Preference pact a power-play at the cost of integrity

BY doing a preference deal with Labor, the Greens have guaranteed they won't morph into a genuine third force voters of all political persuasions can support.

The deal involves the Greens receiving Labor preferences for the Senate in exchange for Labor getting Greens preferences in lower house electorates.

It helps the Greens win control of the Senate's balance of power (although they would have had it anyway), and it helps Labor win the next election (this may not have otherwise been so certain).

Senator Bob Brown says he doesn't like such deals and would encourage voters to direct preferences as they see fit.

On June 19, he also said: "The party takes input from its local groups and takes note of that, but lobbying for preferences takes place because there's a compulsory need for it in the Senate, and that flows on to the house.

Brown added: "I don't think it's a good thing. I'd abolish it."

These were hollow words, as it turned out.

Local input didn't come into it; the central party took the decision to direct preferences to Labor without consultation.

And while Brown says he would like to abolish preference deals, he is now the first party to stitch up such a deal.

If Brown's convictions counted for anything, why wouldn't he follow them and issue double-sided how-to-vote cards, as the Australian Democrats once did?

It is the only way a third force can stay above the two-party divide.

The Greens should be trying to influence the policies that major parties put to the Senate, not which party forms government.

If ever there was a time for the Greens to put partisanship to one side, now is it. The polls show their support at record levels. Brown's deal ensures that support will dip.