Will Richard Di Natale be elected to the Senate?

The Greens polled a record 10.1% of the primary vote in Victoria, but preferences are required to make up the required quota of 14.3%.

Counting of Senate votes is still in progress, and Richard is still very much in the race against the 3rd Liberal Senate candidate Scott Ryan. Scott believes the Howard Government had the right policies on climate change, so let us hope that Richard wins.

Some factors are:

• Postal votes tend to favour the Liberals
  
• Absentee votes ("the bushwalker vote") tend to favour the Greens
• Below the line votes are likely to favour the Greens and Labor

You can help boost Richard's chances by scrutineering - which means checking Senate votes as they are assessed and counted in electorate offices - this is still in progress.

If you can help with scrutineering of senate votes for Kooyong (2 hour blocks during the day), please contact Jenny on 0415 821 554

The address is Level 2, 695 Burke Road Camberwell (just south of the Junction).

You don't have to be an expert. Things to look for include:

• All informal votes are sent to Hawthorn for double checking and data entry
• Votes go into the right piles
• Numbers of votes in a batch that go to various parties

Information on statewide scrutineering is available here.

Please contact me via email or mobile if you need further information.

Kooyong results - Petro wins again and green vote holds well

I would like to thank the many people who helped out during the Kooyong campaign and on election day. Without you, the campaign would not have been so successful.

I would also like to thank the 7,457 people in Kooyong who voted Green.

Jenny Henty at Camberwell High school booth

I offer my congratulations to Petro Georgiou for his win again for the seat of Kooyong. I think Petro's strong stand on upholding the rule of law, human rights and fair treatment of asylum seekers and on the environment have stood him in good stead. In doing so I think Petro has demonstrated the only possible successful direction for the Liberal party.

Petro ran an honest and fair campaign in Kooyong, unlike many other electorates where the Liberals used negative fear tactics and distorted the truth. Petro was rewarded with virtually no swing against him, compared to an average national swing against the Coalition of -4.5%.

Petro Georgiou at Gennozanno College booth

I would also like to congratulate Kevin Rudd and the Labor party for winning the election and running a good campaign. I look forward to some real action on climate change in the very near future, starting with the next round of United Nations international negotiations in Bali in December.

Here are the results as of midday Sunday 25 November.

Kooyong:

• HARVEY, Ken (Labor) 19,248 votes 30.94% +1.93 swing
• GEORGIOU, Petro (Liberal) 33,987 votes 54.63% -0.03 swing
• CAMPBELL, Peter (Greens) 7,188 votes 11.55% -0.99 swing

On these figures, the Greens primary vote dipped by about 1% while Labor's rose by about 2%. It seems that many people may have voted 1 Labor this time because they wanted a change of government, without understanding that they could also achieve this by voting 1 Green 2 Labor. Please note that this is not the final count so these figures may change a little.

Labor candidate Ken Harvey at Camberwell High School booth

National results in the House of Representatives:

• Labor(two party preferred): +6.15% swing (a record win)
  
• Liberals primary votes: 35.96% -4.51 swing
  
• Greens primary votes: 7.64% +0.45 swing
• Nationals primary votes: 5.38% -0.51 swing

The two party preferred voting system in the lower house really does favour the old parties. Even though nearly 8 out of a hundred people voted 1 Green across Australia no Greens were elected to the lower house.

Nationally, over 15 Labor seats were won on Greens preferences, including Deakin and Corangamite in Victoria, so there is a clear mandate for real action on climate change and more funding for public transport, public health and public education.

Senate results in Victoria

We are still hopeful that Richard Di Natale will be elected as the first Greens Senator for Victoria. However, even though Richard received a record 10.1% of the primary vote in Victoria, this is still short of a quota (14.3%). However analysis of preference flows indicates it will be difficult for Richard to be elected, although he is still in with a chance, even though 1 out of 10 people in Victoria voted for him in the senate. It most likely take 2 weeks before the final result is known.

Overall senate results and the balance of power

The Greens achieved two more records in the Senate:

• Senator Bob Brown received 17.7% of the senate vote in Tasmania, a swing of 4.45% and has therefore exceeded a quota on primary votes and is re-elected. Congratulations Bob!
• Kerrie Tucker received 22% of the senate vote in the ACT, a swing of 5.5%. However, a quota of 33.3% is required in the territories (which only have two senators). Kerrie is still in with a chance of securing a senate seat.
  

Other Greens results in the senate are:

• Scott Ludlum is likely to be elected to the senate in WA
• Sarah Hanson-Young is likely to be elected to the senate in South Australia.
• Unfortunately, Senator Kerry Nettle has lost her bid to get relected to the senate in NSW.

On these results, the final outcome would be a total of 37 Coalition senators and 32 Labor senators, with the balance consisting of five Greens, one Family First and one Nick Xenophon (indepedent). If this eventuates, the Greens will thus not hold the balance of power in their own right. The Coalition will be able to stitch together a blocking majority with either Fielding or Xenophon or an absolute majority with them both.

Let us hope that both Richard Di Natale and Kerrie Tucker are elected to ensure the Greens have the balance of power in the senate.

What about climate change?

Prophetic Kev 4PM signing writing in the Hawthorn sky

Alistair McCaskill (Greens candidate for the neighbouring electorate of Chisholm) has provided the following excellent summation of the challenges for getting climate change and other green issues onto the political agenda.

This was clearly Labor's election, and the result is largely a reflection of the electorate's focus on the major parties combined with a mood for change. It's easy to think of additional things we could have done (locally), but it's clear they would have had little, if any effect on the final result. In the seat of Melbourne, with a budget many times larger than ours, a much larger support base, and Adam Bandt as a very capable candidate, the swing to the Greens was only 3.6%. This is a good indication of just how hard it is to change minds.

Even with the efforts of groups such as The Big Switch, GetUp, The Climate Institute, Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and numerous local climate action groups, I don't think climate change was the influential issue that many people suggested (and I hoped) it would be.

Links

• The Day After (Poll Bludger)
• First preferences by party (AEC)
  
• Marginals collapse like sandcastles , Tim Colebatch, The Age
• Paul Keating relieved John Howard era is over , Paul Keating, Herald Sun
• Petro bucks the trend James Dowling, Progress Leader
  
  
  

Ready for the greening of Kooyong

I spent today delivering three rounds of the last lot of Greens leaflets for the campaign - better late than never. It has been a good campaign for Kooyong - we have had very encouraging feedback from many of you out there.

As Richard Di Natale said to me after the recent senate debate in Hawthorn - sharing information about Greens policies is easy - as they are the best and most balanced policies compared to the big spending pork barelling of the old parties, and their lack of real action on climate change.

A face in the crowd: Liberal, Labor and union supporters surround Prime Minister John Howard on his morning walk through Cairns. Photo: Andrew Taylor

I would like to thank all who have helped out during the campaign - your efforts are key contributions to the result we will get tomorrow.

I have been reluctant to speculate on our result for Kooyong. Many people still don't know that voting 1 Green and then 2 for another party means that if I don't get elected then their vote transfers at full value to the other party. With a mood for change about, this means that they will be tempted to vote 1 for another party, even though they want to support the Greens. Well, that would be wasted vote.

You get double value when you vote 1 Green, 2 old party.

I will be happy if our primary vote is maintained at around 13%, anything above that would be a bonus, and a huge wake up call to both Labor and the Liberals.

Remember, if there is a swing of 5% away from the Coalition then Kooyong will become a marginal seat. Vote 1 Green then choose your next preference very carefully.

Ken Harvey (Labor), Petro Georgiou (Liberal) and David Collyer (Democrats) have all run good campaigns too - I have enjoyed the opportunity to debate with them and chat with them. I think that the Kooyong campaign has been clean and fair with no dirty tricks, unlike some other seats such as Deakin and Lindsay where the negative campaigning has been quite unpleasant.

So let's see what tomorrow brings. Hopefully by tomorrow night we will know if we have Richard Di Natale as the first Greens senator for Victoria (although it may take longer for the senate result to be known), and whether we have a government that is committed to taking action on climate change.

I am tipping a Labor win by only 2 seats. Howard is an outside chance to retain government, but only by 1 seat.

This could well be the most important election of our lifetimes. Vote carefully. A Green MP for Kooyong would provide three years of dynamic action in Canberra and be be front page news.

IPCC report indicates urgent action on climate change

With a 37 degree day in Melbourne in November and the severe ongoing drought, the scientific predictions of the latest United Nations IPCC report such as intensified water security problems in southern and eastern Australia are well validated.

Projected surface temperature changes for the late 21st century (2090-2099) Source: IPCC Report 4

Finance Minister Nick Minchin stated (ABC radio AM 19/11) that Kevin Rudd "has recently become an economic conservative after a decade of being an economic vandal". Unfortunately, the Howard government has only recently become a "climate change realist" after 11 years of climate change vandalism.

Nick Minchin stated in March this year that he was still skeptical about human activity causing climate change. Mark Vaile said in October (ABC radio PM 29/10) that "there is conflicting scientific evidence on it".

The Howard government has been economic vandals by shutting Australia out of the booming world market for genuine renewable energy technology. Instead they have diverted around $500m more of our money towards subsidising risky research and development for the coal industry, which should be funding these activities on its own.

The latest IPCC report clearly states that the world is now facing a looming "abrupt or irreversible climate catastrophe that will spare no country", but it also says that many available measures combined can avoid the worst catastrophes at an estimated cost of less than 0.12% of the global economy annually until 2050.

These measures include transitioning away from coal to renewable energy and gas-fired power stations, developing hybrid cars, using more efficient electrical appliances and protecting our forests to store more carbon.

The Howard government is still basically stuck in denial about climate change while Labor is committing to little immediate action on reducing our carbon emissions. It seems that our political system is failing to address the urgency of the situation.

Voting for the Greens' strong emission reduction and energy efficiency targets is a good option, but we also need to consider how we can get climate change out of the political arena so that it can properly addressed with a bipartisan approach properly informed by science.

Links

• Environment goes from bad to worse, Marian Wilkinson and Stephanie Peatling, November 19, 2007
• Minchin denies climate change man-made , Wendy Frew Environment Reporter, March 15, 2007
• Denial industry in full cry, John Quiggin, 16 Aug 2007
• Cabinet divided over climate change: Coalition MP, Karen Barlow, ABC radio PM - Monday, 29 October , 2007 18:14:00
• Summary for Policymakers of the Synthesis Report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
• IPCC Synthesis Report: Greens respond with comprehensive climate action plan (PDF), The Greens, 19 November 2007
• A signal leaders 'cannot afford to ignore', The Age, Federal Election 2007 News, November 19, 2007
• What turned the Liberal party off climate change action? , Guy Pearse, Friday, 16 November 2007
  

You can help to turn Kooyong marginal

Senator Bob Brown and Peter Campbell, Greens candidate for Kooyong

Your help in Kooyong handing out "how to vote cards" for me on the 24 November would be greatly appreciated.

