Loading summary
Transcript24 lines
- [00:01]
A
I'm Daniel James and you're listening to 7am. When the teal independents swept through Liberal Heartland, their pitch was simple. They were not like the major parties. They were community backed, locally, accountable and free to vote how they wanted. Now, two of the best known teals, Zali Steggall and Allegra Spender, are forming a political party. They say Community Strong Australia is a for the politically homeless people who want climate action, integrity, sensible economic management and a pro business agenda. But can you build a party out of independence without sacrificing what voters liked about them in the first place? Today, Independent MP Zali Steggall on why the teals are becoming a party and whether they can hold the centre as Australian politics becomes more divided. It's Monday, june 20nint.
- [01:09]
B
Sally, thank you so much for joining us. Let's start with this new announcement. What exactly is Community Strong Australia and what changes now for you as the member for Warringah?
- [01:19]
C
Well, Community Strong is a new party where we're really trying to put community politics at the centre here in Parliament House, giving more communities a voice and a seat at the table. So. So Allegra and I have already, as community Independents, very much been focused on our communities of Warringah and Wentworth. But we are constantly contacted, to be fair, by many people around Australia in other communities that feel politically homeless and that are quite frustrated, they don't feel represented by the major parties, labor and the coalition. And they are worried that the only other alternatives are more extreme in their political views and they would like something more centrist, more focused on rational policies that will have sensible solutions to really address some of the problems that a lot of people are worried about.
- [02:09]
B
There's been speculation that this move is a response to the new electoral laws that make it harder for independents to raise money and campaign as a network while parties still get much bigger national spending cap. How much truth is there in that speculation?
- [02:24]
C
There's no doubt that the major parties stitched up a deal at the end of the last term of Parliament to lock out community independence from politics. They embedded some changes, reform laws and campaign spending that very much put an advantage on existing major parties. For example, in a seat, an independent could spend up to 800,000. A political party candidate can have to 800,000 plus any proportion of 90 million that the party decided to throw at it. So clearly very different firepower. So the changes to those rules are being challenged in the High Court, but it did, I guess, consolidate my thinking around. We needed to address the playing field and how could we extend and increase the reach of the community movement. Community led movement in politics in the circumstances of the rules of play have changed. So it's not the only reason, but it is an element to thinking that registration of a political party addresses that difference of status. It's also the political party assist in being able to run a ticket and campaign for Senate seats. So the Community Moves has been very strong in the lower house, but hasn't managed to get into the upper house other than David Pocock for the act. And so, you know, there's a number of reasons why this move is an evolution and opportunity to grow the movement.
- [03:51]
B
Zali, part of your appeal and the reason you've done so well is your independence. Isn't this a huge gamble? What if voters start to see it differently?
- [04:00]
C
The feedback I've had from voters is in fact that they want me to be there as a community representative. So I've been elected three times now, the community and of course I've thought very carefully about what are the elements that are most important to my community as a community independent. And it is in fact that responsiveness to our local community and being able to vote in accordance with those wishes. So we have taken the very best of that model and put that into Community Strong by ensuring that each member has a free vote to reflect and continue that feedback from local communities. So unlike other major parties, we don't have a party line or an expectation to toe the line. Right. Which is the piece that most people feel so disenfranchised by major party politics that there's this disconnect between what an MP might say to their community when they're at home and then what they do in Parliament and how they vote. So we have enshrined in the constitution for Community Strong that ability for MPs to stay true to their community. Now, I would argue it's not about picking between being an independent or a party. It's actually about putting the best of both worlds together into a new style of political party that, you know, I think give more communities the opportunities to be at the table.
- [05:17]
B
How confident are you that that free vote, no binding party line will work once you're part of a national political organisation?
- [05:24]
C
Well, embedded in the constitution is also a pledge for any members or proposed members that they must pledge to the clear pillars, core policy pillars that are identified in the constitution around sensible economic management, climate, action, integrity and equality. And then there are also core values as to how we are going to be politicians. Right. And it's very consistent with, I would argue how I've conducted myself for the last seven years and how Alingra has for the last four years in being very future focused, merit based on policy, focusing on facts, not ideology, and being positive looking for solutions. So if you look already over the last four years, Allegra and I, as independents with nothing binding us in terms of how we vote, have voted already about 90% of the time together because we share values and policy positions now, that still allows us to have a difference of opinion to reflect our communities. When issues come up where there is a slightly different feedback from our community, that's good. I think that's much more authentic politics where you can reflect your differences and have a respectful discussion about those differences and for the public to see that rather than it be behind closed doors and everyone speaks from, you know, speaking points and everyone pretends there are no differences.
- [06:49]
A
Coming up, Zali Steggall's open invitation to disaffected Liberal and Labor MPs.
- [07:03]
B
Zali, I want to ask you about how you view community Strong Australia. You've described it as progressive but pro business. So what does that actually mean?
