The Green Party: political prospects & progress

There has been a recent run of fairly good results for the Greens in a range of polls at state and territory level, including their best ever result in the ACT where they will determine who forms government (though they have been in that position before).

This has led to a run of commentary pieces – in blogs at Poll Bludger and Larvatus Prodeo, and by Mike Steketee in The Australian.  Given my long standing interest in promoting greater diversity in political representation, I tend to follow the performances of smaller parties and independents with interest.  My views are along similar lines to Mike Steketee – there have been some good solid performances and a broadly positive trend which is quite good for a minor party, but while there are some good prospects for a bit more growth in their vote, they are still a long way off seriously challenging for major party status.

The Greens are reasonably well placed to build their base vote a bit further in many states and possibly winning a lower house seat or two here and there. Although this is still a long way from the promised land of ‘major party status’ which all smaller parties dream of now and then, it is still a very credible performance.

But being a ‘third party’ in a two party system is a very arduous road. I expect their vote will ebb and flow depending on circumstances, but at present there’s no reason to think it will seriously diminish anytime soon. Bob Brown’s retirement – whenever it happens – may challenge that view, but I’m not convinced it will automatically harm their vote very much.

Any party that wants to build a solid support base above a few per cent has to juggle the tensions of appealing to different constituencies. The bigger the voter base, the ‘broader the church’ needs to be. There will always be some tension for the Greens between trying to seriously consolidate the more doctrinaire left wing vote while trying to broaden their appeal to capture some of the ’small l’ liberal vote that the Democrats used to get.

But the major parties get away with appealing to various groups of voters who have less in common than they do differences – hell, they fit them in within a single parliamentary party room – so in theory there’s no reason why a smaller party can’t do the same, apart from the major hurdle of convincing people to vote for a third party in what is still portrayed and perceived as a two party system (and the related inequalities in finances and media space).

Queensland may present a particular possibility for the Greens, depending on how metropolitan based liberal voters perceive the merged, Springborg led Liberal National party. If city voters do feel the LNP is just the National Party in new clothes, the liberal-leaning voters may be more willing to give the Greens a look, either because they’re the sort of liberal who never likes voting Labor, or they just don’t want to vote Labor this time because of the ‘tired or arrogant’ perceptions that can always beset a government that’s been in power for over a decade. There’s not a lot the Greens can do about how people perceive the LNP, but how well they are able to appeal to such people is very much in their hands. Though the optional preferential voting system will likely make it harder for them to break through for a win.

It all keeps making me think it would have been far better if the Greens had merged with the Democrats in the early 1990s, broadening that base by combining the better elements of both parties, rather than striking out on their own and having to reconquer some of the same ground. However, that’s all rather academic now.