POLITICAL conferences are touted as a warts-and-all look into debates underlying polished policy platforms. The annual gatherings are billed as a rare insight into the inner machinations of the various parties holding power in this state. The outcomes of the meetings allow voters to decide exactly whose views they align with, and which boxes to tick come election day. The Tasmanian Greens have misstepped again in deciding to hold much of their conference this weekend behind closed doors. Public observers and reporters are invited to a cluster of speeches and a Q&A session with state and federal parliamentarians, but will then be asked to leave. The Greens have again made it clear they do not want public scrutiny to inhibit their discussions. A full day of internal workshops will be held in private "for obvious reasons", the party says. The Greens drew scorn last year for shutting the doors on most of their conference, amid concerns from some members that the party at large was being run in an autocratic and secretive fashion. The party's administrative and governance structure will again be thrust under the microscope this weekend. Last year, there were also complaints that past Greens conferences had failed to garner positive coverage. The Liberals and Labor allowed much greater access to debates on their policies at conferences in recent weeks. It was at the Liberals' gathering that we learned the party would not step in the way of sharing economy platforms such as Uber and Airbnb. Nor will the party block Aboriginal recognition in the state's constitution, immediately dismantle the Hare-Clark electoral system or abolish stamp duty. A motion was also passed urging the federal government to focus on adaptation to climate change "should it occur", after some Liberals described global warming as a "furphy". At Labor's, we learned the state's branch backs voluntary assisted dying, opposes turning back asylum seeker boats and wants North-East Tasmania to be transformed into an organic dairy zone. All these ideas were all thrashed out in full public view - and so they should be. It's good to know where the parties stand, and how that came to be. It was also revealing that the movers of some Liberal motions had clear vested interests in the outcomes - whether they be tourism proponents looking for government backing or farmers concerned about irrigation funding. Don't be surprised - small and independent businesses are the Liberals' target market. It should also come as no shock that many Labor motions were debated by union delegates, when the party was born from the labour movement. The fundamental problem in the Greens locking the media and public out of much of their conference is that it flies in the face of their "open, transparent and democratic" mantra. It is abundantly clear that not all Greens members are happy with the degree of privacy. Three separate motions to be debated (in private) will examine future formats for the event. Each includes a push for a re-evaluation on how just how much of the conferences are open to observers and the media. One motion calls for issues and ideas to be contested in a members-only forum, completely separate to the annual conference. Journalists outwardly bemoan having to attend these annual "talk fests", but inwardly acknowledge the importance of heading along. Voters deserve to know how policy debates are run and won, long before the final products are packed in glossy brochures come polling day.
POLITICAL conferences are touted as a warts-and-all look into debates underlying polished policy platforms.
The annual gatherings are billed as a rare insight into the inner machinations of the various parties holding power in this state.
The outcomes of the meetings allow voters to decide exactly whose views they align with, and which boxes to tick come election day.
The Tasmanian Greens have misstepped again in deciding to hold much of their conference this weekend behind closed doors.
Public observers and reporters are invited to a cluster of speeches and a Q&A session with state and federal parliamentarians, but will then be asked to leave.
The Greens have again made it clear they do not want public scrutiny to inhibit their discussions.
A full day of internal workshops will be held in private "for obvious reasons", the party says.
The Greens drew scorn last year for shutting the doors on most of their conference, amid concerns from some members that the party at large was being run in an autocratic and secretive fashion.
The party's administrative and governance structure will again be thrust under the microscope this weekend.
The Tasmanian Greens have misstepped again in deciding to hold much of their conference this weekend behind closed doors.
Last year, there were also complaints that past Greens conferences had failed to garner positive coverage.
The Liberals and Labor allowed much greater access to debates on their policies at conferences in recent weeks.
It was at the Liberals' gathering that we learned the party would not step in the way of sharing economy platforms such as Uber and Airbnb.
Nor will the party block Aboriginal recognition in the state's constitution, immediately dismantle the Hare-Clark electoral system or abolish stamp duty.
A motion was also passed urging the federal government to focus on adaptation to climate change "should it occur", after some Liberals described global warming as a "furphy".
At Labor's, we learned the state's branch backs voluntary assisted dying, opposes turning back asylum seeker boats and wants North-East Tasmania to be transformed into an organic dairy zone.
All these ideas were all thrashed out in full public view - and so they should be. It's good to know where the parties stand, and how that came to be.
It was also revealing that the movers of some Liberal motions had clear vested interests in the outcomes - whether they be tourism proponents looking for government backing or farmers concerned about irrigation funding.
Don't be surprised - small and independent businesses are the Liberals' target market.
It should also come as no shock that many Labor motions were debated by union delegates, when the party was born from the labour movement.
The fundamental problem in the Greens locking the media and public out of much of their conference is that it flies in the face of their "open, transparent and democratic" mantra.
It is abundantly clear that not all Greens members are happy with the degree of privacy.
Three separate motions to be debated (in private) will examine future formats for the event.
Each includes a push for a re-evaluation on how just how much of the conferences are open to observers and the media.
One motion calls for issues and ideas to be contested in a members-only forum, completely separate to the annual conference.
Journalists outwardly bemoan having to attend these annual "talk fests", but inwardly acknowledge the importance of heading along.
Voters deserve to know how policy debates are run and won, long before the final products are packed in glossy brochures come polling day.
