Why Dorinda Cox left the Greens for Labor

ABC Listen.

Podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

Nearly two years ago, Erin Patterson served beef wellington to her family at that now infamous mushroom lunch and her murder trial has finally begun.

I'm Stephen Stockwell.

Each day, we're racing straight from court to our Mushroom Case Daily studio to bring you all the evidence from the trial.

We'll have a new podcast every evening that court is sitting.

To make sure you don't miss new episodes, hit the follow button on the Mushroom Case Daily podcast.

You can find it on the ABC Listen app.

Another bombshell Senate defection.

This time, pretty unusual, in fact.

Somebody leaving the Greens for the government to be in the Labor Party room.

WA Senator Dorinda Cox yesterday stood next to the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to announce she would be leaving the Greens to join Labor, where she says her priorities are more aligned.

And while Greens leader Larissa Waters says the move wasn't entirely unforeseen, hint, hint, nudge, nudge, what impact will it have on the Senate and the government's ability to pass legislation?

Welcome to Politics Now.

Hi, I'm Patricia Carvelis.

And I'm Brett Worthington.

Brett, welcome to Politics Now.

It's great to have you join the podcast.

Long time listener, PK, first time caller, so I'm excited to be here.

It's always good to have somebody you can pick the brain of, and your brain has been very busy all morning on this story, which is genuinely, really fascinating.

Think about that thumping majority Labor got, huge.

Did they really need an extra senator?

Like, really?

It's an embarrassment of riches for Labor, but yet they have.

And it's not often defections happen in this order.

You know, often you'll get a defection leaving a mainstream party.

To go into a mainstream party is quite unusual.

A lot of people didn't see it coming.

It did not leak until the minute it came out of the Prime Minister's mouth in WA, which shows a level of party discipline, can I say, that is worth remarking upon.

But WA Senator Dorinda Cox has defected from the Greens to join the Labor Party, a party she has been previously a member of.

So she has, you know, got a bit of a history with being outside of just the Greens.

But, Brett, what actually happened here?

Yeah, with these things, you sometimes get a bit of a heads up saying, hey, you should really keep an eye on this press conference.

And quite often, it's more sizzle than steak, you might say.

But we kind of tuned in yesterday afternoon and suddenly you're realising there might be a bit of meat on this bone.

And you've got the Prime Minister standing there with a Green Senator.

And like you say, Pik, going the opposite direction of where defections typically go.

It's either big party heading to the crossbench crossbench rather than crossbench back into the government.

It hasn't necessarily worked super well in the past when we've seen something like this.

But there'd been some talk at a distant future about what Dorinda Cox's pre-selection might look like going into the next term.

So she wasn't just elected, she got elected three years ago.

And it was clear that there were some of those tensions that were existing within the Greens party room, which were already bubbling over.

And, you know, you've been in this game for a while, PK.

The Greens party room, it's anything but transparent most of the time.

but the fact that we got a result from some of the ballots that we saw this time, and you could see that Dorinda Cox didn't necessarily have broad support within the party, I guess it's not surprising.

But to only give the leader, I think, what, 90-odd minutes before announcing this defection, it was clear that she's not necessarily leaving on the best of terms here.

No, the terms are not good.

I mean, that's quite obvious.

And it's a real reckoning that the Greens have now, right?

That transition from becoming a party that is such a block in that Senate, potentially was trying to build those representatives in the in the lower house too and that fallback of losing Adam Bant, Max Chandler Mather and Stephen Bates.

It is this real kind of what is the Greens future and what they stand for moment and Larissa Waters is the person who has to oversee that and they're losing more politicians than at a time when they were hoping to gain some.

Yeah and you'd have to say that you know just pretend the Greens leader Adam Bant was in the parliament would the outcome had been different.

I can't say it that it would have been different to be honest.

I think there was a lot of internal reasons why this happened.

Clearly, Dorinda Cox had gone for some leadership positions, as you say, didn't get a lot of support.

There were lots of bullying allegations made against her in the past.

She was a big turnover of staff.

The Prime Minister says when he was asked, you know, that's settled now.

It obviously went through some sort of process.

You know, but there clearly has been a lot of turmoil around her, around her relationship with the Greens, around her feeling about whether the Greens were supporting her.