While Kooyong is a fairly safe Liberal-held seat, we can change the political landscape by making it marginal. There is even a very slim chance that the Labor candidate Dr Ken Harvey might tip out the Liberal incumbent (Petro Georgiou).

Kooyong has the 10th highest Green vote in the country, with your help we can move further up the ranks and force reaction from both the old parties.

Everyone in Kooyong can benefit from an increase in the Greens vote - if the margin the seat is held by continues to decline the seat will become "marginal" so it will benefit from the largesse that is showered on such seats during election campaigns. Voting 1 Green really does count.

You will notice that Kooyong has received no such attention this campaign. The Howard goverment takes voters in the seat for granted.

If you would like to help with the campaign, please contact me via Facebook or via this web form (which sends an email)

Regards, Peter

Greens win mock election at Canterbury Girls Secondary College

Canterbury Girls Secondary College holds a "mock election" event during the campaign of every federal election. This is an excellent opportunity for the student to hear from political candidates from a variety of parties, ask them questions, then vote on ballots similar to those used for the House of Representatives (lower house) in the upcoming federal election.



The ballots (votes) are then counted from the "voting booth" and preferences distributed. This provides hands on experience for how our prefential voting system works.

This year, I spoke as the Greens candidate for Kooyong. My "opponents" were the Petro Georgiou (MP for Kooyong), Senator Lyn Allison (Leader of the Democrats) and Barbara Norman (Labor candidate for Higgins).


A wide range of topics were covered and as usual many good questions were asked.

I was fortunate enough the win the majority of primary votes, and be declared the "winner" after preferences were distributed. Here is the primary vote percentages:

Lyn Allison	16.4
Petro Georgiou	11.3
Peter Campbell	46.8
Barbara Norman	22.4
Informal	3.1
Total	100

While this does not set a precedent for the outcome for Kooyong in the upcoming federal election, it was nonetheless pleasing to see and hear so many year 9 students with a keen interest in taking real action on climate change and many other Greens policies I spoke about.

Greens how to vote card for Kooyong

I have been getting some recent questions about Greens preferences. The first point I make is that we recommend to voters that they carefully choose where to place their second preference. Voting 1 Green sends a powerful message, and if I don't get elected then the vote flows at full value to the next preference chosen by the voter.

This is our "how to vote card" recommendation for Kooyong in this election, in the order of the ballot draw:

3. Harvey, Ken (Labor)
6. Laidler, John (Family First)
4. Georgiou, Petro (Liberal)
2. Collyer, David (Democrats)
5. Curtis, Pierre – (CEC)
1. Campbell, Peter - Greens

Remember, this is only our suggestion to you. We recommend that you choose carefully where your second and later preferences go after you vote 1 Green.

We have carefully examined the other party's policies. The Democrats have many policies that are very close to the Greens, such as emission targets for addressing climate change and mandating energy efficiency standards for example. Our how to vote card has the Democrats as number 2.

In Kooyong in the 2001 and 2004 elections we left it voters to choose whether their preference ended up with Labor or Liberal. We did this by issuing a "split ticket" how to vote card which had a "to Labor" option and a "to Liberal" option after voting 1 Green.

However, this election Labor has committed to 2050 emission reduction targets, to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, and to a 20% renewable energy target by 2020. While they are still avoiding setting 2020 emission reduction targets, we think their policies on climate change are significantly better than the Coalition. Our how to vote card has Labor as number 3.

The Liberals are taking no real action on climate change this election and are supporting nuclear power and spending excessive amounts of taxpayers money on coal research and development, rather than investing in renewables. In addition, many in the Liberal Party such as Nick Minchin and Mark Vaile are still openly skeptical about whether humans are causing climate change. However, Petro Georgiou has taken a principled stand on the treatment of asylum seekers over the term of the Howard government. The Liberals are number 4.

Family First have very poor policies on climate change and are lobbying hard to reduce the retail price of fossil fuel which will increase its use therefore our carbon emissions. They also voted against the Greens Senate motion (along with both Labor and Liberal) to set a 2 degree temperature increase as the maximum tolerable rise and use this to guide energy policy and regulation. We have therefore put Family First at number 5.

The CEC come last at number 6. They are openly skeptical about whether climate change actually exists - which is an untenable position to take in this time of decreased rainfall, rising temperatures and bushfires. Science clearly demonstrates the humans are causing climate change by excessive greenhouse gas emissions.

Please contact me via mobile 0409 417 504 or email if you have any questions about this.

Street stalls around Kooyong

We have been out in the community visiting strip shopping centres such as Balwyn, Glenferrie Road and Camberwell. We hand out the Green Times newspaper which has some excellent articles on the problems with WorkChoices, setting climate targets, how to improve public education, forest conservation and West Papua.

Many people have told me they are greatly concerned about climate change, and that the old parties are not doing enough about it.

I think it is becoming increasingly apparent that if you want real action on climate change, both in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, your best option is to vote 1 Green.

