillard was able to marshal pledges of support on supply from the cross-bench (3 independents and one Green) that allowed her to form a stable government. (Note that Philip Chubb’s book – available inexpensively in Kindle, Power Failure: The Inside Story of Climate Politics Under Rudd and Gillard, comprehensively explores this period in history, that will not be detailed here.)
The roles of three independents introduced above, Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, and Andrew Wilkie, in the Gillard minority government represent the first ripple of what has become the ‘teal tsunami’.
Following Labor’s win in the 2007 election under Kevin Rudd, the resulting Government was dogged by Rudd’s ego and chaotic leadership, confounded by party factionalism, culminating in movement towards a spill, leading to Rudd’s resignation on 24 June 2010 hours before the vote was scheduled (see Wikipedia). This gave Julia Gillard leadership for a period leading up to the 2010 federal election, which she called early for 21 August 2010. Labor lost several seats, and the Coalition regained several. Each side won 72 seats in the lower house, 4 short of a majority. The election and its results are detailed in Sims & Wanna (eds, – 2012), Julia 2010 — The caretaker election.
One Green (Adam Bandt) and three community independents, Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, and Andrew Wilkie pledged support for Labor. While the Coalition led by Tony Abbott was only able to obtain two pledges, allowing Labor to form a minority government.
As detailed in my Climate Sentinel News article, Hung Parliament: Chaos vs Independent Thinking, this supposedly hung Parliament, was arguably the first (most legislation passed per unit of time) or second (percentage of legislation passed) most successful Parliament in Australian history in terms of formulating and passing legislation. Led by a woman, all successful Government legislation was developed and negotiated in collaboration with the three independents and one Green — something to think about!
There are a vast number of ways large social institutions such as nations can be managed. Most people would hope that their nation is governed in ways they can guide and that will benefit them, their families and acquaintances. Basically, most of us hope our governments are ‘democratic’. There are many different versions of ‘democracy’, and many different ways citizens can be involved in democratic processes. It is beyond me to sensibly explore this diversity, but I strongly recommend reading Wikipedia’s article, Democracy, for a practical survey of the possible forms of democracy.
Australia, from its foundation as an independent country was established as a ‘representative’ democracy with a parliamentary form of government.
Whether this was intended from the outset or not, most representative democracies end up being governed by members of a small number of political parties (usually two main blocks or coalitions) that battle for overall power. In Australia since the end of WWII, this has been between an increasingly dogmatic socially conservative coalition of rural and urban interests giving priority to free markets, economic management (i.e., the Liberal/National Coalition); and a more progressive or even dogmatically socialistic Labor Party or coalition giving priority to providing a better life for unionized workers and ordinary citizens.
To me, the net effect of such party-based ‘representative’ government provides less than ideal outcomes for ordinary citizens, whichever block is in government. This is because would-be representatives of the different parties must compete within their districts to be elected. To win, a competitor must build a substantial campaign organization and expend substantial resources on marketing to win enough votes from eligible voters to be elected. In general, to have much chance of being elected, a candidate requires requires the endorsement of a major party and its support in the form of organizational skills and funding for marketing,
To get this endorsement the candidate must show a high degree of loyalty to the party line, rather than his/her electorate. Almost inevitably, the political party ends up representing what its main financial donors and special (e.g., wealthy capitalists and corporations on the ‘conservative’ side; labor unions and major employers on the ‘progressive’ side) and what they rather than what the general citizens want. Voters thus end up being treated like a market to be harvested for votes that may then be sold to the special interests.
In other words, to win a party listens to its patrons and markets the patrons’ desires to the community; rather than listening to the community and working to achieve what the community wants. Inevitably, to be supported on a continuing basis, party-sponsored MPs must follow the discipline of their parties in the same way that the parties need to follow the ‘disciplines’ demanded by their sponsors.
On the other hand, participatory democracy works to achieve a system whereby citizens have a direct role in selecting and supporting candidates, and in guiding their actions and decisions when once selected. This is much harder to achieve in that there are few if any paradigms to follow that are proven to work, or that don’t quickly degenerate to autocracy or party politics.
World history suggests that party politics is the default condition / dominant paradigm for representative democracy. As summarized below, the rise of the teals in Australia represents what I think is the beginning of a fundamental revolution or “paradigm shift” in the nature of Australian politics and Government from political party-driven “representative democracy” to what its practitioners in local community action groups (usually known as “Voices of …”) call “participatory democracy“.
The revolution is being driven by the emergence, evolution, and proliferation of a new type of self-sustaining community action group focused on achieving political representation for its members and associates. These action groups, often known as “Voices of …” the particular constituency they represent. By comparison, even though political parties are normally based on local branches to “get out the vote” for their endorsed candidates, they often have little or no effective role in candidate selection or in setting the candidate’s parliamentary agenda. The following graphic based on my own observations summarizes the differences between the two social systems.
