Sarah Stephen
“I’m ready to come to the mainstream”, new Labor Party recruit Peter Garrett told the ABC’s 7.30 Report on June 10. Garrett’s ascendancy will mark the fastest track to a safe federal seat in ALP history.
On June 12, Garrett became a member of the Labor Party. Within a fortnight he will be installed as the candidate for the eastern Sydney electorate of Kingsford Smith. If there are no other candidates, he’ll be pre-selected on June 24. If challengers emerge, the national executive will vote in Garrett’s favour on June 28.
A lot has changed in 20 years. In 1984 Garrett helped to form the Nuclear Disarmament Party (NDP) in reaction to a massive sell-out by the ALP — the decision in its first year of office to give the go-ahead to the world’s largest uranium mine at Roxby Downs, contrary to long-standing ALP policy of opposition to uranium mining.
The NDP contested the 1984 federal election with three main demands: close foreign bases, prohibit nuclear ships and planes, and stop the mining and export of uranium. Garrett won 10% of the primary vote but was just two votes short of a Senate seat, denied preferences by both Labor and the Coalition.
Garrett continued to campaign against Pine Gap and Australia’s military alliance with the US. He opposed the Jabiluka uranium mine in Kakadu National Park.
So does Garrett’s latest move reflect a shift to the left by the Labor Party, or a conservative leap by Garrett onto the parliamentary gravy train? Garrett has to some extent answered that question himself with a series of back-flips on long-held positions.
At a June 10 press conference, Garrett declared: “I don’t believe that Pine Gap should be closed.” Referring to his days in the NDP, he said, “we had the spectre of nuclear war facing us, the rearmament of nuclear weapons on all sides of the continent. Now I’m convinced, and in the maturing of time can see, that the international situation has changed. It’s terrorism now, not nuclear disarmament.”
In a March 2003 opinion piece in the Australian, Garrett directly contradicting this supposed re-thinking: “The world is now veering off the path of constructive arms control and disarmament to one where tactical nuclear weapons are being readied for use and a second arms race is on the cards.” He referred to the use of depleted uranium and “bunker busters” in the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq as two examples.
He was right — the issue of nuclear disarmament is as relevant today as it was 20 years ago. However, as Garrett told the 7.30 Report on June 10, his electoral ambitions have taken over: “I’ve matured in my views.”
Both Labor and the Greens have worked hard over the last few months to recruit Garrett. The Greens failed — Garrett reportedly declared that he was sick of ``minor party'' politics and wanted a chance to be a real player.
In a June 10 press release, Bob Brown wished Garrett “great success”, but the Greens aren’t holding back their criticism. “The track record of people trying to change the Labor Party from within was not good”, Brown told Channel 10 on June 13.
“I think he’s going to have a hard time of it in the Labor Party. He’s a very ethical man. He’s been a real values person and a beacon of values in Australia, which badly needed it through the `80s and `90s, in this age of economic rationalism. But he’s now gone to one of the major parties which was the architect of that economic rationalism, which has increased the gap between rich and poor in our country, which has [been] devastating on the environment.”
According to Brown, the ALP sought Garrett to offset the “growing power of the Greens”. Brown told Ten’s Meet the Press on June 13: “I notice that Peter ... [is] getting on the Tasmanian Labor government’s agenda there for a pulp mill, which is going to use chlorine, which means it brings cancer-producing products out into the environment, into the ocean. As far as we know, it may take native forests, and that’s not on.”
The Greens announced on June 13 that they would run against Garrett in Kingsford Smith.
In March, Garrett was part of a campaign against the Regional Forest Agreement in Tasmania, arguing that it doesn’t protect enough forest. He now disagrees that Labor’s record on old-growth forests is shameful.
Bob Brown told the 7.30 Report on June 8: “The Labor Party is the chief agent, along with John Howard, for the greatest rate of destruction of Tasmania’s forests and wildlife in history — that’s Labor Party politics. And Peter’s called that shameful and, you know, he’s joined the whole campaign against that. So I’d worry about him being caught up in this chainsaw-driven party.”
Garrett has recently shed some of his former positions in order to come in line with Labor policy. However, on a range of social issues, Garrett has held conservative views for some time. He is a born-again Christian, and has made it known that he opposes the availability of abortion. He told the Jun 10 7.30 Report: “I think it’s preferable if abortion doesn’t happen.”
Few commentators have delved into Garrett’s role as head of the Australian Conservation Foundation, one of the more conservative environmental organisations in Australia. Garrett was president of the ACF from 1989 to 1993, and again from 1998 until this year.
Answering the accusation on the 7.30 Report that, given his history, he would be seen as anti-corporate by corporate Australia, Garrett pointed out: “In my work with ACF, I was happy to work with progressive corporates.” ACF has for a long time promoted the idea that you can sell protection of the environment to corporate Australia by pointing out its potential for business.
Whether it’s based in reality or not, Garrett’s high profile as an environmentalist will give Labor a new green tinge, which they hope will stem the flow of votes to the Greens.
The warning bells for Labor have been sounding since the Cunningham by-election in 2002, where there was a 17% swing to the Greens, a 6% swing away from Labor, and the Greens’ Michael Organ won the seat. The disaffection with Labor was reinforced by the results of the NSW local council elections, where the Greens doubled their vote.
Commenting on the Garrett factor, pollster Rod Cameron told the June 8 7.30 Report that “this election is probably going to be determined in a small number of seats and probably by the extent of preferences that Labor gets from Greens and other minor parties''.
“Labor normally gets 70% of Green preferences. Garrett standing for Labor, I think may well increase that by a few per cent of Green preferences going to Labor and it could well be crucial.”
A June 13 Newspoll showed 39% of voters surveyed believed Garrett would improve Labor’s chances, compared with 19% who disagreed.
It isn’t automatic that Garrett’s move to Labor will slash the Green vote. Voters who have turned to the Greens have done so for a range of reasons, not simply because of their stance on the environment. The Greens are the only consistently anti-war party in parliament, and are widely respected for their stance on the refugee issue.
Michelle Grattan pointed out in the June 14 Melbourne Age that “the process of acquiring Garrett has made a nonsense of much of that agonising about rank-and-file democracy that consumed Labor for a year after the 2001 defeat, spawning an extensive review and a special party conference and, incidentally, corroding Simon Crean's leadership”.
According to the June 12 Herald Sun, Garrett explained his move away from the left as “a part of growing up”.
He said: “I’ve made a decision, effectively, to go towards the mainstream. If that’s identified as being a little more conservative, then so be it.”
From Green Left Weekly, June 23, 2004.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.