Jenny handing out the popular Green Times newspaper in Camberwell

ABC TV Difference of Opinion on climate change

I was in the studio audience of the ABC Difference of Opinion TV program on climate change on Thursday 8 November.

I was lucky enough to be able to make the statement that Australia really should ratify the Kyoto protocol and participate in good faith with international efforts to tackle climate change, then ask Guy Pearce whether we should have shorter term emission reduction targets for 2020. Guy's emphatic answer was "yes, these are essential" You can read the transcript and watch the program on the Internet here

AUDIENCE MEMBER (me): On the issue of Australia's leadership position, I have a question for Guy. If Malcolm Turnbull can lead the world on light globes by saying, let's move to the compact fluorescent light globes and the rest of the world follows California and Europe, surely we can do the same thing, by developing our clean energy and getting it 25% renewable target. And short-term energy targets in place.

GUY PEARSE: I couldn't agree more. APPLAUSE I think what we've seen is a very deliberate attempt to steer clear of the fact that really counts, and that is, that Australia' emissions are on track to rise 70% by mid century. That's the trajectory we're currently on. But, instead we're snowed with a series of press releases about how we're banning the bulb, we need 800 steps of that scale in order to cut our emissions by 60% by mid century. We hear all about our $3.5 billion climate change budget. But, you know, on day one of this election campaign, John Howard gave away 10 times as much in one tax cut, the sixth tax cut in a row. APPLAUSE What really matters is whether we're pursuing those deep cuts in emissions. Right now we're headed in exactly the opposition direction.

Links

• Should Australia ratify the Kyoto protocol and push for binding global emissions?

We need real action on climate change

It is disappointing that both Labor and Liberal party election policies on climate change announced so far do not provide any immediate action to reduce our carbon emissions.

The scientific evidence on climate change clearly indicates that immediate action is required, yet the Howard government has only committed to an emission trading scheme in 2012 after a decade of denial. No details of their proposed scheme are available yet. There is considerable risk that it may not result in any emission reductions.

The Howard Government is also promoting nuclear power as part of their solution, which will be too expensive, too late, produce toxic waste and not be renewable.

On the other hand, Labor has committed to 2050 emission reduction targets, but not too any shorter term 2020 targets that are essential for achieving the longer term ones. However, Labor’s 20% renewable energy target by 2020 is a step in the right direction.

Neither the Labor or Liberal party will commit to the essential policy goal of limiting global temperature increase to 2 degrees, yet science tells us even this temperature rise will have widespread deleterious effects on global ecosystems.

I encourage the many people in our community concerned about climate change to attend the Walk Against Warming rally on Sunday 7/11 to show their support for immediate bipartisan action to address climate change.

Setting energy efficiency targets and increasing our utilisation of renewable energy is achievable immediately, but we need the political will to do so.

Vote 1 Green for real action on climate change, rather than a load of hot air

This video succinctly explains why we really must take immediate action.




Peter Campbell
Greens candidate for Kooyong

On the campaign trail at railway stations

One of my aims in the campaign in Kooyong is to reach as many residents and provide information and get feedback on issues that matter to them.

Visiting railway stations and handing out our free Green Times newspaper is a good opportunity to do this. Public transport users are doing the right thing by not taking their cars into a the city and thereby reducing congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

The Green Times is an informative read which provides some details on our policies and approaches for this election and for the future, which the mainstream media very rarely mentions.

Hawthorn railway station

Chatham railway station

I have visited may stations in Kooyong this week. This year it is evident that many more people are catching trains and the system is now overloaded past its capacity. Currently, no federal funding is provided to the states for public tranport. However, the federal governement provides several $billion to the states for road funding, which of course encourages more road and freeway construction, which in turn encourages more people to use their cars more often.

By contrast, no new train lines have been built in Melbourne since the Glen Waverly line in 1937, and several have been decommissioned.

It is time that this inequity was addressed. Rather then $34b in tax cuts that both old parties are offering to try and win the election, the Greens say that this money should be invested in services such as public transport, which can then be matched by State funding.

This could double the funds available to greatly improve the coverage, frequency and integration of public transport. Only the Greens have this policy and commitment. Improved public transport can also enable use to reduce our carbon emissions.

Greens TV ad and the 3 parties video

Here is the new Greens TV ad. I think it is well worth a look.



Another excellent video produced by the campaign group GetUp is below. 3 Senators from 3 parties (Labor, Greens and Democrats) supporting each other in the interests of a balanced Senate:



And Who on Else Cares is an interesting site that allows you to register your concern about climate change, send a letter to your local federal MP and see who else cares about climate change is on the map too.

Disability and carers forum in Kooyong, they need a fair go

I attended a forum held in Hawthorn Town Hall by the Australian Association for Families of Children with a Disability (AAFCD). Greens Senator Rachel Siewert spoke along with Annette Ellis MP (ALP), Minister for Family & Community Services Mal Brough (Liberal Party), Senator Lynn Allison (Democrats) and Junelle Rhodes (Carers Alliance party).

It was a great opportunity to hear from people who are making huge comitments and efforts caring for disabled people, and from disabled people too. It was evident that resources and funding for both carers and disabled people are far too low.

Rachel, elected in 2004, has an enviable track record both chairing and working on numerous Senate committees. Rachel played an active role in the Disabilities CSTDA Inquiry in Feb 2007 and contributed to the recommendations in the report. Rachel also has good relationships with a range of disabilities groups and community and is co-convenor and founder of the Parliamentary Friends of People with a Disability. Rachel also has national responsibility in the Australian Greens for the disabilities portfolio.