Part 2, takes up the story with the NE Victorian electorate of Indi, where the first self-declared community independent Cathy McGowan replaced the Liberal incumbent, Sophie Mirabella in the 2013 Federal Election, as Tony Abbott’s Liberal led Coalition replaced the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government.
A flock of teal independents has landed in Parliament. Their ‘first speeches’ show why their community independent movement is so important.
This article here is an extract from a major essay I am currently writing on the origins, emergence and evolution of the ‘teal tsunami’ and the growth of the body of knowledge enabling and generated by the revolution. A preliminary version of the essay will be published in parts on Climate Sentinel News as they are finished. Discussion and commentary on them will be greatly appreciated as this will help me improve the final product to be formally published.
For several years I have been hopelessly pessimistic about the capacity of our governments to solve the existential problems the human species faces as we slide down the road to runaway global warming leading to an unsurvivable Hothouse Earth. However, after attending the Community Independents Project Convention, ‘Empowered Communities – Next Steps‘ and listening to these ladies describe their life histories and intentions going into Parliament, I am optimistic that they will help transform our government into a capable instrument for organizing appropriate responses to the dangers ahead.
The image featured in this post is from a blog by someone else who attended the CIP Convention and draws the same very optimistic conclusions I have. Begin with the video linked from the blog to share some of the excitement this transformation in bringing:
By Millie Rooney, (undated) in Australia Remade
Celebrating doing democracy differently
I’ve spent the whole weekend attending an online work-related convention and I should be feeling resentful about being trapped inside at my computer. But the crazy thing is, I’m more excited to be at my desk on a Monday morning than I have been for weeks!
I was at Empowered Communities: Next Steps, the Community Independents Convention and I’m still buzzing.
The event was an opportunity for “community campaigners, ‘voices for’ and community groups, peak bodies, community independent MPs, candidates seeking what next and all those interested in community engagement and grassroots democracy” to share their experiences and ideas, to celebrate what has been achieved and to think about the next steps.
And GOSH it was interesting! There was a full range of fascinating sessions from those in Parliament, to those who’d only just engaged in capital-P politics for the first time, to those who’ve been playing with campaign ideas for years.
I’ve tried to distill some of what I think were the most interesting lessons to come out of the convention, but first, I want to talk about the vibe…
Read the complete article….
As will be demonstrated in subsequent parts of this project, evidence from the Parliamentary performances of early teal MPs and their precursors is that once elected, they continue working for what their electorates tell them they want. Because they don’t forget or ignore their electors, they seem to keep getting reelected for as long as they want to stay in the job.
I would argue that the election of a flock of teal independents to our parliamentary lower house represents a fundamental revolution in the nature of the Australian political system (the Senate will be discussed elsewhere). The transformation is from ‘representative’ democracy mainly representing special interests, to one of ‘participatory’ democracy, where communities of voters genuinely select and guide work of their preferred representatives. The ladies embodying this transformation come from a variety of backgrounds ranging from affluent urban electorates to comparatively hard scrabble rural communities. A common factor is that most of these transformed electorates were considered to be Liberal Party heartlands. Let the teals tell you in their own words in their ‘First Speeches’ on entry to Parliament why they ran and what they are intending to do.
As you listen to these speeches, you might consider what this tells you about the Liberal Party they are demolishing…. The Labor Party is likely to be next — especially if they don’t begin to rapidly progress actions to stop and reverse global warming.
Every one of these teal independents’ speeches is worth listening to in its entirety (20-30 min each). These women as truly remarkable: Each is caring, motivated, intelligent, wise, capable and responsible — and practiced in networking, listening, negotiating and managing. Together, they represent a fundamentally transformative revolution in Australian politics.
However, to gain a flavor without spending a whole day, each of the First Speech links below starts with a point in each speech focusing on something that tells an important story about the teal tsunami or the new MP. Dot points below jump to other significant topics in each speech.
First speech not found
Valedictory 27/06/2013 28m (link includes transcript)
i.e., community independents who have specifically prioritized climate action in their Parliamentary agendas
INDI, elected 2013, returned 2016, succeeded by teal Helen Haines in 2019
MAYO, elected 2016, reelected 2018, returned 2019, and returned again in 2022
WENTWORTH, elected 20/10/2018, succeeded by Dave Sharma 2019
INDI, elected 2019, returned 2022
WARRINGA, elected 2019, returned 2022
WENTWORTH, elected 2022, replacing Dave Sharma
KOOYONG, elected 2022
GOLDSTEIN, elected 2022
MACKELLAR, elected 2022
NORTH SYDNEY, elected 2022
CURTIN, elected 2022
In one sense, all of these speeches are mundane statements of what each of these new MPs is bringing to Parliament, i.e., they should be totally boring like the shopping lists they are. But listened to in detail, they are definitely not boring to anyone like me, concerned with the future of our planet, society, and communities. These people are extraordinary, in heritage, in experience, in community involvement, and in prior achievements. There is every reason to think they will do even more in the future than they have up to this point. To hear such people talking about how they will help shape our futures is optimistically exciting…..
