On 13 April 2012, the Australian Greens announced the replacement for their indefatigable leader, the retiring Senator Bob Brown. Party elder, tenacious campaigner, and soul of the green movement, Brown would always be hard to replace. He has served sixteen years in the Australian Senate, and brought the Greens from the political periphery to the centre stage of national parliament. Supporting the Labor minority government and holding the balance of power in the Senate, the Australian Greens are now powerfully positioned.
Testimony to this is the success of incoming leader Christine Milne in negotiating the adoption of a national carbon tax from July 2012. Milne brings a powerful vision and intellect, prodigious political credentials, and enormous enthusiasm to the task of leadership. Her political reach has long been impressive, having represented Tasmania’s rural-regional heartland as an MP, and having now supported both conservative and labor minority governments.
As party leader of the Tasmanian Greens, she kept a state Liberal minority government in power and achieved significant policy breakthroughs over two years. These included gun law reform, in the wake of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, gay law reform, and a Parliamentary apology to the stolen generation. Tough negotiation skills tempered by a cogent personal philosophy, informed by consensus-based politics, underscore her strengths.
Her leadership marks an audacious new chapter in the evolution of the Australian Greens and threatens to rattle the established political parties at national levels. This is, after all, the Green who delivered on her promise to give Tasmanian Premier Robin Gray ‘the biggest shock of his life’ just before helping bring down his government in 1989. Her capacity two decades on to back-foot Australia’s most prominent politicians was clear only days into her leadership of the Greens.
With bullish, bring it on, certitude, Milne landed Opposition Leader Tony Abbott squarely on the defensive by labelling him ‘pathetic’ on climate change, and his shadow climate minister a ‘wimp’. Taking no prisoners, she then warned the Labor minority government, which the Greens help support in power, not to pursue a budget surplus at the expense of Australian families. And in the same week she manoeuvred Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce into the extraordinary position of competing with her over which of them had the truest, traditionally country party, ‘bush’ credentials.
As she embarked last month upon a tour of rural regional Australia, the sceptics jumped all over Milne’s belief that the Greens can make inroads into the rural vote. And yet the Greens have already worked with conservative rural independents on climate legislation and solar feed-in tariffs. They have worked with conservative country senators on youth allowances for rural workers. And they have worked on truth in labelling that appeals to agricultural constituencies; guiding consumers towards Australian made food that is pesticide and GE free. Whilst much divides rural voters and the Greens, Milne is well aware that crucial rural-Green coalitions against the rapacious coal seam gas mining of prime agricultural land are inevitable.
Changing the political conversation, building coalitions, and practising consensus-based politics to help achieve a clean, green and clever country is very much the Milne credo. And where better to drive change, not just from the left or right flanks, but ultimately from the economic political centre? On 4th May 2012, Milne announced that merchant banker, finance academic, and small business owner, Peter Whish-Wilson, would replace Bob Brown on his retirement as a Tasmanian Green Senator.
If Brown dedicated himself to opposing the environmentally destructive ‘old economy’ of resource exploitation, Whish-Wilson has personally demonstrated the viability of the clean, green, clever ‘new economy’. He is a cross over, new generation Green, an economics graduate from Duntroon, and a lecturer at the University of Tasmania, literate in international, corporate and environmental finance.
He has experience with Merrill Lynch, NY, Deutsch Bank, HK and BHP Billiton and fell in with the Greens whilst opposing the billion-dollar Tamar Valley pulp mill that threatens to destroy his boutique, organic vineyard. Whish-Wilson takes the Australian Greens, with utmost credibility, into the economic mainstream, with Milne tasking him with helping build a visionary new economic narrative for the nation.
Whish-Wilson is an inspired choice, a nod to the agricultural community, to his Northern Tasmania Tamar Valley roots, and to the Green tradition of campaigning against developments like pulp mills. And yet, he is an unexpected choice, with a potent twist to the economic centre where he could comfortably converse with deposed Opposition Leader and fellow merchant banker Malcolm Turnbull about the benefits of pricing carbon.
Of Milne’s many pressing tasks, one of the most crucial and requiring all her negotiating acumen and skill at consensus politics will be to tend to the many shades of Green now jostling within the party. But for outgoing Senator Bob Brown, Whish-Wilson, the merchant banker, is no contradiction; he is an embodiment of ‘clean, green and clever’ that has inspired Greens for many decades. Brown is confident that, just like his family’s wines, Whish-Wilson will be a gold medal Greens Senator for Tasmania.
