It would appear to be a good time to reassess FOE's political strategy in light of two events. Firstly the third successive election win for the conservative ALP Government and secondly the probability that a new, national green/red political coalition will be launched in the next twelve months.

Before the election there was much coming and going by 'heavies' of some environmental and peace groups and disenchanted socialist/ALP activists at invitation only meetings (it is believed that FOE had no representation). For debate was the platform of this new coalition with the clear objective at that time of running candidates at the coming election.

The 'surprise' election blocked any chance they had of getting it off the ground in time. When I suggested, half seriously, to some ALP members that the election was brought forward to head off this new force, they laughed and pointed out that Hawke was only interested in the centre of the electorate, the left/alternatives he can still take for granted.

The election campaign and the result itself reflected this through the near obsession with the materialism of the swinging voter. The real issues facing us and the planet: nuclear annihilation, environmental destruction, poverty, malnutrition, economic exploitation and community disintergration (to name a few) were ignored.

FOE and other peace, environmental and social justice groups, using the time honoured strategies of lobbying, protest, education and agitation, appear to have little influence on those with power: the Federal Cabinet. We have been thrown a few crumbs in the last few years but there appears to be less commitment now then there ever was, particularly on nuclear issues.

Those few ALP parliamentarians who appear to offer us support and hold out to us some hope now appear silent and powerless within the right wing dominated ALP juggernaut. Any support at the branch level for environmental and socialist policies has meant nothing at the cabinet level. The likes of Gerry Hand, Stuart West and Peter Duncan were publicly silent about tne real issues (issues they claim are close to their heart) before, during and after the election. I am now convinced that agitation to reform or shift the ALP towards implementing an enlightened legislative program while in office is quite futile.

What advantages would be offered by a strong, national green/red coalition campaigning in elections? It promises more than the few Senate seats it would most likely win. Perhaps its biggest impact, irrespective of the seats it holds, would be to force political parties towards, for example, non-nuclear and environmental positions in order to protect previous support bases. From West Germany we have seen the positive effect that the Greens have had on Social Democrat anti-nuclear policy. Another benefit would be forcing the mainstream media, at least at election time, to report the real issues more, in a way separate from and additional to the coverage we get from our campaigning at present.

The disenchantment and disaffiliation with the ALP at the green and red fringes of the old support base were obvious at election time, and yet the Democrats have not been able to gain from this. So many people have expressed their distress at being forced to vote Democrat for want of a better alternative. So there appears to be the possibility of considerable support for a new coalition and once the four per cent vote is reached there is guaranteed public funding. The German Greens have been able to use their public funding wisely so that campaigning has not cost the earth. From them we can take much inspiration and learn many valuable lessons.

One blessing of the early election was that the new coalition was not launched too hastily. Now we have the opportunity and time to decide whether to get involved and, if so, in what way. When the new, national, biodynamic, Green/Red coalition (one mooted name was 'Common Ground') sprouts what will FOE's collective position be? Do the gains outweigh the risks?

One thing is certain; the new coalition will only succeed in being 'not left, not right but in front' if a great many activists ensure that it attempts to be non-hierarchical, non-patriarchical, participatory and process orientated. Otherwise it will become another power base for the more expert political operators and again we will become the 'followers' instead of the 'leaders'.

Back...