- [07:12]
C
It's ensuring that, I guess the best way I can describe it. As an athlete, I believe in competition. I believe if you're going to work hard, you deserve to have the opportunity to win. You deserve to have an environment that is a fair playing field, but then gives you that opportunity for success. But at the same time, I absolutely recognise and care for the more vulnerable in our community. So we need to have a system that has strong social support for the most vulnerable that need support and assistance. And I have been pressing the labor government, for example, around raising the rate when it comes to jobseeker and youth allowance and making sure we are helping people, not let them fall through safety nets. But at the same time I want to make sure we can thrive, that we can prosper, that businesses have a fair environment in which to meet success. And that's where I do get frustrated with the labor government that often puts too many. There's too much regulation, there is too many hoops and it really prevents business and innovation from succeeding. And then when you look at where the coalition and the Liberal Party are at, they are really going down ideology and culture wars rather than sensible policies. They are moving further and further to the right. Of course, I also came into politics really caring about climate action. So for me, if you're a sensible middle centralist voter, who do you vote for? If you don't have an independent on the ballot paper in your Community. And so the goal of Community Strong is to have that invitation out to more communities so people can have an option that is not so driven by culture wars and ideology.
- [08:51]
B
If we're talking about tax, it seems that you and Allegra Spender don't seem to be exactly in the same place. She wants a broader shift towards taxing investment income. You've warned against hitting shares, startups and business investment so voters see the same party name, but not necessarily the same policy platform. Couldn't that be confusing?
- [09:11]
C
I respect that. But the point of Community Strong is Allegra and I will now have a platform in which to work more closely together, to build on where we have common ground and really seek the feedback and analysis in terms of where the differences are and how do we build solutions together to find that common ground. As you say, different communities give different feedbacks to their MPs, and it's important to reflect that. But what it means is the ultimate policies of Community Strong will be those that reach the consensus of all of us, and then we will each be able to have those slightly nuanced positions in relation to certain elements, because our communities expect us to.
- [09:53]
B
And as the party builds, Community Strong Australia wants to support obviously more candidates at the next election. So what is going to be the litmus test for whether a candidate fits the party's values?
- [10:05]
C
First and foremost, there must be that connection to community. So the community consultation process around prospective candidates is key to ensure that they do meet that test of values and commitment to policy pillars. Now, of course, someone that's new to politics, you won't have, you know, you'll have to look at sort of their professional experience and the reasons for coming to it. Someone who has been a politician, as suggested, many people are saying, you know, whether or not current independents, well, of course, their voting record will tell us what their position is on issues, or someone from the major parties, you know, whether a moderate liberal or a progressive labor, you know, a Labor via centrist labor mp, are frustrated by the framework of the major parties and want to come to a model like Community Strong. We will be able, you know, to judge them on their voting record and their public pronouncement.
- [10:55]
B
So you're potentially looking at poaching members from other parties.
- [10:59]
C
I wouldn't describe it as poaching. I would say it's an open invitation.
- [11:04]
B
And finally, Zali, this move couldn't come at a more tumultuous time in Australian politics. With the splintering of the right, the politics of grievance and the Apparatus to spread that grievance and anger across the community has never been more organised than it is now. How hard is it going to be for you and other parties to stay at the Sensible Centre when there will be so much pressure to move to the right?
- [11:27]
C
Well, again, it's about the communities that we represent and the feedback we get from communities. And in fact, a lot of people are reaching out and contacting us because they are really worried. They don't want to see divisiveness. There is a genuine concern around policies that is legitimate, around people feel they're working really hard and the system's not working for them, or why are they contributing more to revenue than big multinational companies exporting gas, for example? And they are worried about the lack of synergy between infrastructure and public amenity as population grows and migration. But again, they don't want it to be a divisive argument. They want a rational, constructive argument around those challenges and how do we actually put forward solutions? And I think that is a big point of difference. The far right and the growth of support for One Nation is all about blaming and pointing the finger, but it's not about really putting forward rational solutions. There are no policies that actually will be effective to fix some of the problems that are identified and in fact they're silent on the consequences of some policies. So, for example, slashing migration, as the Coalition and One Nation have suggested, will have severe consequences for our caring industry. Right. Nursing, aged care, we have a lot of skilled migration and visa holders in those industries. Agriculture relies heavily again on migration. So we have to be really clear that if you're going to push that kind of policy, it has consequences then on Australia in terms of capacity for care and other industries. So what I would argue Community Strong will be putting forward are rational policies that address the problem problems people are legitimately frustrated with, but in a way that is more merit and fact based, which I think is really important for the future of Australia.
- [13:21]
B
Zali Stegl, thank you so much for your time.
- [13:24]
C
Thank you.
- [13:34]
A
Also in the news, the Federal Government says Big Tech has not been complying with its under 16 social media ban as much as it would like, doubling the penalties for companies in breach of the laws. Social media companies which don't take reasonable steps to prevent kids from signing up or keeping an account would face fines of up to $99 million under the new legislation. The eSafety commissioner's office, which is currently investigating possible breaches, will also have its powers strengthened and shark spotting drones will be dispatched across New South Wales all year round under a new plan from the state government. Premier Chris minns said the $34 million investment will be the largest expansion of aerial shark surveillance in the world. Around 70 beaches in Sydney and the New South Wales coast will be monitored under the plan, which includes the use of artificial intelligence systems which have the ability to automatically detect sharks. I'm Daniel James.
- [14:29]
C
Thanks for listening to 7am we'll be back tomorrow, Sam.