I can even hope that Australia’s transformation in politics will spread to other ‘democratic’ nations around the world where control is held by political parties representing special interests rather than their communities of voters such that we can work collectively to address the only issue that really matters — climate change.
Depending on how people vote, we may be headed towards a major revolution in the structure and functioning of our form of Parliamentary government.
Under 9+ years of LNP COALition government, major policies have been heavily influenced by special interest patrons and puppet masters in the fossil fuel and and development industries. As the climate emergency grows ever more stark, and the COALition offers little besides humbug, misrepresentation and blarny together with blatant lack of ethics towards solving the crisis an unprecedented number of well-established professionals and business owners/managers in local communities decided they could do better jobs as independents representing their communities than any of the political incumbents or nominees. A few of these independents are men, but most are emotionally mature and thoughtful women and mothers with practice juggling the responsibilities of managing important jobs together with preparing their children to face a seemingly dismal future.
Because many of these independents are progressive moderates, politically falling between Greens (adopting the color green) and small ‘l’ Liberals (normally adopting blue), they soon became characterized by the intermediate blue-green color ‘teal’ – henceforth termed ‘teal’ independents. According to many news reports and even incumbents, more than enough teals are running that even if only a few of them are elected in place of major party candidates, no party or currently existing COALition would be able to form government in its own right.
Today’s featured article looks at the teal phenomenon in depth, and explores just what kind of people have become teals and what has motivated them to put aside their comfortable and rewarding jobs in the community or business to run for a place in the cesspit of our current government.
As I write this and somewhat facetiously, the fact that on top of other qualifications I’ll discuss, many of the women have successfully raised (or nearly raised) families suggests they are not fazed by dealing with childishly irrational tantrums and cleaning out dirty dirty bathrooms.
In any event, if you still haven’t totally made up your mind how to vote next Saturday, read the featured article and what I write here, and think about what it might be like to have several of these capable people representing their communities in a Parliamentary balance of power. See also the caption of the Featured Image at the end of this post.
by Margaret Simons, 04/2022 in The Monthly
Independents and the balance of power: The federal election may hinge on a new crossbench of professional women in wealthy inner-city seats and a rural revolt against the Nationals.
… [A] wave of credible local figures [are] running as independent candidates in the forthcoming federal election. Nearly all of them are taking on electorates normally regarded as safe for the government. Their cumulative impact, and the prospect that some of them might just win, is one of the things that will make the coming contest different. If neither the Coalition nor Labor win in their own right, newly elected independents and those of the existing crossbench who are re-elected will decide who forms government. “Foment” might be a better word for the phenomenon than “wave”, since it is a multiple bobbing up rather than a single, connected thing. There are different issues in each electorate, and a different ecosystem surrounding each candidate.
There is a new ecology surrounding this phenomenon. It includes grassroots community groups promoting political discussions in electorates. In some cases, that is all they do, but other groups actively seek out and endorse independent candidates. Hybrid political organisations are springing up as part of this ecology. There are groups such as Climate 200, founded and convened by entrepreneur and climate philanthropist Simon Holmes à Court, which is raising money and funding carefully picked “values aligned” candidates. Climate 200 has what might be described as nascent policies – on climate change, government integrity and women’s rights – but insists it is not, and will not become, a political party. Meanwhile, candidates in Tasmania have founded the Local Party, which is running candidates but has no policies, instead existing to promote participatory democracy.
So what’s going on? Is this a transitory thing born of particular circumstances, or is it a permanent change to Australian politics? And if the latter, what does it mean for the way we are governed? Is it a good thing, or a harbinger of instability?
Read the complete article – long but very thoughtful….
In this article I want to share some thoughts about this quandary from my studies of the electoral landscape as Editor of Climate Sentinel News. I am not a political scientist. My bias here comes from a lifetime study of evolution and change: of life as a whole, of human culture from our primate ancestry, and of the growth and evolution of knowledge and wisdom in human organizations. If you are an ‘undecided’ voter, how I answer the ‘how to vote’ quandary can be expressed in one short paragraph:
Where you have a choice between an established and known political devil versus a politically untested but demonstrably rational thinker and doer from your own community, which candidate will create the most chaos when faced with a growing emergency?
