When Australians go to the polls on Saturday to elect a new government, the vast continent which was stolen from the indigenous people in 1788 and annexed to the British crown may have its “independent day” — not one that would declare itself a republic, but a day when independent members of Parliament may hold the balance of power in the lower house in Canberra.

In February this year, the founder of Climate 200 Simon Holmes à Court — son of Australia’s first billionaire Robert Holmes à Court — in an address to the Canberra Press Club said that independents hold considerable sway in some seats, and they will provide a tough challenge to the two major parties in Australian politics — Labour (ALP) and Liberal-National (LNP) — in the forthcoming federal elections.

He added that they have gathered a $7 million (US$4.9 million) war chest to fix Australia’s “broken” political system.

• READ MORE: Other reports on the Australian federal elections

“As we approach this upcoming election, the Australian political system is broken. That’s the problem. That’s why we are here today,” he told a packed press club in the national capital adding that Australians have had a “gutful” of politics.

“Engaged Australians are deeply frustrated that we are not making progress on the issues that matter … We are frustrated that so often our government is found to be either lying or incompetent, sometimes both,” he said.

“We have a government more interested in winning elections than improving our great nation. A government that seeks power, without purpose.

“We are frustrated about climate and action. We are frustrated about corruption in politics. We are frustrated about the treatment and safety of women.”

Looking over their shoulders
As the election campaign approaches its final stretch, politicians from both parties are looking over their shoulders at independent candidates who are challenging them in some crucial seats.

The Liberal Party of Prime Minister Scott Morrison is more worried than his opposition counterpart, the Australian Labor Party (ALP). Polling indicates that some blue-ribbon Liberal (governing LNP is a coalition of Liberal and National parties) seats could fall to popular local independent candidates and may result in a hung Parliament when the results of the elections are out by the early morning of May 22.

Liberals got a taste of things to come at a New South Wales (NSW) state byelection in February when voters in the heart of Sydney Northshore (which is a bastion of conservative politics) seat of Willoughby chose a replacement for the former Premier of the state, the hugely popular Gladys Berejiklian, who was forced to resign under corruption allegations.

She last won the seat with a hefty margin of 21 percent but there was a swing of 19 percent against the Liberal candidate who very narrowly won the seat via postal votes. The unsuccessful Independent candidate Larrisa Penn ran her campaign with very little funding.

Holmes à Court’s environmental organisation has been providing funds to a chain of candidates around the country, but he says that Climate 200 is not a political party and the candidates they give money to do not have a common political platform.

He also added that they give them money if they ask for it and give them advice on campaign tactics if they seek it. However, most independents are funded with donations from ordinary Australians who want to see systematic political change in Australia.

“These candidates don’t need to go into politics to be successful because they are already successful,” he told the press gallery.

“They are business owners, doctors, lawyers, journalists, and athletes. They are in it for the right reasons.”

Community advocacy group
In the Melbourne seat of Kooyong, held by Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, local independent Professor Monique Ryan, the head of neurology at the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne, who was endorsed by the community advocacy group Voices of Kooyong to stand in the seat is being given a good chance of unseating the government heavyweight.

“A genuine contest between two smart people to represent a smart, engaged electorate should make for good politics. Instead, the Kooyong campaign has turned rancid, as Ryan and her principal backer, Simon Holmes à Court, can almost touch an unlikely prize and Frydenberg, a potential future prime minister, can see his political career fading to black” observed Melbourne Age’s chief political reporter Chip Le Grand.

Professor Ryan is one of 21 “Voices of” candidates to have announced their run for a lower house seat for the 2022 federal election, and political analysts believe that in at least 5 Liberal-held seats in Victoria and NSW they stand a good chance of toppling the sitting candidate.

“The grassroots campaigns have attracted tens of thousands of people across Australia, many of whom have never volunteered for a political cause before,” noted Guardian Australia’s Calla Wahlquist. “Government MPs are feeling the pressure.”

The Seven Network claimed last week that PM Morrison had become “hysterical” about the independent challenge. It pointed out that he had started to hammer out a key campaign theme in media interviews and speeches claiming that independents in Parliament would threaten Australia’s economic stability and national security.

“The allegation by the prime minister … that independent parliamentarians and candidates are a threat to Australia’s security is a shameful slur on decent people exercising their democratic right to stand for election,” Tasmanian independent MP Andrew Wilkie said in a statement broadcast on Seven Network.

