Labor鈥檚 ferocious attacks on the Greens have stepped up a notch after the Senate voted on June 19 to delay Labor鈥檚 Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF) bill until October 16, after the National Cabinet considers renters鈥 rights.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the Greens and the Coalition now make up a 鈥淣o-alition鈥 鈥 implying they oppose everything and for the same reasons.
Others in Labor聽, accusing the Greens of being聽part of an 鈥渦nholy alliance鈥.聽Senator Don Farrell hyperbolically described the Greens as part of an 鈥渁xis of evil鈥.
In fact, the Senate vote was a procedural matter and does not signify policy agreement between the Greens and Peter Dutton鈥檚 Liberals.
Labor, however, has voted with the Coalition on a range of significant policies, including the Stage 3 tax cuts, the continued incarceration of refugees and funding for AUKUS militarism.
Over several weeks, the Greens聽clearly exposed聽the limits of HAFF, including that it would not guarantee funding for public, social and affordable housing nor would it tackle out-of-control rent rises.
The Greens have been pushing Labor to negotiate on the housing bill, their key demands being: a guaranteed $2.5 billion (reduced from $5 billion) in annual funding for public and social housing; and motivation for state governments to implement a rent freeze or at least limit rent rises.
Labor responded in mid-June with a tepid promise to guarantee $500 million in housing funding and on June 17聽聽a one-off $2 billion 鈥渟ocial housing accelerator鈥 allocation.
The corporate media has run Labor鈥檚 campaign, demanding the Greens stop denying homeless people a roof over their heads.
The ABC鈥檚聽 pressed Greens housing spokesperson Max Chandler-Mather on June 21, saying the Greens ought to 鈥渃ompromise and pass the long-term bill鈥. Her angle of attack was that the Greens are being obstinate, and 鈥渘oone wants鈥 a rent freeze or a rent cap.
David Speers said 鈥渢his housing stand-off hasn鈥檛 followed the usual script of Labor-Greens policy disputes鈥 and implied that the Greens should 鈥渂ank [Labor鈥檚] concessions as a win and back the bill鈥.
Paul Karp, writing in聽,聽said the Greens strategy is a 鈥渞isk鈥 to Labor but 鈥渘one of this is to say [that] stalling the HAFF is fair, or that delaying 30,000 social and affordable homes is a good call鈥.
颁丑补苍诲濒别谤-惭补迟丑别谤听 saying the Greens could not 鈥渢urn to a renter and say, 鈥楬ey, we fought for the $2bn for social housing but when it comes to fighting for you we鈥檙e just going to roll over.鈥 No way鈥.
聽it is looking into the option of calling a double dissolution election if the Greens refuse to support its bill in October. The government has the option of calling a full house and Senate election if the bill again passes the House of Representatives but not the Senate.
Labor is hypocritically accusing the Greens of game playing in a housing crisis. In fact, the Greens have done well to flush聽out the inadequacy of the HAFF, given the housing emergency. Given Labor is in government in all states, bar Tasmania, and federally, the buck stops with them.
Chandler-Mather believes this battle around a better housing policy is about restoring hope. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e trying to crush our hope,鈥 he聽聽Greens supporters in May.
They think 鈥淵ou should not ask for more鈥 and 鈥渋f you do ask for more, you鈥檒l be attacked and called stupid and bad and illegitimate and crazy and you鈥檒l wreck the economy鈥.
鈥淣one of that is true,鈥 Chandler-Mather said, 鈥渂ut the more you hear it, the more people are demobilised, the less people will hit the streets and join a political movement that might actually start to demand something鈥.
Chandler-Mather accused Labor of playing political games instead of implementing solutions.
鈥淭he property developers and the media will do everything they can to make you forget there are over a million people [who need] a social and affordable home.
鈥淭hey want you to forget that and think, 鈥極h does this play well for the Greens politically?鈥櫬燜orget that for a moment. We鈥檙e fighting to redistribute wealth just a little bit, to the extent that, at least, everybody gets a home that they can afford, and live in, and not have to feel stressed about.鈥
Labor, he said, is fighting 鈥渏ust to destroy the Greens鈥 because that for them would be a 鈥減olitical win鈥.