Which candidate will be more likely to help solve problems not precisely covered in party dogma?
However, before I begin my spiel, for an ‘op ed’ report on what I will have to say about the teals, I suggest you see consider how Sky News reports on a threatened Liberal candidate supported by the ‘special interests’ including Sky News’s own parent organization Murdoch Press. This “news” report clearly demonstrates how the COALition and their supporters are responding to the threats.
● Tyrone Clarke, 09/05/2022 in Sky News: Liberal MP Tim Wilson says Climate 200-backed independents are trying to ‘sneak Labor into government’ [also watch the embedded videos].
Contrast this with a more pro-teal article
● Amy Nethery, 03/05/2022, in The Conversation – Why teal independents are seeking Liberal voters and spooking Liberal MPs
Successful progressive independents are not unknown in recent Australian Parliaments, and have even played important roles in minority governments:
● Frank Bongiorno & David Lee, 22/04/2022 in the Conversation: Could the 2022 election result in a hung parliament? History shows Australians have nothing to fear from it.
Whatever the case, it is entirely possible a hung parliament might provide the circuit-breaker for a parliament that needs to grapple with much needed national reforms.
Nick Evershed, 05/05/2022 in The Guardian: Will a hung parliament lead to ‘chaos’? What a Gillard v Morrison comparison reveals
Using records published by the parliament of Australia, it’s possible to see a summary of the number of bills introduced by the government and how many were passed by both houses. This excludes private member’s and senator’s bills. You can read more details about the methods below.
The data shows that despite having to negotiate with independents to pass legislation through the House of Representatives, Julia Gillard’s government has the second-highest percentage of passed legislation.
…
Lowest on the list are the Abbott, Turnbull-Morrison and Rudd governments – all of which involved governments having to make deals with Senates described as “hostile“ and “feral”.
The 2019 Morrison government has had notable struggles passing its own legislation, with the voter identification legislation lacking support, and its religious discrimination bill failing to move through the Senate. Another key policy, legislation to establish a federal anti-corruption body, was not introduced at all, with Morrison blaming a lack of support for the government’s preferred approach.
Gillard’s government also scores higher than Morrison’s when looking at the overall rate of legislation passed a day, an index I’ve previously described as “productivity in parliament”.
…
Last month Frydenberg warned in a media conference this was not the time to take a chance on “the chaos of a hung parliament”.
Similarly, when asked during an interview on Tuesday whether he would negotiate with independents, Morrison said he would not.
“This is a real question for the people who are voting at this election,” he told 3AW. “Voting for the independents is a vote for chaos.”
It should be noted that both of the above analyses do not count the number of bills lost to failed negotiations prior to the introduction of legislation.
However, in the context of minority governments, or governments that have a minority in the upper house, these indexes may give us an indication of which governments were better and worse in their negotiations with crossbenchers or the opposition.
Read the complete article….
See also ● Matthew Liddy, 08/09/2010 in ABC News: Labor’s minority government explained.
Julia Gillard’s government never had a majority in either the house or senate during its life time, but in terms of legislation passed during its lifetime it was the second most successful government in Australian history! It depended on all Labor members present and agreeing, plus ‘alliance’ agreements with the Green’s Adam Bandt, and three greenish independents: Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor, and Andrew Wilkie. Wilkie was an intelligence officer in the Office of National Assessments who resigned because of his disagreement with the Government of the day’s joining the Iraq invasion. He is still in office as an independent today! Oakeshott and Windsor both represented rural NSW. Oakeshott was a National Party representative until he resigned to become an independent, and Windsor and a long-time independent for his areas in both NSW and Federal Parliaments. (see ● Sally Warhaft, Tony Windsor & Rob Oakeshott, 14/04/2015 in The Wheeler Centre – Fifth Estate: Independents Day: Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott). This year both Windsor and Oakeshott are key advisors to ‘Voices’ groups.
According to Vote Climate One’s Voting Guide approximately 100 of the than 1203 registered candidates for the lower house are ‘independents’ (i.e., don’t belong to any specified group or party), and of these approximately 30 by my count have been ranked as green-light for first preferences.
The numbers are a bit fuzzy, but most of these have been promoted by various electorate-based voices groups and/or part funded by Climate 200 as ‘teals’. None of us agree wholly agree on our first-preferences lists. Also, even within Vote Climate One there a few candidates we haven’t given the green light to, but that one of the other organizations would support for a first preference. In any event, the fact that there are 20-30 independents (+ more Greens, + a few other green minor parties running that may also be electable) is suggests we may see a totally new kind of government in less than a week!
As noted previously, around 90% of these green light independents are women, the majority of whom are also mothers of growing families with teenage children.
