THE Greens are fast slipping from view in this campaign. In less than a month, the Greens have gone from heralding unprecedented influence in government, guaranteeing significant interest in their actions, to struggling to have their voice heard in the political scene. The sidelining of the once powerful minority government partner will be keenly felt each time Lara Giddings and Will Hodgman go head-to-head before the election. It seems the title of Greens leader no longer qualifies Nick McKim for a start in the three leaders' debates planned before Tasmanians go to the polls on March 15. The Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry never invited him, while the Launceston Chamber of Commerce withdrew the invitation to participate, after Mr McKim had already accepted. Awkward. The Liberals have also rejected a series of other requests to pit their shadow ministers against Greens MPs. As head of the Launceston association put it very diplomatically, both Labor and Liberals had "highlighted" the "positives" of leaving out the Greens. There are no doubt logistical advantages of keeping the format simple: more time for questions and hopefully more opportunity for some genuine debate between the two potential premiers. But I don't think these are the positives Labor and Liberals had in mind. From a strategic point of view, it's no wonder the two major parties don't want to be seen on the same stage as their Green rival. To do so implies that the Greens are of equal standing, adding credibility to the Greens' case that they are a strong force in politics and could one day win power. It suits both parties, particularly Labor, which is desperate to distance itself from its former minority partner, to play down the Greens' potential influence in the next government. Perhaps most importantly, Mr McKim, who is probably the strongest orator out of the three, misses key chances to present his party's policies at these well- attended and well-publicised events. Out of sight, out of mind. At the moment, the Greens are in limbo. Not in a position to win government, but far more of a threat to the major two than the rest. Commanding 17 per cent support in the electorate, according to Thursday's EMRS poll, and boasting two former cabinet ministers in their ranks and a record of being in stable government for four years justifies more respect than the shambolic Palmer United Party, who have the next highest level of support on 5 per cent. In fact, if you consider the results including the undecideds, only 2 per cent more said they would vote Labor than Green. These results and the influence they've wielded over the past four years surely entitle the Greens to a voice at the leaders' debates, or at least one. Obviously the Launceston Chamber of Commerce thought so too until the major parties made them think twice. Not much point whingeing about being left out, though; the Greens will have to fight hard to have their voice heard in other ways - no doubt something they've had plenty of practice in. In the frenetic four weeks to polling day, competition for the public's attention will be fierce and no party can rely on a sense of entitlement to coverage. Clever media strategy, new ideas and strong policy are needed. The odd photo op involving cute animals wouldn't hurt either.
THE Greens are fast slipping from view in this campaign.
In less than a month, the Greens have gone from heralding unprecedented influence in government, guaranteeing significant interest in their actions, to struggling to have their voice heard in the political scene.
The sidelining of the once powerful minority government partner will be keenly felt each time Lara Giddings and Will Hodgman go head-to-head before the election.
It seems the title of Greens leader no longer qualifies Nick McKim for a start in the three leaders' debates planned before Tasmanians go to the polls on March 15. The Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry never invited him, while the Launceston Chamber of Commerce withdrew the invitation to participate, after Mr McKim had already accepted. Awkward.
The Liberals have also rejected a series of other requests to pit their shadow ministers against Greens MPs.
As head of the Launceston association put it very diplomatically, both Labor and Liberals had "highlighted" the "positives" of leaving out the Greens.
There are no doubt logistical advantages of keeping the format simple: more time for questions and hopefully more opportunity for some genuine debate between the two potential premiers. But I don't think these are the positives Labor and Liberals had in mind.
From a strategic point of view, it's no wonder the two major parties don't want to be seen on the same stage as their Green rival. To do so implies that the Greens are of equal standing, adding credibility to the Greens' case that they are a strong force in politics and could one day win power.
It suits both parties, particularly Labor, which is desperate to distance itself from its former minority partner, to play down the Greens' potential influence in the next government.
Perhaps most importantly, Mr McKim, who is probably the strongest orator out of the three, misses key chances to present his party's policies at these well- attended and well-publicised events.
Out of sight, out of mind.
At the moment, the Greens are in limbo. Not in a position to win government, but far more of a threat to the major two than the rest. Commanding 17 per cent support in the electorate, according to Thursday's EMRS poll, and boasting two former cabinet ministers in their ranks and a record of being in stable government for four years justifies more respect than the shambolic Palmer United Party, who have the next highest level of support on 5 per cent. In fact, if you consider the results including the undecideds, only 2 per cent more said they would vote Labor than Green.
These results and the influence they've wielded over the past four years surely entitle the Greens to a voice at the leaders' debates, or at least one. Obviously the Launceston Chamber of Commerce thought so too until the major parties made them think twice.
Not much point whingeing about being left out, though; the Greens will have to fight hard to have their voice heard in other ways - no doubt something they've had plenty of practice in.
In the frenetic four weeks to polling day, competition for the public's attention will be fierce and no party can rely on a sense of entitlement to coverage.
Clever media strategy, new ideas and strong policy are needed.
The odd photo op involving cute animals wouldn't hurt either.