Dr Kate Crowley is Associate Professor and Head of the School of Government, University of Tasmania
Show Comments
Comments (39)
“the Green tradition of campaigning against developments like pulp mills”.
Now this is where the whole thing comes unglued.
This is where the pendulum is stuck.
This is why the Green have suffered taunts from hard liners such as the recent Paul Howes rant.
As Barry Chipman once so eloquently pointed out, that “we can’t use slate for toilet paper”, there must be a place where paper is both cleanly and efficiently produced.
Of course it would require a pulp mill and the one long proposed for Tasmania is merely a joke, but to label this as a tradition is not helpful.
Hopefully Peter will unshackle the pendulum and work constructively to allow change that will work with our environment and not leave direction as a rusted say so.
I can’t believe this (in my view) blatant political advertising is written by a publicly-funded academic. Perhaps Dr Kate Crowley would like to comment on the fact that a Tasmanian senator represents only 0.18% of the Australian population? Both our Greens senators are representing less than 0.5% of the Australian nation. Lets take a reality check Doctor Crowley? Without a senate ‘gerrymander’ there would be no Tasmanian Greens in Canberra at all. The horrendous truth is that Tasmania cannot even withdraw from the Commonwealth because 60% of the population survive on welfare.
It might be easier to sell W-W if he would be more explicit about those issues where he vaguely admits to departing from Greens orthodoxy, as well as telling us more about his Damascene conversion from Howard-voting conservative to Bob Brown’s successor.
John Hayward
So a guy who has worked with Merrill Lynch, Deutsch Banck and BHP Billiton is the embodiment of ‘clean, green and clever’
Get real!
Good spin though!
‘Appointing’ Peter Whish Wilson behind closed doors without any involvement by the public is an interesting way to demonstrate a commitment to “changing the political conversation, building coalitions, and practising consensus-based politics”.
The community has been left out of political decisions for too long and the high-handed methods used by the Greens to define what is in the public interest mirror more of the same from the other political parties.
It’s tragic for the true believers that the Greens has so quickly demonstrated their lack of commitment to their own espoused principles.
Senator Milne and Senator-elect Peter Whish-Wilson need to look to their Tasmanian constituents and examine whether their Green political brand has been diminished by the ENGOs negotiations in the Tasmanian forestry industry and the mute compliance of at least 4 of the 5 Greens MPs supporting a fetid and bankrupt State Labor Government.
The Greens cannot take their constituuency for granted; the 3-5% of bolstered votes will evaporate without moral courage from leaders within the Greens party. And the core 10-15% of the traditional voter base will need to see authenticity, trust and delivery from their elected representatives.
Their 2010-fling affair with State Labor needs to end soon or Booth might be the last Green-man standing.
#5 So what are you asking for? Another election?
I think psephologist Kevin Bonham (on an earlier PWW thread) has already cleared up some of the misunderstandings around replacement Senate candidates including based on last senate election results that PWW was next in line anyway.
Kudos to Pete for putting himself out there.
If he’s hard-working and has integrity he’s got my vote. Way I see it, it’s a credit to him that he’s been broadminded enough to consider new directions in life, both politically and ideologically - and made a go of changing things for the better - rather than sitting on his arse and grumbling like posters 2 & 3.
Greens, credible? Dioxin anyone?
Is post 2 the same Karl Stevens who once sought Green party pre-selection?
If we want to talk about openness this seems as good as any place to start.
Written and authorised by the Australian Taxpayer….Suckers.
So Kate was this written on a laptop provided by the University and during business hours? Where is it written in your PD that your now a profession green ad writer. ps Turnbull will never be leader again so get that right.
Cleaver 10. Looks like the party has activated the ‘Greens media unit’ to save this thread from further embarrassment. Do you think I will respond to an assumed identity on TT while my specific questions directed to the author have not been answered? Look at Kate Cowleys phrase “Milne landed Opposition Leader Tony Abbott squarely on the defensive by labelling him ‘pathetic’”? Wow! What a knockout blow against Tony Abbott? She called him pathetic. No wonder Abbott is going from strength to strength. Interestingly Christine Milne has never referred to Craig Thomson or Dick Adams or Sid Sidebottom or Tony Burke as ‘pathetic’. I guess they are all competent green-labor politicians in her view?