The general processional competence of these independents is also quite remarkable: 6 have medical or other doctoral qualifications and practical experience.
All these women are products of and still are (or are again – after international experiences or training) associated with their local communities. All are clearly self-motivated thinkers and doers with years of experience working in the community to make life better for their communities. All have considered what the climate crisis means for their families and what the existing politicians are (not) doing to solve the crisis. Accepting that this is the only thing that really matters of their families are to have future – they have put their successful careers aside to run for Parliament, where they may actually be able to apply their skills to making government work to solve problems.
If you are still undecided who to vote for between teals, Greens, Greenish parties, and spin merchants of the fossil fuel industry trying to convince you that these ladies and their teal friends are evil lefty conspirators belonging to a secret political party funded by a hidden patron, a lot of their humbug and bull dust is built around two names: “Voices” and “Climate200”.
Basically, “Voices of …” are emergent and politically unaffiliated groups of people in local communities gathering around kitchen tables to discuss their concerns about the future and what our politicians are not doing about it – especially in terms of the climate emergency, sexism and sexual harassment, and the growing lack of ethics in government. Thanks to the model provided by the independent Kathy McGowan in Indi (Victoria) and perfected by her successor in Indi, Helen Haines and Kerryn Phelps (Wentworth – by election following Turnbull resignation) and Zali Steggall (Warringah – defeating ex PM Tony Abbott), many of the new flock of teals emerged from voices groups in several more ‘safe’ electorates held by the COALition.
Incidentally my colleagues and I published several academic papers on how such community organizations emerge and manage their growth and community actions:
The emergence of Voices groups would seem to fit this model very well – especially where the use of social networking technology is concerned.
Royce Millar, 06/05/2022 in the Age
A secret party? Immoral? Explaining who the ‘teal’ independents really are
The independents, their backers and local supporters do, however, share resources and strategies across seats, not unlike an embryonic party – co-operation that has been encouraged by trailblazing former independent MP turned teal mentor, Cathy McGowan.
The teal movement started more than a decade ago with the founding of the Voices of Indi, a community organisation that helped McGowan take the Liberal-held Victorian seat of Indi in 2013 from its incumbent, Sophie Mirabella. This inspired others such as Zali Steggall, who successfully challenged former prime minister Tony Abbott for the Sydney seat of Warringah in 2019.
McGowan describes the current independent phenomenon as a movement. “There is definitely a thread there,” she says. “Community engagement, quality candidates and effective campaigns.”
As they argue that the teal movement is an undeclared party, their Liberal detractors point out that they also share policy priorities of climate, government integrity and gender equality – especially in wealthier urban electorates.
The urban independents insist this is simply because such issues are the high-order concerns in their communities, and one which the sitting conservative MPs are not adequately addressing. McGowan notes that in rural seats such as Indi, water, infrastructure, health and social services are more important.
In keeping with the Indi model, Voices groups have emerged wherever communities are frustrated enough to organise. Typically, Voices groups withdraw after choosing a candidate and a separate campaign group is formed. In reality, the two often overlap.
University of Sydney political scientist Anika Gauja says the allegation that the independents are a party makes no sense because their very point is that they are the antithesis of the major parties – top-down organisations in which members have to toe the line.
“The teal independents”, on the other hand, “have been backed by grassroots organisations that have chosen them”.
Read the complete article….
The second thing threatened COALition members are terrified by is that some of the teals are outspending them on campaign advertising. As noted in the article below, Jason Falinski claims that there is something “immoral” about the amount of money available to teals – completely ignoring the fact that huge amounts of untraceable funds flow into the COALitions coffers for every election.
Actually it is well publicized that the very wealthy Simon Holmes a’Court has put millions of dollars of his own money in play to draw matching funds from community sources. How and why he has done this publicized on the Climate200 web site as well as who the large donors are and the amounts donated – totaling around 1,400,000 plus a similar amount from Holmes a’Court himself. See also a summary of Holmes a’Court’s National Press Club talk on 16/02/2022 in F&P (Fundraising & Philanthropy), published 01/03/2022: David and Goliath – the Realities of Political Fundraising, where he compares what he is doing and his reasons compared to what the established political parties are doing.
Catherine Murphy’s Guardian article here, gives her take on what the COALition is screaming about.
● Katherine Murphy, 23/04/2022 in the Guardian: Coalition scrimps on MPs as Climate 200-backed independents outspend them in key seats.
Katherine Murphy, 23/04/2022 in the Guardian
Coalition scrimps on MPs as Climate 200-backed independents outspend them in key seats
… The Liberal MP Jason Falinski, who is being challenged in his northern beaches seat of Mackellar by Climate 200-backed Sophie Scamps, said the amount being spent by independents was “immoral”.
It is expected that Scamps will spend more than $1m trying to win the seat, with a combination of traditional and digital advertising.
Falinski suggested that the independents could instead be directing their financial resources to charity, giving the example of much-needed emergency accommodation for women fleeing domestic violence as one worthy cause.
“I just think it is an immoral use of money; we have real problems in the world and for these guys to be spending $2m against members of parliament, when, according to them, they agree with their member profiles, is just immoral.
“They agree with us on climate, they agree with us on equity for women, and they agree with us on integrity, but instead of helping us they are trying to knock us off.”
Scamps suggested Falinski was “plucking figures from out of the sky or from the depths of social media rumour mills”.
“Our campaign began two years ago with conversations at kitchen tables across the electorate to listen to the concerns of people who had been taken for granted for too long,” she said.
“We are immensely proud and humbled by the way it has grown into a campaign supported by over 900 eager volunteers including some who have left their jobs to volunteer full-time on the campaign, as well as 640 donors who have collectively donated $565,644 to date.
“Additionally, Climate 200 is matching those community donations to help level the playing field against the resources and advantages held by the major parties.”
Read the complete article….
You may also be interested to read ● RMIT FactLab, 12/05/2022: Online misinformation wars: the Goldstein electorate, where copious examples are given of the political blather and humbug posted on social media re the contest between Tim Wilson and Zoe Daniel.
This is the last major component of the bull dust, blather, misinformation and overall humbugging spewed by COALition members in fear of losing their once ‘safe’ seats to the teal tsunami. The next three articles cover this issue off quite well:
● Michelle Grattan, 20/04/2022 in the Guardian: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Andrew Wilkie invites independent candidates to call him for a chat about approaching a hung parliament
● Christopher Knaus, 12/05/2022 in The Guardian: What happens if there is a hung parliament: how would independents approach talks and what is non-negotiable?
● Michelle Grattan, 17/04/2013 in The Guardian’s View from the Hill: Looking Back on the Hung Parliament
Oakeshott says that the great lesson for him out of this parliament has been that “bipartisanship is the best and politically the only way to achieve long-standing reform”.
He admits that he’s had disproportionate power. “Because others stayed true to their party first, they’ve handed me more influence than any one MP should have”, he says, adding, “If they are going to hand it to me, I’ll take it and use it – and I have”.
From the article….
Think about this: Teals are practiced rational thinkers and doers. They understand science and are concerned enough about the futures of their families in a world being progressively heated by the continuing profligate burning of fossil fuels, and the integrity and ethics of a government continuing to promote the fossil fuel industry. Their ideas and ideals have driven them to set aside highly rewarding careers to run for Parliament where they might be able to actually fix things. Then there are the Greens Party nominees who are wedded to these ideal as a matter of party policy as well as (normally) by personal belief. And finally there are nominees of a few other minor parties also claiming to support climate action as a matter of policy.
Vote Climate One ranks all of the people fitting these categories as green light candidates that should be given your top preferences. We do not tell you how to rank such candidates in your electorate, but only that all green-light candidates should be numbered before numbering any of the red or orange light candidates.
Parties supporting the fossil fuel industries or other carbon emitting activities and/or lacking evidence of major activities to work towards zero emissions are marked with red lights. These should be numbered last.
Orange light candidates are those that have weak climate credentials theemselves or else are nominees of parties such as the Labor Party that are both relatively weak on climate and still beholden to support fossil fuel interests, but are potentially willing to support more effective actions in a green colored alliance.
A final thought: Teal independents are driven by ideals, thoughts and ethics; party members are driven by ideologies, beliefs and historical decisions;) populists and their believer followers are driving by narcissism, greed and hate (e.g., Clive Palmers United Australia Party, Pauleen Hanson’s One Nation Party and or other faith & humbug micro parties).
Who is most likely to solve the climate crisis to avoid the existential risk of runaway global warming?
Featured Image: Hung parliaments can provide very effective government. Julia Gillard’s ‘hung’ government was the second most successful government in Australia’s history, based on the objective measurements of the proportion of bills passed, and absolute most successful based on the number of bills passed per parliamentary sitting days. This was in the face of incredibly vicious misogyny bulling of PM Gillard by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, not helped by the poorly united and faction ridden Labor Party / Source: Nick Evershed, 05/05/2022 in the Guardian.
Today in the Nine-Newspapers Fred Chaney says why he can no longer support the Liberals“
[T]he party I served has lost its way. Members are no longer able to successfully execute what the electorate demands and it is now in the sad position of being held hostage by its extremes and those of its Coalition partner.
Fred Chaney is actively supporting his Niece, Kate Chaney, a teal independent who seems to have a good chance to convince thinking Liberal voters in WA’s ‘safest’ Liberal seat that action to deal with the global climate emergency, social responsibility and ethics are much more important than keeping the LNP COALition puppets representing the interests of fossil fuel special interests in power in Canberra.
