Good afternoon.
You could feel the heightened sense of drama at Parliament House this week, as a new political reality set in.
Labor was under serious pressure on the economy, while the Coalition and One Nation set to work redrawing battle lines for the next election.
Interest rates climbed to their highest level in 15 years, tough new inflation numbers made Jim Chalmers’ life harder, and the Greens reeled from a shock leadership change.
Any of these events would have been enough to dominate the political agenda, yet they all happened in just a few days.
New leadership, new direction
Greens MPs told the Guardian they were blind-sided by Larissa Waters’ resignation on Monday night, unaware her health issues were so serious.
As the leadership battle played out, we were given a window into a toxic couple of days within the party. Sarah Hanson-Young and Mehreen Faruqi emerged from the election dejected, and their anger was palpable on social media in the aftermath.
New leader David Shoebridge now has to unite his party room before he can take the fight to Labor and One Nation.
Having blitzed the media on Wednesday, Shoebridge joined Guardian Australia’s team on Thursday for a broad conversation on politics and policy. He came in calm and prepared to lay out his vision. On the Australian Politics podcast, you can hear us push Shoebridge on how he might achieve what he calls “a new project” aimed at taking on the elite 1% and offering a more progressive alternative for Australian voters currently disaffected with the major parties.
A packed political agenda
Even though parliament won’t sit for a couple of weeks, the packed agenda isn’t letting up.
With the threat of another rate rise within months, the opposition leader, Angus Taylor, believes the Coalition might have its best opening against Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers on economic management.
The prime minister and Chris Bowen are off to host the pre-Cop summit in the Pacific on Monday and scrutiny of OpenAI’s response to the Medicare hack will heat up in parliamentary committee hearings.
Thank you to everyone who wrote in this week with questions and thoughtful feedback. Keep them coming.
I, along with reporter and Canberra chief of staff, Josh Butler, answered a selection below.
The future of the Greens
Many of you wrote in with questions about the Greens, and how a more aggressive approach from their new leader would impact the political landscape.
Mark Johnstone asked: Is it possible for the Greens to get to a 20% primary vote and become a more important political force?
Tom McIlroy writes: Surely there is an opportunity. The Coalition is in a total mess. Labor appears determined to be politically pragmatic, leaving many voters feeling they are untrustworthy. The perception that traditional parties do not govern with integrity and transparency is a major factor behind One Nation’s rise, in my view. Of course, One Nation has their own integrity issues, which seemingly weakens my argument. But polls show a lot of One Nation’s votes are a form of protest, rather than true support for One Nation’s policies and values. So, I think if a party like the Greens demonstrated that they wished to govern for the majority without being unduly influenced by any particular interest group – whether it be gambling interests, property developers, miners, foreign-owned salmon farmers, unions, or indeed environmental and social activists – they might actually win over some disaffected voters who are planning on casting a protest vote at the ballot box.
Could the Greens manage to do such a thing? And is David Shoebridge the candidate capable of telling that story? Right now in the polls, the Greens are in the range of 12-13%. Increasing to 20% would require a huge political effort and lots of luck, but it is possible. At the last election, many voters retreated to Labor for fear of a Peter Dutton-led government, and this time the threat of Pauline Hanson and One Nation could have the same effect. But, Greens sources say Shoebridge wants to bring the energy and fight the party has been missing since the last election, and that could resonate with voters. With bold policies they could achieve the Mamdani-like energy they so crave.
Christine Dixon wrote in to say: Voters will rightly ask how the Greens can deliver policies any faster than Labor or any other party?
Tom McIlroy writes: You’re right. Shoebridge says the Greens want to replace Labor. On the current numbers, that plan will take decades. He needs to fight the government to rebuild the Greens’ political stocks, but also work to influence policy through the balance of power in the Senate. We learned from Adam Bandt and Max Chandler-Mather that voters don’t want the Greens to simply block legislation, so Shoebridge needs to attack and cooperate. A difficult line to walk.
If government spending is the problem, where do cuts come from?
With interest rates rising and inflation numbers going up, government spending has been in the political crosshairs. The Reserve Bank, the Coalition, and even some friendly fire from the NSW premier, Chris Minns, all pointed the finger at Jim Chalmers’ ability to keeping spending under control. Michael Poe wondered: Why don’t those who say government spending must be reduced offer specific areas where the reductions should be made?
Tom McIlroy writes: Great question, Michael. I think politicians and commentators advocating for cuts to spending should nominate areas for reductions. Sometimes, for oppositions in particular, this is easier said than done. Angus Taylor was challenged on this exact point on Monday. He said the Coalition would cut spending on net zero by 2050 programs, wind back some of Labor’s housing policy structures like the housing future fund, slash “corporate welfare” and limit spending on the NDIS, other welfare programs and only give support to first home buyers who are Australian citizens. It’s not clear, however, if that would make a difference to the inflation problem – especially, as the treasurer points out, the Coalition has announced additional big spending plans of its own.
AI on the agenda
Senior tech execs will front a parliamentary inquiry into artificial intelligence next week, and Jenny Cameron wanted to know: Who is on the committee, when did it start, what have they done so far?
Josh Butler responded: Thanks for your question, Jenny. The committee is pretty new, and hasn’t had time to do much yet, but you’ll be seeing a lot more of it when four days of public hearings kick off in Sydney – to be headlined by appearances from OpenAI executives, after the company revealed one of its AI agents went rogue and accessed Services Australia data on Medicare.
The committee was only stood up in late August, and is chaired by the Labor MP Jo Briskey, with the Liberal senator Jonno Duniam the deputy chair. Also on the panel are David Pocock, Kate Chaney, Andrew Hastie and Tim Watts.
It’s an interesting selection of members. Duniam is the shadow home affairs minister, so could be expected to bring a more national security approach to the issue; Hastie, the shadow industry minister, is a former elite soldier and China hawk, and has spoken often about sovereign capability and his desire for Australia to develop its own frontier models. Pocock, the independent senator, has spoken passionately about protecting creatives and artists, and has raised alarm about the potential for AI companies to get free access to local works without compensation.
The witness list for the hearings dropped just today. The first witness on Tuesday will be the ABC, whose submission to the inquiry – which I wrote about today – accused AI of “cannibalising” journalism and saying big tech companies had unfair advantages over media outlets in terms of copyright, defamation and other rules applying to mainstream news platforms. The ABC argued that AI companies should be subject to the same rules as media outlets.
Also appearing on Tuesday will be Anthropic, OpenAI, Microsoft, Google and the Commonwealth Bank. It should be fascinating.
Nearly a dozen federal public servants were paid more than $1m last year. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP
