In this week’s installment of ‘how hypocritical can he get?’ Paul Murray decides to fire a warning shot over the Labor party’s bow by depicting the current conflict between the Greens and Labor over Housing Policy, Gaza and the CMFEU.
In the article Paul Murray gleefully recounts the issues that the Greens have been arguing with Labor about over the past two weeks. He points out, quite correctly, that Greens preferences are an important ingredient of any election win in next year’s polls.
The point of hypocrisy is the disingenuous messaging here. Elsewhere (see July 7, for example) Paul Murray has insisted that a vote for the Greens is akin to voting for the Monster Raving Loony Party… he has also implored Labor to detach themselves from their alliance, insisting that any Greens influence on Australian politics is likely to result in our sudden and immediate failure as a nation state.
Q. So why is Murray so concerned that they want to question Labor’s stance on negative gearing, supporting Israel and criminalising unions?
A. He’s not. This is a two page article about people in parliament using parliament to argue about policy. That’s exactly what its for… the real reason for the article is buried in the middle of the piece, where he carefully outlines that the ‘pro-Labor voting patterns of the current teals’ could also prop up a Labor government. He issues a dire warning:
‘And on that basis, voters in the wealthy Perth seat of Curtin should vote for Kate Chaney. That’s a de facto Labor vote.’
Murray goes on to quote a statement made by my PhD Supervisor Dr Ian Cook – who warned about the preference deals the Liberals made in the 2017 state election:
‘The Liberals risk losing supporters who think that One Nation is divisive and extremist, and One Nation risks being seen to support a Barnett government.’
Murray’s ploy here is to insist the same applies here… by supporting Labor, The Greens and Teals risk alienating their constituents, and through their association with The Greens and Teals, Labor also risks alienating their own. He goes as far as suggesting that because of these disagreements, Labor and the Greens should put each other last on preferences (‘on principle’). Ridiculous.
I, for one, am glad that the Greens (and Teals) are asking important questions of Labor about issues like housing affordability, Isreal’s continued war on Gaza and the criminalisation of the CMFEU. The fact of the matter is that on these issues the LNP is not a credible opposition because it supports and holds the same position as the Labor party.
The reason that people will preference Labor is simply that they remain better than the Liberals on the issues that actually matter to this country.
Of course, these issues are never discussed earnestly in ‘The West’, whose front page, and page 2 yesterday, was dominated by a story about 7West’s (the ownership company’s) employee Basil Zempilas ‘biting back at Labor insults’ as he preps for his LNP leadership run. As housing affordability becomes a forgotten dream, WA suffers from a skills and worker shortage, we are heading into the 13th hottest month on record in a row… the West chooses to focus its two opening pages on propping up a celebrity because they were criticised for being a phony.
‘Labor is uptight about Mr Zempilas, fearing his high-profile media background, including host of major events such as Telethon, will help in a future contest if he ever became Liberal leader’.
Impartial and inspired journalism at the West.