Friday, April 9, 2010

Good article from the Examiner on key policy differences between Greens and Labor

Greens holding firm on policies

BY ANGUS LIVINGSTON
09 Apr, 2010 11:31 AM

IF Labor chooses to govern with the support of the Greens it will be with significant policy differences between the two parties.
Despite Greens leader Nick McKim saying he was prepared to trade away any of the policies the Greens stood for, yesterday he confirmed there were issues he was standing firm on.
"We still hold all of the policy positions we took to the state election. For example, we will continue to oppose the proposed pulp mill, fight to save Tasmania's high- conservation value forests, and roll back Tasmania Tomorrow," he said.
There are a number of points of difference between the parties.

Tasmania Tomorrow education reforms
The Greens pledged to roll them back, and at the very least would expect to see major structural changes to post year-10 education.
Labor leader David Bartlett linked his political future to his Tasmania Tomorrow reforms and has backed them to the hilt.
It remains to be seen whether he will take his electoral battering as a sign he may need a rethink.
Regional Forest Agreement extension
Labor promised to extend the RFA for another 20 years in the middle of the campaign in a bid to wedge supporters who may have considered voting Green, despite the agreement still having years to run.The Greens are against the extension, and released a forest transition strategy promising "more jobs, less logs".
Tarkine road
Labor is committed to building a tourist road through the Tarkine, although the Federal Government's decision to list the area on the National Heritage Register has clouded the issue.
The Greens oppose the building of the road, which is costed at $25 million.
Pulp mill
The Greens oppose the pulp mill as it is proposed on its site on the Tamar River.
Labor has consistently supported project developers Gunns, most controversially passing legislation in 2007 allowing the project to bypass the Resource Planning and Development Commission.

No comments:

Post a Comment