My dear Earthians…
Gee that Carbon Tax is a winner. And then we have Milne wanting to get rid of the coal industry and replace with 100% renewables.
Well you’ve had years thinking about it. What’s the plan? This is core Greens policy so if you dont have a coherant sensible and financially sound plan to get rid of the coal industry then the whole Green agenda is economic suicide.
#12 Good on you Karl. You’re probably already aware, but it never hurts to point out the nexus that often exists between academic positions in ‘political science’ and high-ranked government positions as ‘Advisers’. Is Whish-Wilson hiring?
I personally think this piece is party-political propaganda and reflects poorly on the University.
#11, Sam, you make some accusations, but where is your evidence? I would suggest your comments arise from pure speculation.
#2, Karl, you say that 60% of Tasmanians are on welfare; Sam has also made this statement; could you give some idea of the break down of your 60%?
That is, percentages of unemployed, aged pensioners, disabled etc.
(10) “If we want to talk about openness this seems as good as any place to start.” Oh your so funny cleaver … “openness” indeed. What are you hiding behind, a chopping board? Fair dinkum.
Don’t worry Karl many of us were once in the same closed door room, heard the same things … but perhaps perceptions are different when one prefers to ignore serious community questions.
I distinctly recall being beaten around the head in an email because I never jumped on a non existent bus … standard practice, so it seems … and I was ASKED twice to stand!! I was never really into bondage and discipline before, but I had my eyes opened and … now I know the game I think it’s quite fun now!! … I’ll supply the whip if you bring the cleaver!!
Seriously though I think (5) Richard Barton ultimately hits the nail on the head.
I think we need clarification on whether this is for TT or taken from something else? It is quite an extraordinary piece - is the writer a member of the Greens? Or is this from an independent commentator. If the latter, I would worry about the prosaic style used. If the former, then shouldn’t the article contain a disclaimer?
Peter Whish-Wilson might have mixed it with big financial institutions-but he is likely to look back at those as nursery days when he tangles with the hard-left Green Senators in the Greens Caucus meetings.
Oh nooooo, a “publicly-funded academic” who may have “written on a laptop provided by the University…and during business hours.”
And writing ads for greens to boot…...well I never!!
Meanwhile, Milne and Brown and Whish-Wilson and the rest of them are out there successfully doing politically what the ever aerating whingy whiner tall poppy harvesters can only dream of.
That is, making significant state and national political history in their time. It’s a massive achievment folks, regardless.
It’s telling when the most ardent advocates of “a fair go” are so bloody unfair themselves when it suits them.
Politically ill informed comments and feel-in-the-dark observervances fail to note that Abbott boringly talks the standard ambiguous polly speak, with lotsa stalling and stuttering and verbal flap-flapping around the issues, slew eyed down the nose ducking and weaving, but always, always moving backwards.
He leaves little impression at all…...if there is any it’s more of a stain.
With Milne you know right where you stand, or where you don’t.
If you’re an unreasonable git she’ll nut you (upstairs or downstairs) with sound reasoning and logic while moving forward all the time offering you more informed info than a Tory mug lair intellect can only fail to fathom.
It’s about politics and policies with depth, not flouro vests, camera crews and shallow self centred cringe worthy staged antics and events.
Abbott is a pathetic example of an aspiring national leader, statesmen and decision maker.
He’s a seat warmer.
Good luck to Milne and good luck to Whish-Wilson.
More power to them for getting up and having a go, for making the commitments and the sacrifices that it takes to step into the at times nasty petty and pathetic sh*t fight that passes for our political processes these days.
Ah…...are there any other volunteers?
Kate Crowley is no slouch either, she writes a good informative and articulate article.
Cleaver [comment #10] - maybe when individuals like Karl Stevens (and Andrew Wilkie) got into the Green Party citadel maybe they weren’t welcomed; they told their truth and ultimately they walked away. It’s set up as a political party, not a religion.
When sincere people aren’t listened and faces glaze over, what do you do? When you get the political-stare with no diaglogue - the ball is in your court; nowhere else to go but out that door you came in.
‘Truth’, Cleaver is of course ‘relative’ and always a fragile beast in human hands!
#19 TerryS: “Good luck to Milne and good luck to Whish-Wilson.
More power to them for getting up and having a go, for making the commitments and the sacrifices that it takes to step into the at times nasty petty and pathetic sh*t fight that passes for our political processes these days.”