Rachel stated in answer to a question that the Greens recognise that funding for people living with a disability and their carers is urgently needed and that neither the Government nor the ALP would commit to increasing funding to the level needed. Yet both are offering a massive $34 billion tax package - tax cuts which could fund community services and resources.

Michael Gourlay, the CEO of AAFCD joked that when he heard about the $34 billion tax cuts he thought about calling John Howard and asking for about $4 billion.

Unfortunately the Commonwealth and the States (and Territories) process (CSTDA) that is supposed to be managing the framework and funding for people with disabilities has been has been marred by a continuing blame-game between the Commonwealth and the States (and Territories).

In this very meeting, Mal Brough attempted to shift the blame for lack of progress on provision of much-needed disabilities services onto the States.

On the other side, Labor hasn’t even bothered releasing a policy yet. It’s clear that carers and the disabled are being ignored by both major parties, and are being forced into a great mobilisation towards democracy.

The Australian Greens continue to:

• advocate for giving people living with a disability, their families and carers a greater opportunity to actively participate in policy development, service planning and delivery.
• support whole of life planning covering activities and services that should be accessible to children, adolescents and adults with a disability
• increasing funding for supporting people with a disability and their carers
• stopping the "race to the bottom" where only the person with the worst case wins funding

You can read Rachel's full report on the forum on the Greensblog here.

More kindergarten places are needed for Kooyong

The local Progress Leader newspaper (31/10 edition) covers of concerns about funding for the Manresa kindergarten and increased childcare costs in Boroondara.

I am hearing from many people in the Kooyong electorate that there is a real shortage of local kindergarten places. Many parents are forced to place their children at kindergartens some distance from where they live which is inconvenient and often requires car transport. I share this problem as I have a young daughter who may well miss out on a place at the local kinder.

Many couples are now starting families or have moved into the Kooyong electorate with children. The planning and provision of kindergarten services has just not kept up with this increased demand. In addition, successive interest rate rises have put more pressure on families with mortgages covering childcare costs.

Rather than dishing out $34b tax cuts during the election, I support federal subsidies for child care places and increased federal funding for more kindergarten places in Kooyong, and for the continued operation of the Manresa and other local kindergartens.

Links

• Kinder makes last attempt at funding
• Struggle over childcare costs

Australia's climate change response, Guy Pearce

Guy Pearce spoke on 24 October at the Melbourne Town Hall on why the Australian government has failed to take real action to reduce our greenhouse pollution. Find out the interesting details from someone who's been on the inside. I took a video and have put it on YouTube in the following segments (videos are restricted to 10 minutes length).

Guy is on a speaking tour around Australia that has been organised and promoted by Greenpeace. His talk covers information that is included in his recent book High and Dry

Guy's talk gives some very good reasons why we need a change of government in Australia and Greens in the Senate to take real action on climate change.

Part 1: Guy's journey and forgotten Liberal Party history

Part 2: I love a burnt country?

Part 3: Behind Australia's world leading spin

Part 4: Carbon capture and the greenhouse mafia

Part 5: Denial, delusion and the election campaign

Part 6: What can we do?

Part 7: Being climate clever, not climate conned

Walk against Warming on 11 November 2007

John Howard's and Kevin Rudd's policies on climate change both fall well short of what is required to take real action on climate change.

Howard has not committed to any targets, while Rudd says Labor will ratify the Kyoto Protocol and set emission reduction targets for 2050.

We don't need more reports, we need short term targets for 2010, 2015 and 2020. In particular, we need to set a firm target of 30% emissions reductions by 2020.

You have the opportunity to attend Australia's biggest day of community action on climate change.

Date: Sunday, November 11, 2007
Time: 1:00pm to 3:00pm
Location: State Library, Swanton Street, Melbourne

I encourage you to "walk against warming" to highlight the need for action on climate change. I will be there.

See http://www.walkagainstwarming.org for walk locations in your capital city.

This advertisement from Getup summarises the Howard Government's position well. Demand real action on climate change: I can do that!

Burning forests is not green power

Peter Campbell joined Senate Candidate Dr Richard Di Natale and Melbourne Candidate Adam Bandt to protest over the plans by Gunns to sell power back to Victoria as Greens power at the Origin Energy Shop in Richmond on Friday.

Greens lead Senate candidate in Victoria Dr Richard Di Natale said that now the giant Gunns pulp mill had been given the go-ahead, consumers needed to be warned about the insidious link between old-growth forests and their power supply.

"When the pulp mill goes into production we will see a massive increase in the level of native forest logging for wood chips in Tasmania," Dr Di Natale said."'This will lead to the extinction of threatened wildlife and will significantly increase global warming.

"Forestry Tasmania has initiated proposals to burn wood chips from native forests for electricity generation. This power source will grow after the Gunns mill comes on line. Victoria and other states that are part of the national electricity market will be able to import electricity from Tasmania via Basslink.

"At a time when we desperately need renewable energy, the logging industry proposes to burn native forests for power generation under the guise of renewable electricity or 'green' power.

"We call on Origin Energy and other power suppliers, including TXU and AGL, to state explicitly to their customers and their shareholders that they will not purchase electricity from Tasmania generated from the burning of wood chips from native forests."