“It’s also symptomatic of a government becoming increasingly hysterical at the realisation it’s out of step with a great many Australians.” Wilkie pointed out that some crossbenchers, such as himself, had served in the defence and intelligence services and it was “outrageous” for the prime minister to criticise them.

Encouraged voting for independents
Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who was toppled in a party-room coup by Morrison in 2018 is encouraging Australians to vote for independents whom he calls “small-l Liberals” that are trying to save the liberal values he once espoused.

He says the party is now being taken over by climatic change deniers supported by Rupert Murdoch’s media in Australia such as Sky News, which has given ample coverage to Morrison’s “independents being a national security threat’’ argument.

Well-known election analyst Malcolm Mackerras predicts that the May 21 elections would result in a hung Parliament with both ALP and LNP dependent on 6-8 independent MPs to form a government.

The preferential voting system in the lower house of the Australian Parliament has resulted in favouring a two-party system, but he believes it is due for reform and voters would deliver it. It is compulsory for Australians to vote in elections.

Independents supported by Climate 200 are called “teal candidates” because they use colour in their campaign material which is a merger between green and blue.

“The teal independents are speaking directly to moderate Liberal constituents who are frustrated with the (blue) Liberal Party’s positioning on social and environmental issues” argues Amy Nethery, senior lecturer in politics and policy studies at Deakin University.

“While these same voters may never vote Labour or Greens, many are alienated by Morrison and his government, particularly on climate change and women’s issues.”

Many candidates are women
She points out that it is significant that 19 of the 22 Climate 200 supported candidates are women.

“All of whom have had highly successful careers in their own right. High-profile candidates include Ryan (Kooyong), a professor and head of neurology at the Royal Children’s Hospital, Zoe Daniel (Goldstein) a former ABC foreign correspondent, and Allegra Spender (Wentworth) the chief executive of the Australian Business and Community Network,” noted Nethery writing in The Conversation.

“The teal independents are not political staffers taking the next step towards inevitable political careers. These are professional women making a radical sideways leap because, they say, this is what the times require. It’s a compelling story.”

Dr Kalinga Seneviratne is a Sydney-based IDP-InDepth News Southeast Asia director, the flagship agency of the nonprofit International Press Syndicate. He is currently in Suva. This article is republished with permission.

In 1992, 1700 scientists warned that human beings and the natural world were “on a collision course”. Seventeen years later, scientists described planetary boundaries within which humans and other life could have a “safe space to operate”.

These are environmental thresholds, such as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and changes in land use.

Crossing such boundaries was considered a risk that would cause environmental changes so profound, they genuinely posed an existential threat to humanity.

• READ MORE: Worried about Earth’s future? Well, the outlook is worse than even scientists can grasp
  

This grave reality is what our major research paper, published today, confronts.

In what may be the most comprehensive evaluation of the environmental state of play in Australia, we show major and iconic ecosystems are collapsing across the continent and into Antarctica. These systems sustain life, and evidence of their demise shows we are exceeding planetary boundaries.

We found 19 Australian ecosystems met our criteria to be classified as “collapsing”. This includes the arid interior, savannas and mangroves of northern Australia, the Great Barrier Reef, Shark Bay, southern Australia’s kelp and alpine ash forests, tundra on Macquarie Island, and moss beds in Antarctica.

We define collapse as the state where ecosystems have changed in a substantial, negative way from their original state – such as species or habitat loss, or reduced vegetation or coral cover – and are unlikely to recover.

The good and bad news
Ecosystems consist of living and non-living components, and their interactions. They work like a super-complex engine: when some components are removed or stop working, knock-on consequences can lead to system failure.

Our study is based on measured data and observations, not modelling or predictions for the future. Encouragingly, not all ecosystems we examined have collapsed across their entire range. We still have, for instance, some intact reefs on the Great Barrier Reef, especially in deeper waters. And northern Australia has some of the most intact and least-modified stretches of savanna woodlands on Earth.

Still, collapses are happening, including in regions critical for growing food. This includes the Murray-Darling Basin, which covers around 14 percent of Australia’s landmass. Its rivers and other freshwater systems support more than 30 percent of Australia’s food production.

The effects of floods, fires, heatwaves and storms do not stop at farm gates; they’re felt equally in agricultural areas and natural ecosystems. We shouldn’t forget how towns ran out of drinking water during the recent drought.