My thoughts exactly. How posters here can put the boot into the Greens, considering the alternative parties, is beyond me. I have total respect for Christine Milne and, although I know little about WW except for his stance on the pulp mill, his credentials outlined by Kate Crowley are impressive and should add to the depth and intelligence of the Greens.
Karl - why are you so confrontational? Do you really think it helps? My understanding is that you were cut loose from the Greens because of your public criticism of their policies. Nothing surprising about that - if you behaved in a similar fashion in a job you were paid to do, you’d be out the door. Swallow your pride Karl - use your intelligence in a positive way.
Keith Antonysen 15. Thanks for picking me up on that. The last time I checked with the ABS, Tasmania had 59% living on government funds. Around 38% are on direct welfare which may have risen in recent times. There is another 21 or 22% employed by the state and federal governments. I recon its around 60% of the Tasmanian population on public money. That makes it too hard for us to break away from the Commonwealth and become a tax haven in the South Pacific.
It appears that many of the contributors to this thread are ignoring what is happening in the world today. We are actually going through a period of technological change from carbon based to renewable energy systems. Whether we like it or not, and obviously many of the contributors don’t like it, we have to become part of the new system and just becoming a tax haven is not going to solve our problems.
We could do worse than to contemplate the way that Iceland is steering its recovery from a disastrous period of government. They have a mix of natural resources, arts and music, tourism, industry and renewable energy that seems very balanced. Peter Whish Willson may be just the right person to help us achieve that balance and still manage to avoid the attempts of developers to mismanage the environment.
(21) Whilst Karl is more than capable for speaking for himself, and I wouldn’t presume to speak for him, however I feel some things need addressing. Firstly, why is it presumed party politics is the only way, the only choice? Wilkie has already proven that wrong in Tas. Indeed the rise of independents is surely going to happen… The Greens want to be considered equal to the two other major parties, but they have come in on the end, at a time when politics/pollies are considered by many as nothing more than a joke. … Infact do people want the Greens to be the same, equal to the Lib/Labs. Is it a case of getting ‘in’ at any cost? Look at Peter Garrett, who ultimately ended up toeing the labor line … the Greens warned him about that, but it appears they now follow suit, in a slightly different fashion of course, but still at the end of the day … compromised! As Independent Senator Nick Xenophon said “… there’s so much sound and fury about a code of conduct now just shows how much on the nose politicians are with the Australian public.” “Ultimately this is a case of common sense. The best integrity commissioners are the Australian public and a robust media, and I think that we’ve come to this indicates how the system is broken and how politicians are held in such low regard by the entire community.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-14/mps-reluctant-to-support-code-of-conduct/4009436
25%, by the latest EMRS poll, apparently want an alternative.
The Greens aren’t perfect. They too need to be held accountable, not play the insular, out of touch, behind doors games, instead be proactive in true representation and consideration of communities, rather than just herd and coral the sheep. Otherwise what are they? Gods to rule, no matter what?
It’s also a bit scary and indeed suggestive of John Hawkins suggestions when people support/vote for people they know little or nothing about. Let alone what goes on behind the scenes. Of course you would know the WW name associated with the Exaggerator, and the close personal friendship/visits Gunns Gay made to the same … hmmm?? All very ‘relative’ you see!
Do people want to know the truth, or do you want to stay blindfolded?
I’m all for, as John Hawkins suggests … without ‘fear or favour’ … surely people must make their choice based on ALL the truth, not just cherry pick the bits that sound good and ignore the inconsistencies.
Maddie [comment #21] you just explained ‘the culture of compliance’ that operates in Tasmania with our comment: “My understanding is that you were cut loose from the Greens because of your public criticism of their policies. Nothing surprising about that - if you behaved in a similar fashion in a job you were paid to do, you’d be out the door.”
When sincere people aren’t listened to and faces glaze over, what do you do? When you get the political-stare with no dialogue - the ball’s in your court; you can think and act differently.
The Tasmanian Greens and the Australian Greens are only political parties; - no more, no less. Their elected representatives are all perfectly capable of responding to critique if they wish to individuals like Karl Stevens. I’d welcome it and so would many others. Thank you.
So let me get this right.
It’s a moral outrage if an academic writes a subjective opinion piece, possibly while at work and eating organic tofu, that’s arguably supportive of two Green senators.