Why voting Green is vitally important

With climate change, drought, energy and a sustainable future now high on the political agenda, there has never been a more important time to vote for the Greens so that we get real action rather than rhetoric.

In the House of Representatives

Some residents I have spoken to recently have said they support the Greens by putting them as number 2 on their ballot after either Labor or Liberal.

They are surprised when I tell them that 2 for the Greens does nothing if you have a Liberal or Labor as number 1.

Nobody ever notices your number 2. Unfortunately, this doesn't help the Greens or show your support at all. Your vote just goes directly to the Labor or Liberal party and stays there.

However, if you like the Greens policies and would like me to represent you in Canberra, you can vote 1 Greens, then for the other parties of your choice.

This is really effective because you actually get double the value for your vote. Here is how it works:

Select 1 Greens. You make a really strong statement that you support the environment, open and fair government and a sustainable future. If I get enough votes, I will be elected and will be privileged to represent your views in parliament so I can work for a better future.

Select 2. This is your second preference, it is your choice. If I don't get elected, your vote is distributed to this choice on your ballet paper. The vote is counted again, at full value.

• So if you would like to John Howard returned, you can give your second choice to Petro Georgiou, the Liberal candidate.
  
• If you prefer Kevin Rudd, you can give your second choice to Ken Harvey, the Labor candidate.

If you prefer other parties (such as the Democrats) above either Labor or Liberal, you can give them your second preference. What really matters in the end is where you put Labor with respect to the Liberals. Whichever has the lower number will invariably get your vote. So if you vote 1 Green, 2 Democrat, 3 Liberal, 4 Labor then the Liberals will end up with your vote.

Need to know more? See the Australian Electoral Commission notes for more details.

Make no mistake: I’m serious about getting elected to represent you in Kooyong, but given that that is a big, BIG task, it is good to be able to reassure supporters that their vote will STILL BE COUNTED (twice, in fact.)

In the Senate
Even if Labor win enough lower house seats to form government, the polls and analysts indicate they will not win control of the Senate. It is important that more Greens are elected to the Senate so that it can act as a real house of review. The Greens will ensure there is balance in the Senate so that no major party will hold sway pushing their own agendas.

Either Vote 1 Green (above the line) in the Senate (the big ballot paper) or number the Greens candidates 1 to 6 then number every other square below the line in the order of your choice (also known as voting "below the line"). If you make a mistake or miss a number then your vote will be invalid and not be counted. Ask for another ballot paper if you have made a mistake!

Gunns pulp mill will not be clean

Both Kevin Rudd and John Howard support the proposed Gunns pulpmill in the Tasmania’s Tamar valley. Peter Garrett supports it too. This is in spite of polls showing that two out of three locals in the valley oppose the mill due to serious concerns about the air and water pollution it will produce and the native forest it will consume.

Once again we see major party politics let down the people of Australia. Why not have a local plebiscite on this divisive issue?

The Lennon government has abandoned its own environmental assessment and public consultation to fast track the mill. Malcolm Turnbull is keeping his options open with a huge majority of voters in his marginal seat of Wentworth also opposing the mill.

If it were truly a world-class, best environment standards pulp mill then I think it would proceed. But this would mean a plantation-based, chlorine-free, closed-loop pulp mill that doesn't use a Kraft (sulphur-based) pulping process.

This would enhance Tasmania’s growing green image and ecotourism appeal that the Government has spent millions promoting. This is where Tasmania’s long term future, employment and prosperity should be.

See also: Greens Kooyong website

Kooyong climate change forum

I spoke at the Kooyong climate change forum on the evening of Monday 3 September 2007.


It was encouraging to see about 350 people turn up to hear the candidates for Kooyong talk about climate change. Greens policies on climate change are fairly close to the Democrats (David Collyer) in that we both specify short term emission reduction targets. However, Labor (Ken Harvey) is still refusing to specify any targets earlier than 2050, with the Liberals (Petro Georgiou) are still refusing to set any targets at all.

Interestingly, all candidates set their "temperature arrow" to 2 degrees, even though both Labor and Liberal voted against the Greens motion for this in the Senate in April, and John Howard has stated that "Australia can adapt to climate change of up to 5 degrees", a statement which is bordering on lunacy.


It really is a case of separating what politicians say from how they or their party votes in parliament. There is often a world of difference. So now we can hold John Howard to the two degrees rise maximum, courtesty of Petro Georgiou. But maybe this is just another "non-core promise".

Below are my presentation slides. Click on any to enlarge them.

Why the Gunns pulp mill proposal for the Tamar valley should not be approved

There are serious concerns about Gunns proposed pulp mill for the Tamar valley in Tasmania.

However, the Lennon Labor government in Tasmania has cut short their public consultation process that was supposed to address social and environmental concerns about the pulp mill.

And Malcolm Turnbull, the Federal Environment Minister, has granted preliminary approval for the mill to proceed, despite stating his "concerns about the poor process followed by the Lennon Government"!

Turbull has now called for public submissions about the mill, with a closing date of 31st August. Please consider writing your own submission. You can send your submission via email to epbc.pulpmill@environment.gov.au

My submission to the "Invitation to comment on draft recommendation report - 2007/3385 Gunns Limited Proposed Pulp Mill, Tasmania"

To whom it may concern,

The Gunns pulp mill proposal for the Tamar valley in Tasmania should not be approved until:

• Full consideration of the impacts of the mill on Tasmania's native forests and wildlife habitat are assessed.
• An independent assessment of the flow and dispersal of effluent in Bass Strait is undertaken.
• All toxic substances are removed from the mill effluent - no output of dioxin should be allowed.
• Adequate local consultation has occurred - this was cut short when the Lennon Government abandoned their RPDC process

In its current form, the pulp mill would pollute the ocean with toxic dioxin, and have a very serious negative impact on fisheries and local tourism ventures in the Tamar valley.

