Matt Hrkac's Blog

In response to the criticism that Kathleen Maltzahn has been facing from within the Greens, combined with the heat that the young Greens are copping over their reluctance to publicly come out against Maltzahn, the Victorian Young Greens made a post to their Facebook page in which they claim to stand up for the rights of sex workers:

We recognise sex workers as workers, and that they have the same equality of labour as other workers. We're proud of Greens Policy which is "Decriminalisation of consensual adult sex work." [...] We need to stand with sex workers as we would with any worker whose right to livelihood and safety was impacted by unfair policy.

Mind you, nowhere in this frankly poorly formatted post is there any condemnation of Maltzahn over her views regarding sex work. One person was quick to point out this contradiction:

Maltzahn's views now not only contradict the Greens policy, but are actually supported by sections of the Victorian Liberal Party, who are going to attempt to get it adopted as formal Liberal policy:

Liberal Party conference motion support for Nordic Model

Could they be banking on the Greens support, knowing full well that Maltzahn has a real chance of getting elected come November, especially given that Maltzahn herself is on the record to say that she would "vote with her conscience" against the Greens established policy regarding the decriminalisation of sex work?

Definitely not all smooth sailing within the Victorian Young Greens. They are trying to play both sides of the fence, keeping one foot in the door, and people are clearly seeing through their charade. They need to decide, firmly, which side they stand on: do they stand with the Liberal Party? Or do they stand with sex workers - an extremely marginalised group in our society?


Given it is me who the above anonymous page admin is referring to, I only felt compelled to respond. Since I have published those comments, which have been attributed to the Victorian Young Greens, I've had several members of the Young Greens from other states clambering over each other to get to me in order to work who the source is (sorry, I don't give up the identity of my sources). Also given that I'd be liable to defamation by making up comments and falsely attributing them to a specific source; it's not exactly within my best interest to be fabricating quotes and falsely attributing them to specific sources, is it?

Nice try, though.

Update - 9.34PM April 22, 2018

It appears that the Facebook post (along with the associated comments) has been removed.

Photos: March on Esso
17 April 2018

Following a huge mass union delegates meeting which saw attendance in excess of 2,000 delegates; the unions marched on the Esso Australia offices in Southbank, Melbourne to stand in solidarity with picketing workers participating in the Esso Longford UGLy dispute. As of publishing, this dispute has been ongoing for more than 300 days. Here are some photos from the march and rally:

View full photo album.


Another day, another post relating to the fall out within The Greens after their Batman by-election loss. They can't even keep the details of their own internal investigations on leaking from leaking.

From The Guardian:

The leaked terms of reference for the review, appear to assume that damaging leaks accusing the Greens candidate, Alex Bhathal, of bullying constituted a breach of confidentiality and widen the investigation to members’ public discussions of the issue. It will investigate how confidential information is provided to the state executive and “the impacts the breaches of confidentiality had on the candidate, other individuals, Darebin branch, Batman byelection results and [the Australian Greens Victorian branch] as a whole”.

... Also up for investigation is “public messaging” regarding the party dispute and whether members’ comments on social media constituted breaches of the code of conduct.

Of course, the Victorian Greens targeting members based on public discussions such as on social media is nothing new. They have been 'informally' doing that for ages, long before the Batman by-election. In fact, there were Greens members who were often targeted by a rather heavy handed Digital Communications Coordinator who was paid too much and who had very little to do, leading up to the last Federal Election.

The 'thought policing' within the Victorian Greens is still very much prevalent - particularly against those whom the party hierarchy don't like and it looks like they could be about to formalise it.

The Greens leader, Richard Di Natale, has suggested that those responsible for the leak should be expelled from the party, describing it as a “major factor” in the loss.

Only one major factor was responsible for the Batman by-election loss: Richard Di Natale and his last minute pandering to conservative voters.

Lastly, the co-convenors of the Victorian Greens (both from the party's centrist 'new guard'), Rose Read (a former 2013 federal Greens candidate for the seat of Goldstein) and Colin Jacobs (who had worked in Di Natale's office as a Senior Advisor for several years, briefly becoming Director of Policy and Strategy after he became leader), insist:

Members ... be sceptical of what they hear in the media or via third parties, to trust in party processes and give fellow members the benefit of the doubt.

Which is a laughable statement and deserves to be ridiculed.

Firstly, lets talk about the media: legally, journalists and reporters can't make stuff up else they would be liable to defamation suits. Different outlets have different editorial bents but they still have to report the facts. If the Greens claim that what is being reported is untrue, they should take them on in a lawsuit or challenge it through the Australian Press Council (they won't do either, because there is no case).

Second, any third parties, myself included, who are speaking up on this and other matters about the Greens are mostly those who were formerly involved in the party. Our unfiltered and frank comments about the Greens are arguably more credible than the controlled and filtered party lines that come from those in the party.

The state of civil war within the Victorian Greens doesn't seem to be subsiding at all.

On May 11th, former Greens Councillor, who also stood as a candidate for the seat of Narre Warren South at the 2014 Victorian State Election, Lynette Keleher, took aim at the party and blasted it for what she describes as a culture of bullying and abuse.

I have seen cases, including my own, where preselection rules and dates have been changed at the last minute, affecting outcomes in at least one winnable seat. I have seen victims of bullying, including myself and Bhathal, lodge complaints, only to have them ignored or batted away. And then I have seen victims' words used in counter complaints against them, which are acted on with speed and force.

Right now the cover up is on. Right now, it seems the party leaders are busy spinning their lines. They write about the need to identify the leakers while protecting the complainants’ right to raise anonymous, evidence-free allegations as the rest of the party prepared for an expected historic byelection. They know very well that journalists will protect their sources – the leakers will not be found. The bullies will continue their careers in the party, and nothing will change.

I, as someone else who was heavily involved in the party; I can only say that Keleher is absolutely spot on in her assessment of the Victorian Greens.

By and large, the party's membership can be divided into two camps. The first camp is what can be considered the 'old guard'; consisting of people who have helped build the party from its humble beginnings in the early 1990's, on the basis of activism, as well as other people who have come in around them up to the present day. People such as Alex Bhathal and Lidia Thorpe both fall into this grouping.

The other, and more concerning, broad group can be termed as the 'new guard'. This group consists of several sub-groups, based on when and how they came into the party.

The first big subgroup are those who came into the party post 2001,  jumping ship from both the Labor and Liberal Party's in response to the bypartisan me-tooism between the two major parties on Tampa and the Iraq War. These people, while broadly  progressive and left-wing; were also broadly dismissive of social movements and their role in creating change, believing that progressive change comes from electing people into parliament. They brought with them the same attitudes and culture of opportunism and careerism that plagues the major parties, into the Greens.

The second big sub-group of the 'new guard' consists of former Democrats (some who held key positions in that party) who jumped ship following their demise as a political force. It is this sub-group that has been broadly responsible for the Greens centrist drag and willingness to do deals - seeking to turn the Greens into the Democrats 2.0, claiming to have learned from their mistakes of the past.

The third sub-group consists of a loose collective of younger people from affluent backgrounds, who grew up in Liberal voting households. In their adult lives, these people have only ever known the Greens. These people are very individualist, inward looking, ambitious and are very much motivated by career progression rather than activism, social movements, issues advocacy and party building.

It is the 'new guard' that now has dominance within the Victorian Greens and it was this group that gained confidence and was emboldened by the elevation of Richard Di Natale into the Federal Parliamentary Leadership. This group, which now occupies most of the key internal positions in the Victorian Greens, has been consistently and aggressively going after the 'old guard' in the party ever since as well as successfully taking power away from the grassroots membership and centralising it. Which is why...

We Greens have problems, and we should lay off the smug boasting that we "do politics differently". However, if the progressive green-left were to abandon this party – built over 30 years by thousands of committed volunteers – it would just have to be rebuilt.

...this statement, in a letter to The Age on May 13 by 'long standing Greens member' Colin Smith is completely misguided.

The fact is, the progressive green-left aren't really being given a choice. They are being forced out of the party unless they toe the centrist line and the party's 'new guard' couldn't care less about the work that has been put in to build the party over the years.

The party may not be entirely a powerful elite - but this powerful elite definitely have the most influence within the party.

