Climate party must come clean

Warren Mundine has made an astute observation that Climate 200 party founder Simon Holmes a Court is a left-leaning equivalent of mining entrepreneur and political aspirant Clive Palmer. Mr Mundine has been duelling with Mr Holmes a Court online, where the son of billionaire sharemarket raider Robert Holmes a Court described the Indigenous former politician as a “grub” and a “flog”. The insults were in response to Mr Mundine drawing attention online to an article by The Australian about Climate 200-backed candidate Zoe Daniel’s criticism of Israel. Aside from confirming the poor quality of conversations on Twitter, the insults bring fresh clarity to several lingering suspicions. Chief among them is the level of protective instinct Mr Holmes a Court holds for his party and the candidates it supports, and the fact he has a glass jaw. Coupled with accusations of white privilege levelled against Climate 200 by Kyinzom Dhongdue, a refugee and former MP in the Dali Lama’s Tibetan parliament-in-exile, the Holmes a Court party is being exposed increasingly for what it is – a plaything of the privileged.

Nonetheless, Mr Holmes a Court’s involvement as head of the “teal” independent party organisation deserves close scrutiny. On the Climate 200 website that collects funding to be distributed to candidates, the objectives of the party are clearly defined. The task is to deliver “a federal parliament where a clear majority of elected representatives are ambitious on both climate action and restoring integrity to politics”. Climate 200 says it is aiming to raise at least $15m to $20m to help level the playing field for 10 to 12 high-quality, values-aligned candidates. Support includes strategic communications, analytics and engagement to identify the best values-aligned campaigns in the most strategic electorates, capacity building and tactical support as well as direct funding to candidates with the best chances of success or highest strategic impact.

Climate 200 communications and analytics head Claire Snyder is listed as a communications expert focused on climate communications and political advocacy. Ms Snyder has worked with the Environmental Defenders Office, 350.org.au, Oxfam International, Greenpeace, Change.org and many other organisations on campaign strategies. She previously helped to start the Climate Council. These affiliations put her at odds with claims by Climate 200 independents that the push is part of a moderate Liberal revolution. The same is true of Mr Holmes a Court-backed candidates who are drawing on the backroom expertise of former GetUp and Labor Party senior operatives for campaign direction. The voting record of those who have entered parliament as soft Liberal independents has been heavily slanted towards Labor.

Despite claims by Mr Holmes a Court that Climate 200 is not a political party, the group says all donors giving above the disclosure threshold of $14,500 in the 2022 financial year will be disclosed in accordance with AEC regulations. As founder and head of the party, Mr Holmes a Court has taken a high profile and made himself a public figure. Just as Mr Palmer’s financial interests are in the public domain and include fossil fuel and mining projects in Queensland and Western Australia, Mr Holmes a Court’s potential conflicts of interest should be upfront as well. Mr Holmes a Court lists his activities as a cleantech investor, climate philanthropist and a director of the Smart Energy Council and the Australian Environmental Grant-makers Network. Given the stated purpose of the Climate 200 party is to encourage government support for further investment in renewable energy projects, Mr Holmes a Court has a special responsibility to make clear any potential conflicts of interest that may arise if his candidates are successful. The same scrutiny must be applied to donors who make large contributions to fundraising efforts.

Healthy competition is a good thing in politics and all candidates should be encouraged to fight hard for their place in parliament. But those pulling the strings must be upfront about what they are doing and what they stand to gain.