What's wrong with working with the Lib Dems anyway? Where do I start ....

I’m hearing some concern that I am letting my political position get in the way of working with the Liberal Democrats to fight the Grampians bans; that we can work with the Lib Dems on this without supporting their other policies. I don't think it's that simple. I disagree with the National Party on many things as well, but I think working with the local National Party member on the Grampians bans is a good idea. What is different about the Lib Dems?

Firstly, the Liberal Democrats are hardly well regarded politicians. They have almost no political clout or standing. They are laughed at (quite possibly because they deserve it).

Secondly, they are raising a motion in the upper house, which is for all intents and purposes, useless. It’s grandstanding. If you pay attention to politics at all, you’ll see plenty of radical (at both ends of the spectrum) motions raised in the upper houses of our parliaments and they have a brief moment of talking about this for before they are swept aside. Passing such a motion does not affect any actual change. The Legislative Council is a house of review. Changes to legislation happen in the Legislative Assembly.  People are asking what this means now – in terms of practical change, it means diddly squat. We got some publicity, and we got associated with the Lib Dems.

Thirdly, these guys are anathema to any green leaning person or politician. Look at their policies. They want to break down National Parks, deny climate change is a problem, reject the value of the environment outside of commercial ones, deny the extinction crisis exists and I expect if they ever develop a policy about cultural heritage, they’d say that had no value either. Then they cover their arses by saying if these things ever really turned out to be a problem, they would be resolved by market forces if we just reduced regulation and commercialised stuff. Hunting saves endangered species. Forestry saves old growth forests. I’m not joking, this is in their policies. I hear a lot of people criticising PV for the Peaks Trail, the impact of that and accusing them of using these bans to push climbers out in the process of making money off parks. Go have a look at what the Liberal Democrats advocate about commercialising natural assets and contemplate that future. Ecotourism is nothing compared to what they want for our parks.

Fourthly, they have added their agenda of breaking up National Parks to the motion. Their edited down motion is an improvement, but note the last point on it still. As long as this happens (and I suspect they realise it’s not most climber's position, because it seems to be discussed as an aside, as if we might not notice it), we can’t accept their support for our position without being entangled in theirs.

Working with these guys is an almost instant refusal of involvement by all environmental and left wing politicians. When we collaborate with these guys, people looking on are going to tar us with this brush. We already have a bunch of media, bureaucrats and politicians saying we damage the environment and destroy cultural heritage and then we sign up with a party with horrendous environmental credentials. How do we argue that we care for the environment and respect cultural heritage whilst standing with a party that thinks we should allow land clearing, whale hunting, logging of old growth forests and clearly state that individual freedom, private property and prosperity are more important that the environment? What is the risk that this just reinforces an image of climbers as selfish hedonists wanting to just do what they always have done?

Addendum: I wrote this yesterday, and this morning I have read the proofs of the discussion on line. https://beta.parliament.vic.gov.au/parliamentary-debates/Hansard/HANSARD-974425065-2354/?fbclid=IwAR1exkYNCWuffthPi9vgZdgt_l-2rmCvzBYpabXBv5IGe8mW6cCntBO_QkM. Please take the time to read the context in which Tim Quilty is raising this. His speech begins with a rant about totalitarian regimes and how one couldn’t have a fishing club in Russia or China. His next point lumps us in with loggers, hunters, four wheel drivers and fishers. He goes on to an extensive spiel about the need to curtail government and spruiks his point about breaking down national parks. He sounds ignorant rabbiting on about Parks being managed from Melbourne by people who don’t know or care about the park, when we know that the Grampians have a regional land manager in Halls Gap and Arapiles has one in Wail and local staff who are devoted to land management. It's also worth noting other member’s statements of support for the concerns, but being unable to vote with the motion due to fundamental disagreements with aspects of the motion and Liberal Democrat policies.

The language the Lib Dems have chosen – lockouts – has been freely adopted by climbers around the discussion, and I wonder about that as well. Because people are hurt and angry, are they picking up on these extreme voices and running with them? Falling in with their language also suggests to others we are falling in with their positions and values as well. Can we stick to using bans please?

Have a read of that speech and consider if you really want that to be what represents you.