Yet no-one on here has said boo about Bruce Felmingham, or Julian Amos et al, who do exactly the same thing with a neo-conservative bent on a regular basis, but probably without the tofu.
Looks like another case of playing the person rather than the ball.
Why not attack what Crowley says rather than her, she’s entitled to an opinion, just like the people who take issue with it.
Just for the public record I’m not a member of any political party or movement, unless you count the RACT.
It constantly amazes me that the same few people keep banging away on here about how they aren’t heard, and if it wasn’t for TT no-one would have an opportunity to speak out.
Then the same people launch personal attacks on anyone daring to contribute something that differs from their world view.
As for comments about how Tasmanian Senators only represent a fraction of the Australian population I suggest they enrol in a class on Constitutional Law, so they can gain a better understanding of co-operative federalism and how a house of review is supposed to work.
Better still, perhaps Dr Kevin could post something?
The Senate was designed to give states an equal footing to help ensure that smaller states, like ours weren’t trodden into the dirt.
Helen Hutchinson 23. It doesn’t matter if the economy is based on renewables or cowrie shells, the fact is it has failed. The wealth is being sucked-out of Tasmania in a thousand ways and all we have left is the burden of supporting 19 parliamentarians for each and every one of us. The very parliamentarians that put us into this position in the first place. If you think a green senator from the Tamar Valley can miraculously reverse decades of stupidity then good luck to you. Parties are not based on logic anyway but on dreams. Tasmania has run-out of magic mojo spin and all thats left is the ugly reality of a welfare-dependent state that only exists to fight over trees.
#22,Karl, I thought you must have added Public Servants in your 60%. Remember that within your 21% to 22% are Police, Teachers, Doctors, Nurses, Allied Health Professionals and their administrative supporters; all very necessary workers. How would Tasmaia fair if these Professionals were not employed?
Every State and Territory employ staff in these catergories. I think your 60% is rather a meaningless statistic.
Keith Antonysen 28. Australia’s shortest lifespans, least educated, least number of doctors, highest cancer rate, highest unemployment rate, longest elective surgery queues and your defending it? Why not move to Burma and feel really at home?
Maddie quite unintentionally makes a telling point about who it is our elected representatives truly serve.
It may come as some considerable surprise to the rusted on party apparatchiks of all colours that haunt this place, but there are a significant and growing number of voters who are heartily sick of eleceted representatives who will cheerfully ignore the search for the public good in order to advance party dogma. (dioxin, anyone?)
They wish no less than a pox on all three houses, and often a whole lot worse.
At last count the proportion preferring none of the above was running at around 25%. Attacking Karl and Claire for drawing the curtains and revealing that the green party machine is exactly the same nest of vipers as every other party machine does not alter the reality they expose.
The comment about behind closed doors applies to every Senator selected to represent their State by their State since Federation. Appointenmt on advice is the convention. Right or wrong the only one I can remember is a Field selected by Beljke-Petersen in QLD when it was flagged as a first.
I found myself on the road to Damascus when my brother came over from the Menzien Liberals. so shocked was I that I had to be assisted with closing my mouth.
For those who are always opposed the can crit the EMRS poll. Bonham has substantive criticism of their methodology. However, the collapse of the Green vote predicted by those who feel disempowered is not shown in the lateat measure of TAS voting intention.
For TGC [#18.] I think you will find PWW has mixed it before, probably with those of the pointy head persuasion. It will be interesting to see if he is of a Wilke bent but there is no guarantee he will turn blue again. Wilke hasn’t. More likely is whilst the Greens are growing and Australia changes the challenges will retain hs interest until he faces the voters.
#29, Karl, I’m at a loss to understand how you come up with the view that I’m supporting the view about “...shortest life spans,... longest elective surgery queues….” What I stated in #28 has no bearing on those matters.
If your arguing that we need more Doctors and other Professional staff in the Public Service then I agree; your comment in #22 implied to me there should be fewer.
By placing mutually exclusive different groups within your 60%, renders your statistic as being meaningless in my opinion.
I hope the Tasmanian Times editor is not trying to cover-up the fact the UTAS Foundation Chair is also on the board of Forestry Tasmania.
#23 Helen Hutchinson, you obviously haven’t been to Iceland lately. In lieu of that experience try reading Andri Snaer Magnason’s best seller Dreamland: A Self Help Manual For A Frightened Nation.