The mill proposal should not be approved until these matters are resolved.

Peter Campbell

*** End of submission ***

Links

• Invitation to comment on proposed decision and conditions for the pulp mill proposal in Tasmania's Tamar Valley
• Comment sought on draft Pulp Mill decision and conditions - Malcolm Turnbull MP
• The Wilderness Society - Gunns' Proposed Pulp Mill
• PM's pal damns pulp mill proposal | The Australian
• Turnbull to clear way for pulp mill | The Australian

Videos

• Natural Tasmania brand worth more than a dirty pulp mill (Greens)
• Tasmanian scallop fisherman, John Hammond, on the pulp mill
• Pulp mill 2007... Back to the future with Christine Milne
  

Young voters: get in early, make sure you enrol to vote

Many young people in Boroondara maybe unaware that recent changes to electoral laws mean that they could lose their right to vote.

The Australian government changed the electoral act in April so that when an election is called, those eligible to vote for the first time will only have less than a day to enroll before the rolls are closed.

Previously, the law allowed between two and three weeks for young people to claim this basic democratic right. It is hard to see what good effect the new provisions are intended to have. However, this law would seem to be a very effective way of reducing the participation of first time voters, of which there may be a thousand or more in Boroondara.

Parents, teachers, youth-workers and others in our community will have a useful role to play in getting this message to the young people of Boroondara.

The most important action now for those turning 18 this year is to enroll to vote right now before an election is called. This will ensure young voters are not locked out of the democratic process.

Post offices have the enrollment forms, or you can get them from the Australian Electoral Commission website. There is also now the requirement for proof of identity and a statutory declaration. The effort is worth it though so you can have your say in the future direction for Australia.

Links

• Enrolling to vote, Australian Electoral Commission

• Use this link to check your voter enrollment status online

Kooyong electorate climate change candidate forum

When: Monday 3rd September 2007

Where: Hawthorn Town Hall, Burwood Road/Glenferrie Rd, Hawthorn

Time: 7:30pm - Mon Sep 3 9:30pm

A coalition of climate change action groups across Kooyong is convening this forum to provide an opportunity to hear our House of Representatives candidates speak about what they would do to address climate change.

They are Petro Georgiou (Liberal), Ken Harvey (ALP), Peter Campbell (Greens) and possibly a Family First candidate.

The question convenor will be Michael Gorton, whose background includes being a founder of Greening Australia, a prime mover in United Nations Youth General Assemblies, an Equal Opportunities Commissioner, and chair of the Victorian Aboriginal Reconciliation Commission.

In addition, a speaker from Environment Victoria who will outline the major science findings and the immediate actions we can take. Questions will be taken from the floor. On display in the hall will be some local primary schools posters done by their children who have painted how they see reduction in greenhouse gas production, as well as some stalls with information about local climate change groups.

The Mayor of Boroondara will open this evening focused on assisting our community and our representatives to work together in playing a part to help to save our planet.

Further information/ Press interviews: enquiries@lighterfootprints.org

Carolyn Ingvarson 9836 0925

Greens for real action on climate change - videos

There has been a lot of political activity on YouTube lately in the lead up to the election. Here are a few Greens videos I find interesting and refreshing:

Rescue the Climate - Vote Green *(Senators Christine Milne and Bob Brown)

Howard and Rudd in bed with the coal industry

The Chaser's 'Backflips of the Greens'

Vote Green for real action on climate change

I have compared Labor and Liberal policies on climate change, as at July 2007, and drawn the conclusion that there is actually little difference between them. Both Labor and Liberal policies do not translate into meaningful or real action on climate change.

This diagram illustrates the widespread concerns with climate change and why we need to take immediate action to address it:


Climate change affects us all. A comprehensive and widespread strategy is required to tackle it.

Comparing the Greens policies on climate change to the Liberal (John Howard) and Labor (Kevin Rudd) policies reveals how shallow those of the major parties are, as illustrated in the following table:



This leaflet is being distributed across the Kooyong electorate and elsewhere in Australia. Please email me if you are keen to help us with this.

Forests can slow climate change

This letter was published in The Age and The Heraldsun on July 25, 2007

Once again we are faced with the unedifying spectacle of Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull both playing political football with Australia's forests.

Kevin Rudd has just fully endorsed John Howard's forest policy which supports the destruction of remnant majestic old growth forests in both Tasmania and South East Australia. He has done this to curry favour with the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union in the run up to the federal election.

Deforestation and land clearing accounts for around 10 per cent of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, yet Kevin Rudd is doing nothing to stop this, despite the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report which identifies protection of forests as a key global strategy for combating climate change.

Malcolm Turnbull says he recognises the importance of forests as carbon stores, yet he also supports the ongoing destruction of Australia's forests and the resulting export of 4 million tonnes of woodchips from Tasmania and 1 million tonnes from Victoria each year. The Howard government is allocating $200 million to protect forests in South East Asia, but is unwilling to protect Australian forests that store up to 1200 tonnes of carbon per hectare.

Carbon dioxide emissions from logging in Victoria in 2004-2005 were almost 10 million tonnes which is equivalent to emissions resulting from an additional 2.4 million cars onto Victoria’s roads each year.

The solution is remarkably simple. We need to protect all remaining old growth forests to preserve both their intrinsic value and the carbon they store.

Unfortunately, Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull can only see woodchips rather than our trees.

View some Tasmanian forests and hear why local people want them protected.

MEDIA RELEASE: Canadian Green leader says Australian energy and building standards must be improved

July 17, 2007

Ontario Green Party leader Frank de Jong visited a sustainable house in Surrey Hills owned by Peter Campbell, Greens candidate for the federal seat of Kooyong, on Tuesday July 17 to raise awareness about domestic energy standards.

He said Mr Campbell's house, which produces three-quarters of its power requirements, was a fantastic example of how home owners can reduce their emissions, and highlighted that standards in Australia need to be lifted, as they have been in Canada.

“Improved energy and housing standards have been successfully introduced in Canada to reduce energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Mr De Jong said.

“We have recently improved our EnerGuide standards for heating and cooling, water heating, gas and electric appliances, lighting and windows.

“Consumers in Canada also use the Energy Star symbol and ratings to buy energy-efficient TVs, VCRs, DVDs, audio equipment and other audio visual products,” Mr De Jong added.

“For the future, we need to set a target of net-zero energy construction as the standard for all renovations and new buildings. This means that buildings could be energy neutral in the long term by a combination of passive solar design, solar panels and hot water systems, and energy efficient appliances such as we see in this Surrey Hills house.”

Mr Campbell stated, “Our Surrey Hills house produces 75 per cent of the power we consume and we are net producers of clean green power over summer.


“If all new homes built in Australia were this efficient and if we implement widespread energy efficiency measures to reduce demand for power, we could avoid building new coal-fired power stations like the one on the drawing board for the Latrobe Valley, which would increase greenhouse gas emissions,” Mr Campbell said.

“While the improvements introduced in 2005 to the five-star energy efficiency requirement for housing in Victoria are a step in the right direction, they clearly don’t go far enough.

“Average energy-related emissions for new dwellings are almost six per cent higher than those of existing dwellings, mainly due to people buying inefficient appliances and lighting, so clearly the five-star building standards need to be further improved” Mr Campbell continued.

“Some large-screen plasma TVs consume more electricity than a fridge while in use, and consumers have no easy way of knowing this when they buy them.

“If we are serious about addressing climate change, we need to consider six-star building standards that include assessment of solar building design and efficiency of appliances, similar to the standards in place in Canada, and we urgently need to expand the energy star rating to cover all electrical goods rather than just whitegoods,” Mr Campbell added.

Frank de Jong is visiting Australia as a guest of Earthsharing Australia.

MEDIA CONTACT: Peter Campbell mobile 0409 417 504 kooyong@greens.org.au

Links

• Frank de Jong, Green Party of Ontario leader
• EnerGuide standards
• Overview of Australian Regulatory Requirements - Labelling and MEPS
• Options to reduce greenhouse emissions from new homes in Victoria through the building approval process. Report to DSE by George Wilkenfeld & Associates (2007)
  5_star energy report May 07 (PDF - 531 Kb)
• Surrey Hills house
  
  
  
  

LETTER: Howard luke-warm

Below is a letter from Phillip Walker, St Kilda East, that was published in The Age on Sunday July 8, 2007. I think he sums up John Howard's complete lack of action on addressing climate change, and his political maneouvering on the topic. I think is completely unacceptable for the Australian Government to avoid setting targets for reducing carbon emissions for 2010, 2020 and 2050 despite clear scientific evidence that the future of our planet is now at stake.

And Labor's avoidance of setting 2020 targets makes them not much different from John Howard.

Letter text follows:

The report in The Sunday Age (1/7), "PM warms to his task", highlights the Liberal approach, which is a diversion that will not reduce Australia's carbon emissions to the levels required to stop catastrophic global warming.

Dealing with climate change is an international issue and that requires working through international institutions. As Michael Raupach noted (The Age, 25/6), "the biggest value of the (1997 Kyoto) protocol was its effort to build social capital".

Howard's APEC initiative undermines international efforts and of the 16 Pacific island countries, only PNG is a member. This means the Pacific countries that are in the forefront of coping with the negative consequences of climate change are excluded from the negotiation process.

It appears unlikely that Australia will meet the Kyoto commitments, which even permitted us to increase greenhouse emissions by 8 per cent on 1990 levels. As it is, Australia's per capita emissions are 4.5 times the global average, second only to the US.

The criticism of Labor for failing to set a mid-term (2020-30) reduction target is accurate. What is not mentioned is that the Liberals have neither a medium nor a long-term target for greenhouse emissions reduction.

Similarly, a national emission trading scheme needs to have stringent limits and be applicable to all emitters. Howard has put the start date off for five years, has not yet set limits, and will not apply it to all industrial emitters, which is self-defeating.

Scientific consensus is that we have 10-15 years to get it right on climate change and that we need to limit global warming to 20 degrees Celsius, a target both Liberal and Labor are silent on.

What Australia does need is leadership that provides a clear strategy for steady reduction in greenhouse emissions, and the political will to apply it. That's why I'll be voting for the Greens.

Source