She was, just in terms of the political optics here, she was a more moderate member, I think, of the Greens, former policewoman.

I mean, you know, you don't join the police if you are a sort of raging anarchist generally.

So that's unusual even to have someone who once was a member of the police force, right?

First Nations woman who was very pro-voice, took a very different line to Lydia Thorpe, who was very anti-voice, and of course it led to her leaving the party.

But on that very theme, Larissa Waters was asked about this, which is what's going on here with your Indigenous MPs.

For a while, they had trouble even having any Indigenous representation.

Then, of course, these women were elected as senators to their party, but now they've lost them both.

Like, they don't actually have any Indigenous MPs in the federal parliament, which is pretty unusual for a progressive party.

And you've got to ask the question, why have all the Indigenous MPs left you?

Now, Larissa Waters says there are different circumstances.

And if you do analyse that objectively and fairly, I think she's right.

I think Lydia Thorpe's issues were different to Dorinda Cox's, but optics matter and they've lost all their Indigenous MPs, Brett.

Like, it's not a good look.

Yeah.

And one of those difficulties of political reporting is there is no black and white that exists here.

And yet, in, you know, newspapers, particularly when you're trying to cover what is the clear facts of this story, and it's a little bit of all of the above, right?

That That you can have both a person that can be a polarising figure for one regard, but at the same time that doesn't discount from the fact that this party clearly has struggled to retain its Indigenous representation within the federal parliament.

Now there are differing reasons and of course like you say PK, Lydia Thorpe and Dorinda Cox are different figures but there is a clear through line there that this party is the progressive party that likes to push forward and yet it has struggled at times to resonate within migrant communities and now you've got it potentially at a point where it's losing its Indigenous representatives.

And these aren't quiet political figures that are going to disappear into the ether.

And that is where you've got that contrast that will exist between Dorinda Cox's decision to go to Labour as opposed to Lydia Thorpe's in going to the crossbench.

Because in going to Labour, you potentially get wrapped in bigger structures that will prevent your ability to speak out in a way in which Lydia Thorpe can really contest whatever idea and any topic that she wants to because she's in charge of her own destiny now.

Now, there are some things that are making this a little more uncomfortable.

Clearly, the Prime Minister enjoyed very much.

You could feel it yesterday when he did.

He was the cat that got the cream, PK.

Get that grin off his face.

Because here he, and remember, there's also the legacy of what's happened in WA.

So he lost Fatima Payman, who sat on the crossbench in relation to the issue of Gaza.

And she, that really annoyed the Prime Minister, right?

That really angered him.

And the Labour Party is pretty strict on such things.

Like, you know, know, you're a bit of a rat.

That's the language in politics.

If you language that they're extending to Dorinda Cox this time, Zachala Mundo, right?

But it's different if you leave, lose the Greens because they've lost their way, the Greens, and they're a terrible party, according to the Prime Minister.

But there is a contradiction there.

He doesn't care, by the way, about that contradiction at all.

He just does not care.

But the idea that Dorinda Cox ran on the Greens,

you know, as a Greens-funded candidate.

He made this kind of unusual argument that she's halfway through whereas I think Fatima Payman it happened almost straight away when she had a six-year term.

So what the fact that three years have been served as Greens mean it doesn't matter.

There's another three to go and sorry Prime Minister if you're listening, I'm more consistent on such matters.

I think if you run as a person with one political party, that's what you've appeared to the public as.

That's why they put that one in front of you.

I really think that's important.

And I do think it's problematic if you then change your mind because they didn't change their mind as voters or especially in the Senate where it is such a brand of the party that a person is voting for.

The idea that many of you are getting, you know, because it was Dorinda Cox or it was Fatima Payman or, you know, insert other, I mean, some people would very high.

I bet Penny Wong would get a few votes for her own name.

Some people huge name ID.

But in this case, no.

And so consistently, you've got to say that, you know, there's always a problem with running one way and then doing something else, right?

Yeah, it's sort of like Dorinda Cox, if this was an idea that has been coming for a little while, you wonder, was it in the back of her mind before the election, in which case, if you apply the Fatima payment standard that the Prime Minister is saying, well, you should give up that seat and you should run for re-election.

