2004 FENNER CONFERENCE ON THE ENVIRONMENT

Bruce Hawker One of the country's premier political strategists, Bruce understands the priorities and drivers of government decisions better than any other consultant in Australia. Bruce has a unique insight into government relations and campaigning aspects of corporate strategy borne of his nine years as NSW Premier Bob Carr's chief of staff and key political strategist and his regular contact with ministers and senior public servants since that time. Bruce's experience has proven invaluable to clients seeking to design winning campaign plans, organise political support for legislation or build public consensus for proposals. Since establishing Hawker Britton in 1997, Bruce has continued to serve as a key strategist in political campaigns across Australia. Bruce worked in a central capacity in the campaigns for the re-election of the Queensland Government in 2001 the Carr Government in 1999, the ALP's victories in WA in 2001 and Tasmania in 1998, the unprecedented Labor swing in South Australia in 1997 and Labor's remarkable victory in that state in 2002. Bruce's unrivalled political strategy and campaigning expertise brings a fresh approach to strategy and decision making in the corporate boardroom.

Session 7: Questions/discussion

What I wanted to look at today was what we identified when we were preparing for this conference as the three major political factors affecting the population-environment debate. Obviously, it is very broad and difficult to juggle, but we isolated it down to three things: firstly, the rise of the Greens, secondly, the inter-state antagonism over population growth and, thirdly, national inaction on climate change. We then went about conducting some polling, which we will share with you today, to test what current public opinion on these issues is, hoping to identify gaps between public opinion and what the political leadership is thinking.

The benefits of polling to the population-environment debate are that you can provide a reality check to current political assumptions. And it can be used then as a way to try to persuade governments of your position, or to inform them of where you come from and where you are going on a point. But it is just a snapshot of public opinion at any one time; it doesn't necessarily reflect a long-term view of public attitudes on a particular issue.

(Click on image for a larger version)

The first issue, as I said, was the rise of the Greens. We considered that to be one of the most significant political developments in recent years, and the recent electoral successes of the Greens and the demise of the Democrats have taken other parties, I think, somewhat by surprise. To pick up on Lynton Crosby's point, if you look at the influence of the green parties and green movement at a local level, you see that it is quite dramatic. In New South Wales, in the recent local government elections, they elected 57 Green local government councillors across the state, and one Green mayor. So they are starting to have a significant impact, certainly at a local level.

And, of course, they now have a very much wider and more significant impact through the preferences deals that they do with the major parties in election campaigns. You will see that particularly in state election campaigns; you saw it in every campaign in recent times. The green parties and green movement will be very driven to make sure that they extract the best deals they can from the major parties, particularly the Labor Party, when it comes to distributing preferences. You saw that in 2004, particularly, with Peter Beattie making a very strong statement about the end of broad-scale land clearing within three years. Similar statements were made in New South Wales in 2003, when Bob Carr gained what is essentially a record majority for a third term.

(Click on image for a larger version)

So what does the polling tell us? It shows that there is a strong feeling that governments have not done enough on the environment. We asked a question, 'Which view about the environment is closer to your view?' and you will see that 79 per cent of Australians thought that not enough had been done on the environment. That is a very significant number and there weren't too many variations in that, across demographics and age groups. You will see there that 81 per cent of women thought that Australia still has a long way to go, and 81 per cent of the under-30s. It really only drops off in any significant way when you get to low income earners and the elderly, and people in provincial areas – which probably doesn't come as a great surprise to most people.

You will see there that the increase in green issues, of which population is very much a part, is very resonant in the electorate at the moment. How much it becomes a major political issue for the major parties is another issue, but certainly the Prime Minister, as recently as in the last few days, has said that he doesn't regard green issues as being peripheral any more. Exactly what he intends doing to make them a mainstream issue, I think, is something to be seen, because he has ruled out any changes to Kyoto. But it is a significant front-line issue. Newspoll, as recently as February, ranked it fourth after health, Medicare, education and leadership as front-of-mind issues for people when they are asked to rank issues that they think are most important to the country.

So the Greens certainly have tapped a hitherto untapped demand in the electorate for environmental action. But how far they go, I suppose, is yet to be seen. When you become a powerful, influential party in the political process, then almost inevitably compromise starts to creep in. There are real issues that they have to deal with when they are in positions of power. When they hold the balance of power in the Senate, as they may well do in the next few months, then there will be other questions that they will have to be dealing with constantly.

The problem for the Green Party, particularly, is that when it presents itself as a mainstream party of the left, then it has to embrace other issues apart from environmental and population issues and so forth, and that can be a stumbling block as we have seen in the past with issues such as drugs. Calling for a wider acceptance of drug use in the community can alienate people who otherwise might have had a strong inclination to give them their support. The danger in this, I think, is that the green population message could be diluted as the party continues to locate itself in the political spectrum.

The next issue I wanted to talk about was inter-state rivalry and the population growth debate. The fact that there are state Labor governments everywhere doesn't mean that there aren't really strong divergent views on this, particularly between Bob Carr and Steve Bracks. It is well known that Bob Carr has a low-population predilection, and Steve Bracks has quite the opposite. It was demonstrated in 2002, when Carr met with the Immigration Minister and asked that there be a state-federal task force to reduce the amount of immigration into New South Wales. Eighteen months later, Premier Bracks requested a task force with the aim of doing the exact opposite: increasing immigration into Victoria.

Carr believes that excessive population growth will lead to overstretched infrastructure, loss of open space, urban sprawl, excessive demands for natural resources and so forth, and clearly because of the overcrowding in Sydney this is a very real and cogent political issue. Bracks has a different view. He sees a need to populate or perish, essentially. He sees the need for economic growth and he thinks that comes with population growth. There is a very, very real divergence of opinion there that is yet to be sorted out.

It is interesting to note that there has traditionally been political tension between such  economic considerations as job creation and environment concerns. Previously, job creation would have won over environmental considerations in just about every campaign that I have been involved in, when push came to shove. It is not so clear now and – I might mention a little bit more about that later – it may be the case that economic concerns are being dressed up as environmental issues, particularly at a local level, as is the case with the rise of NIMBYs, particularly in the major cities, whose primary concerns are the effect that major infrastructure changes are going to have on the price of property – perhaps more than the local environmental concerns, or maybe they are all mixed up in their heads and they are not quite sure what are the greater priorities.

Lynton says he is identifying the local significance of environmental issues, and I think that has got a lot to do with it. Property prices have got a lot to do with people's environmental concerns. I know it sounds craven, but that in fact is the feedback that we get.

(Click on image for a larger version)

So we asked the question to test who is on the side of the angels on this growth versus environment question as between Carr and Bracks, and essentially it is still pretty well evenly split: 50 per cent of Australians agree with the proposition that further population growth in Australia will inevitably harm the environment – quite a strong statement – and 45 per cent disagree with that proposition. State by state results show that neither New South Wales nor Victorian residents are convinced on the issues, despite the positions of their governments. So that debate is still very much alive and ready to go. That is a very important issue, I think, that the electorate still needs to come to terms with.

The final point I'd like to make is about Kyoto and climate change. We asked the question, 'Which is the most important environmental issue of concern to you?' You will see there that 29 per cent nominated global warming, 22 per cent clean air, 17 per cent reduced salinity and 13 per cent prevention of tree clearing. So, c(Click on image for a larger version)learly, the attitudes of the major parties on Kyoto are going to be a significant issue as we go forward.

It is interesting that the electorate is nominating global warming as the most significant issue among environmental concerns at the moment. I am surprised at that, but that was the result and it shows that the whole question of global warming is resonating in the electorate. If you combine that with the issue of clean air, then you have got 51 per cent of the electorate looking at air-related issues as being the most important for them.