Drinking water is also at risk when ecosystems collapse in our water catchments. In Victoria, for example, the degradation of giant Mountain Ash forests greatly reduces the amount of water flowing through the Thompson catchment, threatening nearly five million people’s drinking water in Melbourne.

This is a dire wake-up call — not just a warning. Put bluntly, current changes across the continent, and their potential outcomes, pose an existential threat to our survival, and other life we share environments with.

In investigating patterns of collapse, we found most ecosystems experience multiple, concurrent pressures from both global climate change and regional human impacts (such as land clearing). Pressures are often additive and extreme.

Take the last 11 years in Western Australia as an example.

In the summer of 2010 and 2011, a heatwave spanning more than 300,000 sq km ravaged both marine and land ecosystems. The extreme heat devastated forests and woodlands, kelp forests, seagrass meadows and coral reefs. This catastrophe was followed by two cyclones.

A record-breaking, marine heatwave in late 2019 dealt a further blow. And another marine heatwave is predicted for this April.

These 19 ecosystems are collapsing: read about each

What to do about it?
Our brains trust comprises 38 experts from 21 universities, CSIRO and the federal Department of Agriculture Water and Environment. Beyond quantifying and reporting more doom and gloom, we asked the question: what can be done?

We devised a simple but tractable scheme called the 3As:

• Awareness of what is important
• Anticipation of what is coming down the line
• Action to stop the pressures or deal with impacts.

In our paper, we identify positive actions to help protect or restore ecosystems. Many are already happening. In some cases, ecosystems might be better left to recover by themselves, such as coral after a cyclone.

In other cases, active human intervention will be required – for example, placing artificial nesting boxes for Carnaby’s black cockatoos in areas where old trees have been removed.

“Future-ready” actions are also vital. This includes reinstating cultural burning practices, which have multiple values and benefits for Aboriginal communities and can help minimise the risk and strength of bushfires.

It might also include replanting banks along the Murray River with species better suited to warmer conditions.

Some actions may be small and localised, but have substantial positive benefits.

For example, billions of migrating Bogong moths, the main summer food for critically endangered mountain pygmy possums, have not arrived in their typical numbers in Australian alpine regions in recent years. This was further exacerbated by the 2019-20 fires. Brilliantly, Zoos Victoria anticipated this pressure and developed supplementary food — Bogong bikkies.

Other more challenging, global or large-scale actions must address the root cause of environmental threats, such as human population growth and per-capita consumption of environmental resources.

We must rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero, remove or suppress invasive species such as feral cats and buffel grass, and stop widespread land clearing and other forms of habitat destruction.

Our lives depend on it
The multiple ecosystem collapses we have documented in Australia are a harbinger for environments globally.

The simplicity of the 3As is to show people can do something positive, either at the local level of a landcare group, or at the level of government departments and conservation agencies.

Our lives and those of our children, as well as our economies, societies and cultures, depend on it.

We simply cannot afford any further delay.

Dr Dana M Bergstrom, principal research scientist, University of Wollongong; Dr Euan Ritchie, professor in wildlife ecology and conservation, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University; Dr Lesley Hughes, Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, and Dr Michael Depledge, professor and chair, Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Green Party delegates have voted to accept a deal with Labour which will give it two ministerial portfolios outside of cabinet in the New Zealand government.

Consensus was blocked, so the party required 75 percent of delegates to get the deal across the line this evening.

Labour offered the Green Party the two portfolios as part of a cooperation agreement.

• READ MORE: NZ Greens accept Ardern’s offer of ‘cooperation agreement’
  
• Labour and Greens formally sign cooperation agreement

BREAKING: We’re thinking ahead by acting now. Today we’re proud to launch our bold new vision for the future that resets and reimagines Aotearoa so all of us and our planet thrive. pic.twitter.com/oOGjU5VnHO

— Green Party NZ (@NZGreens) July 25, 2020

Yesterday’s vote to accept the deal came after several rounds of talks on potential areas of cooperation between the two parties concluded on Thursday.

About 150 Green Party delegates were presented the deal on a zoom call, before voting on whether to accept it.

Green Party delegates were also told the two select committees Green MPs will chair or deputy chair will likely be Environment and Transport, RNZ understands.

As part of the proposed cooperation agreement, Labour will support the nomination of a Green MP to be the chair of a select committee, as well as a Green MP in the deputy chair role of an additional select committee.