This was a tweet in response to mine that outed City of Darebin Greens Councillor Trent McCarthy as being one who was responsible for the undermining of Alex Bhathal's by-election for the seat of Batman:

Yet, this, courtesy of The Age, drops today:

"Four Greens councillors in Melbourne’s inner-north, including the Mayor of Darebin, have been confirmed as among the 18 party members who tried to take out their own candidate for the recent Batman byelection before the race had even started. Darebin Mayor Kim Le Cerf and councillors Trent McCarthy, Steph Amir and Susanne Newton face calls for their expulsion from the Greens over their alleged roles in the sabotage of the failed campaign of candidate Alex Bhathal."

When I tweeted calling out McCarthy as one of the possible perpetrators of the leaks against Alex Bhathal - I knew I was right about my assumptions. This merely confirms it.

Never tweet, McCarthy. Never tweet.

If you thought that Prime Minister Tony Abbott was bad, it could be about to get a whole lot worse.

(A reminder too that Malcolm Turnbull hasn't even lost his 30th Newspoll in a row yet; but that will come next week)

Abbott was a bumbling idiot. Peter Dutton is actually a smart and conniving political operator who knows what he is doing. I think we can all determine just who is more dangerous.

God help us if Peter Dutton becomes Prime Minister. God, help us.

According to the latest Australian Election Study, which has been conducted following every Federal Election since 1987, more Australians than ever are describing themselves as on the political left. Since 1996:

Granted, more still identify as being centrist, but that figure is in decline - give it a couple more election cycles and those identifying as left will outnumber those who identify as being in the centre. Those who identify as 'right' has not changed at all over the years.

Granted, also, those identifying as "left" could very well range from your more liberal Liberals right though to Marxists - however, it is now becoming very apparent that people want more progressive politics.

This is arguably reflected in Labor's left-ish lurch in recent years from their slump to the right pre 2013; but it boggles the mind that there are still some who insist on pandering to centrist positions.

Granted, it was a Labor commissioned survey, but it is none the less quite telling:

... responders in the Melbourne [Batman] ­electorate describing the Greens leader in negative terms such as “aggressive”, “disappointing”, ­“arrogant”, “smarmy”, “confused” and “not Bob Brown”.

... with some responders associating the Greens leader with “disunity”, ­“infighting”, “complaint”, “bullying” and “secrets”.

I said in the aftermath of the Batman by-election that Di Natale's pitch to right-wing voters over dividend imputation is what cost the Greens the election. This merely confirms my analysis.

The response from Di Natale's spokesperson is also very telling:

“This so-called ‘polling’ says far more about the Labor Party’s growing anxieties about the Greens in the inner city than anything else.”

Dismiss it as they will as some sort of 'Labor conspiracy', but they should know this: there are numerous people on the left; not just within the Labor Party but many non party aligned, members of smaller left wing parties and even people within the Greens who feel exactly the same way about Di Natale's leadership as this polling indicates.

More than 6,500 early childhood educators in more than 5,000 early childcare centres walked off the job today over poor pay. 1,000 of those workers rallied in Melbourne. Childcare workers remain among the lowest paid professionals in Australia, mainly because the sector is women-dominated and its historic association with 'women's work'.

The nationwide day of action was staged by United Voice. View the full photo album.

The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) and the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) coordinated a series of actions to coincide with the Victorian Transport Association's 2018 Annual Conference in Lorne over the 19th and 20th of March.

The unions were protesting against the Victorian Transport Association's support for the Victorian International Container Terminal (VICT) during the MUA dispute. VICT is owned by Philippines-based International Container Terminal Services Inc (ICTSI), which operates in countries known to be “the worst countries in the world to work in” and where workers have “no guarantee of rights”.

Here are a few photos from the actions:

Protesters stage a silent stand-in at the Victorian Transport Association's 2018 Annual Conferece in Lorne, March 19

At least 50 union activists made the trip to Lorne on March 20 to protest against corporate links to dictatorships

The CFMEU and the MUA were prominently represented at the rally

Shannon O'Keeffe, ITF Campaigns Director for the Asia Pacific

Dave Noonan, National Secretary of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) (Construction and General Division)

View full photo album.

« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »