By James Vassilopoulos CANBERRA — The Greens won two Legislative Assembly seats in the ACT elections in February. They were elected on a platform which includes reducing waste, supporting an efficient and clean public transport system, quality education, health and social services to all, increased funding for schools and an economy which serves the people. The Liberals received approximately 40% of the vote and formed a minority government with independent and Green support. They immediately began to implement their economic rationalist agenda. Over the last eight months, the Liberals have:
- corporatised ACT Electricity and Water (ACTEW);
- closed Charnwood High School;
- proposed a $13.5 million handout to business, in the form of payroll tax savings;
- axed Jobless Action and Red Cross Youth Health Services;
- privatised Jindalee Nursing Home, Kippax and Melba Community Health Centres and the Kaleen Youth Shelter;
- promised 3000 public service job cuts and a $12 million cut to ACTION;
- made an effective $6.9 million cut to education;
- promised cuts of $1.1 million from the ACT library service and $20 million from health.
The first ACT budget, passed by a one-vote majority on November 24, cuts $110 million or 9% from government spending. This is a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. How have the Greens, the first to be elected in the ACT, responded? The Greens made a major mistake when they voted for Kate Carnell as Chief Minister. Such a decision by a progressive political force was, and continues to be, unjustifiable. Without the Greens' support the Liberals could not have formed government to carry out their economic rationalist agenda. Since then, the Greens have attempted to repair some of the damage by voting against much of the Liberal agenda in the Legislative Assembly. They opposed both the closure of Charnwood High and the privatisation of the Kaleen youth shelter. In a last minute change of mind, they also voted against the Liberal government's horror budget. The Greens have also used the Legislative Assembly to popularise various progressive issues. They have condemned the ALP for not supporting a motion calling for an immediate end to woodchipping of old growth forests, opposed a 2% pay increase for MLA's and educated the community about the Tarkine forest issue. The Greens' opposition to the Liberal's attacks, however, has not been consistent. More significantly, it has not been effective either. For example, one of the first actions of the Liberal government was to corporatise ACT Electricity and Water. If this move had been defeated it would have put the Liberals on the back foot and their austerity program in disarray. The Greens did not actively support the corporatisation of ACTEW, but they did not oppose it either. Instead, they campaigned to take the proposal to a legislative committee, thereby simply delaying the decision. The Liberals won on this issue and already the printing areas of ACTEW have been contracted to private industry and more than 30 jobs have been lost. This example, along with others, reveals the fundamental problem with the Greens approach — that is, their strategy of relying on parliament to try to stop the attacks. It is a perspective which is costing the people of the ACT dearly. There has been no shortage of public anger and activity aimed at stopping the Liberal government's onslaught. Just in the last few months there has been, among other actions, an 800-strong rally against job cuts, 400 hospital workers mobilised against the hospital cuts, and a strike and picket by Kaleen Youth Shelter workers. In all of these the Greens were noticeably absent, preferring to argue it out within the confines of parliament. The Greens didn't even mobilise their support base in these public campaigns. In another example of the Greens' flawed approach, on August 22 the government defied widespread community and union opposition to privatise the Jindalee Nursing Home. In a media release titled "Greens gain assurances from Liberals on Jindalee", the Greens justified their support for the privatisation (and illustrated their illusions in parliamentarism) by saying that the Liberals had "guaranteed" that the standard of aged care would, at the very least, be maintained; the needs of staff and residents would be addressed, and costs would be cut in a way which did not impact on services. Paul Ingwersen, an organiser with the Health Services Union of Australia, told
Green Left that since the company that wins the contract for Jindalee will not be subject to the ACT Government Service enterprise bargaining agreement, the sale will mean that nurses are likely to suffer a 10% wage cut. In addition, Carnell has since reneged on an agreement which stated that all permanent and casual staff would retain their jobs when Jindalee is sold. In this context, Ingwersen said: "Many [HSUA] members felt that while the Greens might fight to save old trees, when it came to old people they had sold them out". In order to defeat the Liberal's right-wing agenda it is nowhere near enough to fight within parliament. To win, the struggle must be extended into the public arena — into the streets, schools, workplaces and communities. It is essential that pickets, demonstrations and strikes are organised and supported so that the people under attack are empowered to fight back, win broader solidarity, defend their rights and achieve positive change. The Greens' opposition or amendments to motions in the Legislative Assembly have not prevented a single cut in the ACT. The Greens' vote against the November 24 budget, while it was the correct way to vote, did not serve to prevent the escalated attacks that are now coming down the line for the majority of workers and unemployed in the ACT. If, however, the Greens had put their considerable resources into an broad anti-budget campaign in the lead up to November 24, they would have helped swing the balance of forces, beyond and within parliament, so that the budget could have been blocked. After eight months of defeats, it is time for the Greens to mobilise their base and enter the "parliament of the streets". They need to build alliances with unions, students, single issue campaign activists and other progressive political parties to stop the attacks. Neither the Greens nor any of these groups is not strong enough alone to fight the Liberals and win.