Green Party co-leaders
The ministerial portfolios will be held by the Green Party’s co-leaders, Labour leader Jacinda Ardern revealed this afternoon.

James Shaw will continue as Climate Change Minister and be appointed Associate Minister for the Environment (Biodiversity), while Marama Davidson will be the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence and Associate Minister of Housing (Homelessness).

Despite a landslide election victory for her Labour Party, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said Saturday that the Green Party would be given two ministerial positions to help advance their “shared goals”https://t.co/cY7m3bVrX1

— AFP news agency (@AFP) October 31, 2020

In a statement, Davidson said the Green Party was “thrilled” to enter into this governing arrangement with Labour.

“We entered into this negotiation hoping to achieve the best outcomes for New Zealand and our planet. This was after a strong campaign where we committed to action on the climate crisis, the biodiversity crisis, and the poverty crisis.

“New Zealanders voted us in to be a productive partner to Labour to ensure we go further and faster on the issues that matter. We will make sure that happens this term.”

Shaw said the Greens had a larger caucus this term, who were ready to play a constructive role.

“In the areas of climate change, looking after our natural environment and addressing inequality, there’s no time to waste. Marama will do incredible work rapidly addressing the issues of homelessness and family violence,” he said.

‘First in NZ political history’
“We are proud to have achieved a first in New Zealand political history, where a major party with a clear majority under MMP has agreed to ministerial positions for another party, as well as big areas of cooperation.”

Areas of co-operation will be: “achieving the purpose and goals of the Zero Carbon Act” through decarbonising public transport and the public sector, increasing the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, introducing clean car standards, and supporting the use of renewable energy for industrial heat.

As well as protecting the environment and biodiversity, and improving child wellbeing and action on homelessness, warmer homes, and child and youth mental health.

In return the Greens will not oppose the government on confidence and supply for the full term of this Parliament, and support Labour on procedural motions in the House and at select committees

But the Greens will be free to take their own position on any issues not covered by the ministerial portfolios and areas of co-operation.

Ardern said in the interests of transparency, Labour was releasing the deal publicly in tandem with the Greens’ deliberations.

“On election night I said I wanted to govern for all New Zealanders and to reach as wide a consensus on key issues as possible. This agreement does that, while honouring the mandate provided to Labour to form a majority government in our own right.

Balancing two key objectives
“The cooperation agreement balances these two objectives, whilst not committing to a more formal coalition or confidence and supply arrangement.”

Ardern said strong, stable government was essential to New Zealand as it recovered from covid.

“Between this agreement and our existing parliamentary majority, we won’t be held back from getting on with the work needed to rebuild our economy and continuing to keep New Zealand safe from covid-19.

She said policy areas where Labour and the Greens could work together were places where the policy and experience of the Greens would provide a positive contribution to the Labour government, but without any requirement for either party to have to reach consensus.

“James knows climate change inside out, his expertise in this complex and detailed policy area is an important skill set to tap into, and he has a range of domestic and international stakeholder relationships that are important to maintain.

“Stability and predictability in climate change policy I see as key, and that has also been feedback that I’ve picked up from stakeholders ranging from environmental NGOs to the business community.”

On Davidson’s role, she said Green MP Jan Logie had led the work on family and sexual violence as an undersecretary, and it was at an “important phase of implementation”.

Addressing a national shame
“Again, continuity on addressing this area of national shame is at the front of my mind. It’s also my strong believe that this is an area which should be a ministerial portfolio in it’s own right, and so that’s what we’re doing.”

She said the agreement struck the right balance of the parties working on issues where there is agreement, “allowing space for disagreement and independence, delivering business continuity and predictability in key policy areas, especially climate policy, and guaranteeing that Labour’s majority is bolstered on key votes to ensure the ongoing stability of the majority government.

“Never before has one party won a majority under MMP, but that’s not to say that the principals of MMP should be ignored. Furthermore it is also simply not how I do politics.”

She said she would not have invested time and energy in this agreement unless she thought it was in the best interests of the government and also for New Zealand.

“My view is there are skills and talents that exist in other parties in Parliament, I want to make use of those from the Green Party, and work on policy areas in which there are skills and expertise as well, it makes sense for New Zealand to do that. At the same time though, I will use the mandate that we’ve been given.”

This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a partnership agreement with RNZ.

