Blatantly Partisan Party Review XL (federal 2022): The “Teal” Independents
Running where: 6 out of 8 states and territories—not NT or QLD. Most are in specific lower house seats; see full list below.
Prior reviews: None, this is not a party
(This entry is a bit long. The first section covers the rise of the indies this past decade and what they stand for. If you are primarily interested in whether a teal is standing in your seat and a recommendation if so, scroll down to the candidate list and recommendation sections.)
Australia has seen a resurgence in independent politics the past decade. In 2010, the only indies in the House of Representatives were men who had been first elected to public office as Nationals MPs and since left the party. At that year’s election, Andrew Wilkie ran a successful independent campaign for the Division of Denison (now Clark): in a remarkable four-cornered contest, he came third on first preferences and won after the distribution of preferences. Next, in 2013, Cathy McGowan ran an impressive local campaign to unseat Sophie Mirabella, a terminally unpopular Liberal who had steadily turned one of the safest seats in the country into a loss. As a friend with relatives in Indi quipped to me, “every time Mirabella met a voter, she lost a vote”. McGowan in 2019 then successfully handed over to another local indie, Helen Haines, the current Member for Indi, while Zali Steggall defeated Tony Abbott in Warringah. Kerryn Phelps also briefly held Wentworth after winning as an independent at a 2018 by-election but she narrowly lost to Dave Sharma in 2019.
This election, independent campaigns have been especially well organised, receiving significant funds from clean energy activist Simon Holmes à Court’s organisation Climate 200. There are plenty of indies not funded by Climate 200, including a couple of competitive ones (e.g. Dai Le in Fowler, Rob Priestly in Nicholls), but by and large the indies getting attention are those with Climate 200 backing. These indies have become known as the “teal indies” for the colour many use in their branding or as the “climate indies” for their policy focus. Holmes à Court had formerly participated in Liberal Party fundraising activities for Josh Frydenberg, but was expelled after writing an opinion piece in support of closing the Liddell coal-fired power station. He promptly began supporting independent and minor-party candidates with more progressive climate agendas than Liberal MPs.
Because this is not a party as such, the teal indies are a diverse bunch. Some are running on distinctively local issues, and if you are in one of their electorates you probably know them and the issues much better than I do. I would largely define the teals as centre to centre-right. A few clearly lean left (e.g. David Pocock, Kim Rubenstein) while some belong to a lost generation of Liberals: professional women who two decades ago would have been moderate Liberal candidates, but who have been put off by the party’s notorious sexism problems and its inability or refusal to act on climate ()e.g. Allegra Spender, Sophie Scamps, Kate Chaney).
Three issues unite the teals. They want much stronger action on climate change, guided by scientific advice. They want integrity in politics—you can read this as a federal ICAC. And, as implied by the end of the last paragraph, they want gender equity. The specifics of exactly what sort of policies they support on climate, integrity, and gender vary between candidates and each campaign has been resolutely focused on their electorate’s expectations—and on tying incumbent Liberals to Scott Morrison and Barnaby Joyce, no matter how nice and moderate the local incumbent might be.
Climate 200 has contributed to twenty campaigns this election. Four are candidates from parties I have reviewed: Leanne Minshull of The Local Party (TAS Senate), David Pocock of his eponymous party (ACT Senate), Rebekah Sharkie of the Centre Alliance (Mayo), and Kim Rubenstein of Kim for Canberra (ACT Senate). Of those four, only Sharkie is the incumbent; the other three are challenging for Senate seats. Three more people in receipt of Climate 200 support are incumbent independents who are likely to be re-elected: Helen Haines (Indi), Zali Steggall (Warringah), and Andrew Wilkie (Clark).
The remaining thirteen are independents challenging sitting members for a seat in the House of Representatives. They are varying degrees of competitive. I think Zoe Daniel should win Goldstein over toxic cesspit of a person Tim Wilson, and Monique Ryan (Kooyong), Allegra Spender (Wentworth), and Kylea Tink (North Sydney) are all in strong positions too. I would suggest 2–3 of those four will unseat the incumbent. I am also tipping one other indie, not necessarily a teal, to unseat an incumbent somewhere in the country. There is buzz around Kate Chaney here in the west for Curtin, although I’m not yet persuaded it’s enough to get her over the line. I suspect David Pocock is going to fall just a few percent short of defeating Zed Seselja for the second ACT Senate seat.
The following are the candidates to whom Climate 200 has contributed funds. They are alphabetised by seat contested, which is named in brackets. In square brackets is party affiliation, if they have one. Italicised candidates are sitting incumbents.
ACT: David Pocock (Senate) [eponymous party]; Kim Rubenstein (Senate) [Kim for Canberra]
NSW: Nicolette Boele (Bradfield), Kate Hook (Calare), Caz Heise (Cowper), Georgia Steele (Hughes), Kylea Tink (North Sydney), Hanabeth Luke (Page), Zali Steggall (Warringah), Allegra Spender (Wentworth)
SA: Jo Dyer (Boothby), Rebekah Sharkie (Mayo) [Centre Alliance]
TAS: Andrew Wilkie (Clark), Leanne Minshull (Senate) [Local Party]
VIC: Claire Ferres Miles (Casey), Despi O’Connor (Flinders), Zoe Daniel (Goldstein), Helen Haines (Indi), Monique Ryan (Kooyong), Alex Dyson (Wannon)
My recommendation: In all instances I recommend you preference a teal above a Liberal or National candidate and the various far-right crackpots (this favourable recommendation applies to Rob Priestly and Dai Le too). Just how strong a preference you give them will vary based on individual, but it will be generally a decent or good one—especially given how many dire candidates are on some ballots.
I want to go into more detail than I usually do in giving a recommendation, as there are strategic considerations to make in some cases. If your priority is unseating the sitting Liberal, you should ponder who is likely to end up second and third as preferences are distributed. If there are three candidates left in the count and none has 50% (or, in the Senate, none has reached a quota), the third one will be eliminated. and their preferences will decide which of the remaining two wins the seat. Where will their preferences go? If the third candidate is Labor or Green, the easy majority of their preferences will flow to the teal and might get them over the line if the margin is close enough. If the third candidate is a teal, however, some of their voters will likely break back to the Liberals to give the Lib the win ahead of Labor or the Greens.
This means that if your main goal is defeating a Liberal and the count is likely to end up a three-way contest between the Liberal, a teal, and a party candidate you might otherwise vote for, consider your vote very carefully. In such a situation, if you decide that Labor or Green (or another desirable candidate) is likely to finish in the top three but cannot defeat the incumbent Liberal on preferences, while the teal is also likely to finish in the top three and could defeat the incumbent Liberal on preferences, then you might wish to give the teal a better preference than Labor/Green/other-desirable-party. I do not normally recommend tactical voting, and our system is designed to avoid it, but in this case it’s relevant.
Website: https://www.climate200.com.au/candidates