If you still have a tint of rose left in your spectacles you might like to delve into the cause of Iceland’s collapse, and marvel at the similarities between Tasmania and Iceland, and while we are at it between Tasmania and Ireland as well. If you weren’t in either place at the time of the collapses and the aftermath, which I was, then the following books make instructive reading.
Iceland
Frozen Assets: How I Lived Iceland’s Boom and Bust by Armann Thorvaldsson
Meltdown Iceland by Roger Boyes
Ireland
Ship Of Fools: How Stupidity and Corruption Sank the Celtic Tiger by Fintan O’Toole
Banksters: How A Powerful Elite Squandered Ireland’s Wealth by David Murphy and Martina Devlin
There is just too much uninformed commentary here in Tasmania, a product perhaps of our insularity and tribal politics, of which the columns of TT are indicative.
I have often though of writing about the uncanny and instructive similarities between the politics, economies and casual corruptions of Tasmania, Iceland and Ireland but I guess I would be wasting my time because objective scholarship is heresy to the rusted on cheer squads of the the three political parties in Tasmania.
Bob, don’t concern yourself with the party hacks. Write for those of us who can see past the dogma and insular personality cults that comprise political parties. Write so that for once in this islands’ white history we can actually do the smart thing and learn from somebody elses experience, rather than our own expensive mistakes, please.
“There is just too much uninformed commentary here in Tasmania” I agreed with that after reading #34
Re #24 and #30 it might be nice if 25% really were thumbing their noses at Labor, Libs and Green alike but it isn’t actually true. That 25% isn’t specifically a “none of the above”, it’s just any kind of “don’t know” response given to a company that isn’t all that good at prodding its respondents and has always had a pretty high don’t-know rate. Someone who’s locked in to rejecting all three parties would most likely answer “Independent”. Eight points of the 25 involves people who have a leaning towards one of those parties but don’t say they are sure of their vote. Many of the remaining 17% are the classic Tassie swinging major-party voters who don’t decide between Liberal and Labor until close enough to the election to work out which one is best picked in order to keep the Greens out of a share of power. It’s really hard to say how many Tasmanians are really receptive to voting for somebody else at state level even if somebody else significant emerges. Even the “independent” rate in EMRS polls doesn’t tell us much since it seems to be in large part driven by confusion with LegCo and federal independents - but we also know that indies running a good campaign get under pollsters’ radar pretty easily.
phill (#31), the latest EMRS when interpreted with the assistance of past observations still isn’t looking all that flash for the Greens - they would not repeat their result from the last election whatever the headline says. The latest is the first for a while to suggest they might escape a major whacking and just lose four or five points, but I’d wait to see if the next says the same thing before getting too hopeful that that is where it’s at.
As for the article, I found it one-dimensional. Milne has obvious strengths in policy, debate and experience, many of which were mentioned, but plenty of negatives as well. My perception of her as often being shrill and dogmatic is apparently not all that unusual. The policy outcomes of her time as Greens leader supporting a minority government in Tasmania were substantial, but the constant perception that Milne would bring down his government was enough to provoke even a politician as hard-nosed as Tony Rundle to take the huge risk of accepting an opposition parliamentary reform proposal and calling an election in the slim hope of retaining government while getting rid of her. Hardly an unequivocal testament to Milne’s diplomatic skills in a balance of power situation.
Also Milne’s leadership at state level was an electoral failure for the party. In 1996 there was a massive swing on against the incumbent Liberal government, but the Greens suffered a 2% swing against them. In 1998 the Greens had every opportunity to gain a protest vote based on outrage at the changes to the system nobbling their vote, but there was hardly any outrage from outside the tent and they copped a further 1% swing. Christine Milne indeed led the party to its worst two state election results.
I doubt she’ll be as successful a national Greens leader in terms of voting performance as her illustrious cult-guru predecessor, but Labor may be happier to have him out of the picture in the short term.
And now, almost as if it were on cue, the Greens announce job vacancies in the office of Peter Whish-Wilson
“Four positions vacant with the office of Incoming Senator Peter Whish Wilson.
1/ Policy Adviser
2/ Media Adviser
3/ Campaigns Adviser
4/ Office Manager
Full position descriptions for all the vacancies are available at greensmps.org.au/positions-vacant.
It will be fascinating to observe upon whom these generously remunerated positions are bequeathed - undoubtedly, only the best Greens cheerleaders that taxpayers money can buy..
*38 Oh the horror!
Have you reported this one to the cops matey?