Australia’s new Minister for Foreign Affairs Marise Payne probably envied New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s welcome at this week’s Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Nauru this week.

During the leaders’ retreat lunch break on Wednesday, Nauru President Baron Waqa joined a group of local elders to serenade Ardern with a song titled “Aotearoa our friend, Jacinda new star in the sky’”.

Payne was never going to be described in such warm terms. After just over a week in the job, she had to convince Pacific leaders that Australia remained committed to being the region’s “principal security partner” when the new prime minister, Scott Morrison, had chosen not to attend.

READ MORE: Australia to improve Pacific access to security information

Morrison’s absence, and his non-appearance at the April 2018 Forum Economic Ministers’ meeting, suggest that Australia’s continued claims about prioritising the region might be more hyperbole than fact.

The PM’s failure to attend this week’s gathering also undermines Australia’s claimed recognition of the importance of building people-to-people links.

Although Payne is the person in Cabinet most likely to continue Julie Bishop’s positive approach to the region as foreign minister, she was hamstrung at the meeting by Australia’s hypocritical policies.

The centrepiece of Wednesday’s leaders’ meeting was the signing of the Boe Declaration, designed to update the 2000 Biketawa Declaration on regional security.

The Boe Declaration articulates an “expanded concept of security inclusive of human security, humanitarian assistance, prioritising environmental security, and regional cooperation in building resilience to disasters and climate change”. It’s a sad irony that this commitment to “human security” was signed only kilometres from Australia’s offshore processing centre where the human rights of refugees are regularly violated.

This expanded concept of security also highlights the different priorities of Australia and its Pacific Island neighbours. Australia is focused on strategic concerns, particularly the increasingly crowded and complex geopolitics of the region, which has negative effects in the Pacific islands.

Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi warned in a speech in Sydney last week that the region is “seeing invasion and interest in the form of strategic manipulation”.

“The big powers,” he declared, “are doggedly pursuing strategies to widen and extend their reach and inculcating a far-reaching sense of insecurity.”

The biggest challenge facing Payne was the reality of Australia’s climate change policies. The Boe Declaration identifies climate change as “the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of the Pacific” and reaffirms forum members’ “commitment to progress the implementation of the Paris Agreement”.

Payne faced a tough job convincing Pacific leaders that Australia is genuinely committed to meaningful action on climate change when her prime minister is a known advocate for coal-fired power and the government refuses to adopt an explicit strategy to meet its Paris Agreement targets.

There is scope for Australia to improve its relationships in the region. For example, the Boe Declaration reaffirms forum members’ commitment to the idea of the “Blue Pacific”, which is intended to highlight the “collective potential of our shared stewardship of the Pacific Ocean”.

Australia already does valuable and valued work to help Pacific island states protect their ocean territories through its Pacific Maritime Security Programme, under which it provides patrol boats and personnel to regional states. It’s now looking to bolster that with expanded aerial surveillance, with a particular focus on fisheries and, increasingly, undersea natural resource management.

The wider understanding of security outlined in the declaration also specifies “humanitarian assistance” as a priority. Australia is already the primary provider of humanitarian and disaster relief (alongside New Zealand), which it can continue and expand.

The declaration identifies “transnational crime” as another priority, an area in which Australia provides significant support and which is likely to be enhanced when the proposed Australia Pacific Security College is established to train security and law enforcement officials.

The declaration specifically mentions the need to “improve coordination among existing security mechanisms”, which is likely to be assisted by Australia’s proposed Pacific Fusion Centre to connect regional security agencies.

And the declaration highlights the need to promote the “prosperity of Pacific people”, to which Payne’s signing this week in Nauru of agreements with Samoa, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu to join the Pacific Labour Scheme (Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu are already members) will hopefully make a contribution.

However, this week’s forum leaders’ meeting again highlighted the counterproductive nature of Australia’s approach to the Pacific islands.

Bishop worked hard to build bridges with the region when she was foreign minister, and was instrumental in formulating Australia’s policy of “stepping up” its engagement with the Pacific islands, but those positive developments are undermined by Australia’s declared policy positions.

While it’s unlikely that Payne (or any Australian leader) will be serenaded by Pacific leaders soon, Australia at least needs to be singing from the same song sheet as the region, particularly when it comes to climate change.

Dr Joanne Wallis is a senior lecturer at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University and the author of Pacific Power? Australia’s Strategy in the Pacific Islands.