Like many other ‘teals’ Kate is a self-motivated thinker and doer concerned about the harsh and scary reality we face today rather than a believer in party political dogma about an endless future of business as usual (especially for the parties’ patrons in the fossil fuel industry). Seeing the dangers ahead being ignored by the party faithful, she has given up her normal occupations to run for Parliament. Her declaration of independence from the established parties seems to stand for all the teals I have studied to now:
We can do much better on climate action and integrity in Federal politics. Decarbonisation will offer significant opportunities in renewables and failure to act now will cost us. We need strong targets, certainty and aligned incentives to ensure that we are well-placed to catch that wave. This isn’t ideology. It is sound economic management. [my emphasis]
…
Over the years, I have voted for a range of parties but no party represents me. I grew up handing out how-to-vote cards for the Liberal party. I believe in the Liberal party my grandfather and uncle served in – one of opportunity, foresight, freedom and community. I don’t see that party any more.
I thought change could be effected through the Labor Party but when I attended a party event, I was turned off by the tribalism and focus on politics over policy. Until very recently, it was unthinkable that community independent candidates had a real chance of election – a real chance to make a difference, to change the way we do politics.
The rise of grassroots community independent organisations around the country, including here in Curtin, demonstrates that there is now a real opportunity to drive this change. The complex issues we face no longer fall into left and right. Running as an Independent in the current climate allows me to represent the views of the Curtin electorate and stay true to my conscience.
…
The wave of economically sensible, socially progressive independents who believe in stronger climate action sends a strong message to the major parties that they can’t take moderates for granted. There are Independent candidates like this with a real chance of success across the country, and we may just hold the balance of power. [my emphasis]
About Kate – from her campaign web site.
The Age/Story Mirror article summarizes the field in Curtain and explains why it should be considered ultra-marginal:
by Richard, 27/04/2022 in Story Mirror
Why WA’s safest Liberal seat feels like an ultra-marginal tussle
The presence of local weather and transparency-focused unbiased Kate Chaney might see first-term Liberal member Celia Hammond unseated, which has sparked an election marketing campaign resembling one thing extra akin to ultra-marginal seat tussles and has thrown a spanner within the works for the Liberals’ broader West Australian marketing campaign.
It’s no surprise, with latest polls suggesting a neck-and-neck race between the 2 ladies. Dropping Curtin would place a large boulder within the Liberals’ path again to authorities, in line with Notre Dame Politics and Worldwide Relations professor Martin Drum.
“I feel each type of unbiased race is a bit completely different, however each seat [the Liberals] lose makes it more durable for them to type a majority authorities, ”he says.
Curtin has at all times been a Liberal seat – apart from a hiccup in 1996 when incumbent Liberal Allan Rocher fell out along with his occasion and ran efficiently as an unbiased. Underneath former overseas affairs minister and one-time prime minister hopeful Julie Bishop’s rein from 1998 to 2019, she step by step elevated the margin to 20.7 per cent on the 2016 election.
Read the complete article….
For a community of mostly self-made and thoughtful people that built Western Australia, Kate Chaney is the kind of thoughtful, motivated and powerful independent person to represent your interests in Parliament. Personally, I think there are more of these kinds of people in Curtin than there of the ‘rusted on’ sleepwalkers blinded by clouds of COALition bulldust who would vote to keep our current fossil fuel industry puppet government in power.
Even though the WA economy is built on and around the extractive industries. There is no economy if society collapses under the growing weight of climate disasters and catastrophes as the world continues to warm. Action on climate change can save the economy – especially if it encourages the development of ‘renewable’ industries. On the other hand, social collapse will destroy whatever economy there is.
The climate emergency is very definitely a major issue on the ballot in Curtin, and it is likely that no party will achieve a majority in its own right.
If voters consider the evidence and THINK before they vote, I have little doubt that the green light candidates will gain the majority of first preferences amongst themselves. Whether one of them will win the seat in the end depends on how voters manage their remaining preferences. How the different players will guide preferences may be critical in deciding the election. Most importantly, the Greens have already recommended that Greens voters give their second preference to Kate Chaney rather than any of the established parties. Although the Labor candidate, Yannick Spencer is much less well know, he has also stressed the importance of climate, and may well preference Kate.
Vote Climate One’s Traffic Light Voting System and its voting guides are designed to help people rank their preferences in such a way that if a green light candidate is given the first preference, and doesn’t win, the vote will still go to another green light climate friendly candidate as long as any remain in the running. Only if there are no more green or orange light candidates alive can the vote be given to a red light candidate.
Vote Climate One is also providing downloadable blank ballot formats so preferences can be decided at home, so the choices can easily be transferred to the formal ballot paper in the voting booth. Check the bottom of the your electorate’s page in the voting guide. (If you don’t find it now, check again in a couple of days as they are being progressively loaded into our system.)
See Climate Sentinel News‘s Corrupt leaders, casual media, gullible believers for a different and sometimes humorous take on how use preferential voting to make the kind of humongous political transition we need to make to cleanse the Parliamentary stable of its many years accumulation of bulldust.
In any event, the IPCC tells us that this election is probably our last chance to change our current puppet government to one that will act in our behalf to resolve or at least mitigate the accelerating climate crisis.
It seems to have taken the clear thinking of Greta Thunberg, a 16 year-old girl who concluded school was pointless as long as humans continued their blind ‘business as usual’ rush towards extinction.
In other words, wake up! smell the smoke! see the grimly frightful reality, and fight the fire that is burning up our only planet so we can give our offspring a hopeful future. This is the only issue that matters. Even the IPCC’s hyperconservative Sixth Assessment Report that looks at climate change’s global and regional impacts on ecosystems, biodiversity, and human communities makes it clear we are headed for an existential climate catastrophe if we don’t stop the warming process.
Scott Morrison and his troop of wooden-headed puppets are doing essentially nothing to organize effective action against the warming. In fact all they doing is rearranging the furniture in the burning house to be incinerated along with anything and everyone we may care about.
In Greta’s words, “even a small child can understand [this]”. Like Georgia Steele, people hope for their children’s futures. Greta doesn’t want your hopium. She wants you to rationally panic enough to wake up, pay attention to reality, and fight the fire…. so our offspring can have some hope for their future.
Featured Image Boundaries of the Curtin Electorate from Vote Climate One’s Curtin Electorate page. Click candidate names for more details.
Stanford University engineers have added thermoelectric generation to solar panels enabling them to harvest heat energy radiating to space
by Sarah Roach, 7/4/2022 in Protocol
Stanford engineers make solar panels work at night: Meet the thermoelectric generator, what could be solar panels’ newest friend.
The Stanford team used a device known as a thermoelectric generator. As the name hints, the device generates electricity from difference in temperature between the ambient air and solar cells. The device basically harvests energy that passes between solar panels back into space at night, a process known as radiative cooling. (That process isn’t limited to solar panels, either.)
It has a particularly strong effect on clear nights, which is when the researchers found they were able to generate the most power. The new system can offer a “continuous renewable power source” throughout both the day and nighttime and could cost less to maintain over the long run compared to battery storage, according to the new paper published in Applied Physics Letters.
Read the complete article….
Featured image: A thermoelectric circuit composed of materials of different Seebeck coefficient (p-doped and n-doped semiconductors), configured as a thermoelectric generator. / Ken Brazier – self-made, based on w:Image:ThermoelectricPowerGen.jpg by CM Cullen (which is GFDL 1.2 and CC-by 2.5 licensed) via Wikimedia
Heat pumps use physical laws of thermodynamics to move large amounts of thermal energy for heating and cooling with little energy expenditure.
by Emiliano Bellini, 08/04/2020 in PV Magazine
Residential heat pump produces water up to 75 C: Scientists in Spain have developed a new heat pump that can produce 6.49 kWh of heat for each kilowatt-hour of power it consumes. The device could generate hot water at a temperature of up to 75 C.
Researchers from the Polytechnic University of Valencia in Spain and heating specialist Saunier Duval, a unit of Germany-based Vaillant Group, have developed a new residential heat pump based on natural refrigerants.
The device uses propane as a refrigerant, which allows for high energy efficiency, while keeping carbon dioxide emissions to almost zero.
“Our heat pump can heat homes completely environmentally friendly, without emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In addition, its high-efficiency energy allows it to be classified as renewable energy, by pumping energy from the environment”, said researcher José Gonzalvez.
Read the complete article….
Featured image: Diagram of a phase change heat pump. Legend: 1. Condenser coil (hot side heat exchanger, gas cools and liquifies); 2 Metering Device (liquid expands and cools), 3. Evaporator coil (cold side heat exchanger, liquid vaporizes and heats up), 4. Compressor (gas is compressed and heats up). Red = Gas at high pressure and very high temperature, Pink = Liquid at high pressure and high temperature, Blue = Liquid at low pressure and very low temperature, Light Blue = Gas at low pressure and low temperature. Note: the arrows in the diagram are meant to indicate the flow of air and coolant; they do not correspond to heat flow, which in the system depicted is (generally) from right to left. / Author: Ilmari Karonen, own work / Licensing: Public Domain.
Useful article, thank you. Top article, very helpful.