The trouble is giving up that seat is the Greens would have...

predetermined who gets to fill that spot in the same way that if it was that Dorinda Cox was to quit and leave, it is the Greens who would replace her ultimately, which is why there was that Greens push for Lydia Thorpe to, yeah, you should leave the parliament so that we can then replace you and bring those stocks back up.

Because they reached that high watermark of 12 and now back to 10.

There will be those broader consequences there for any replacement should it be that they decide to leave.

So the Prime Minister essentially saying, well, she has to go through the pre-selection processes of the Labor Party if she wants to make it back into the Senate.

I imagine a few noses out of joint if she got us off on that Senate, don't you reckon?

I mean, there's a lot of people

who fight for those roles and are...

Particularly those Senate seats, PK.

so like you know the everyone in in federal parliament in the house of representatives has in the back of their mind they imagine they could be the prime minister but to go for the senate you are a different kind of figure and politician and the kind of work that you want to pursue is different to being in the house of representatives and that's why you tend to get union figures people who have been more involved in the movement rather than necessarily being hyper local and hyperpartisan at a very direct level within a community and so to run in the the senate there would be people who might be sitting there going well hang on like deep sing who was very close to getting up and getting elected to that final spot in the Senate for Labour.

If he had been elected, just imagine this fantasy football for a second.

If he had have been elected and Fatima Payman hadn't left, Labor would hold seven of the 12 seats in Western Australia.

It is incredible to think that this party was so much in the doldrums in that state that now you could potentially have seven of 12 senators in your ranks.

Now, Deep Singh is someone that maybe thought he might have a claim on, I'll put myself forward at the next election and run again and hope that maybe I could get over the line this time.

Well, Dorinda Cox now saying, hang on, I'm a Labor senator and I've got ideas here.

So she has to play nicely if she wants to get elected.

And I can tell you she's already playing nicely.

And I'll give you an example.

Mimatees.

Look at some comments she made just, what, a week ago about the Northwest gas shelf.

Now, of course, Murray Watt gave it provisional approval on the environmental grounds.

There are implications for ancient Indigenous rock art.

Not all traditional owners are a big fan.

Whereas she was very outspoken.

Now,

she was saying, hang a minute, the line was pretty wild.

She's going to hold the government's feet to the fire over it.

Is there fire?

Are there feet...

We must not go ahead, I think.

And what's the line now?

I couldn't possibly comment.

It's in the provisional approval process.

And it would be inappropriate for me to say anything at this time.

And you, journalists, of course, would understand the situation that I am in.

And it'd be inappropriate for me to say anything beyond that moment.

It's It's an incredible position that she suddenly found herself in.

What a time to be alive.

Okay, so there's all of that shenanigans.

Happy day for the Prime Minister, although, you know, sometimes...

Having so many people on your backbench can be hard to manage, but he obviously, he's getting greedy.

He likes the numbers.

He likes the numbers and he likes the popularity in WA.

It's sort of, it's a good look for him.

I'm recruiting, other people lose, but I'm actually getting more members, right?

It's all very, it's all about his victory lap, and he goes to WA and, you know, he tells us how many times he's been there.

And if I hear that list.

It's like a little tally above his head every time PK just ticks over.

One more.

We get it.

We get it.

Prime Minister likes to visit electorates.

But Brett, let's move to some other issues that I think are worth talking about.

The seat of Bradfield.

The seat of Bradfield is a seat of

mystery and ongoing counting.

So much.

What's happening here?

Can you just give me the lowdown on how close it is or how much longer it will take?

Yeah, so at the end of last week, you saw Giselle Capitarian, the Liberal, was up by as little as one vote.

And incredible just to sit with that thought.

If more than 112,000 ballots have been cast and it would be down to one vote, this essentially they're just checking.

And so the number, the raw number overall, is sitting around 112,000, but it is dropping as you kind of check those votes.

So that this redistribution, this recount will continue throughout this week.

You're in a period now where Nicolette Buller, the independent, is kind of increasing up.

She was sort of in the low 20s earlier today.

And look, a win is a win is a win.

And if it is one vote, that is enough to get there.

As long as it doesn't end at equal, and which would trigger a by-election, this will slowly continue.

And the AEC's got a bit of time to work out what the final result here is.

But you kind of get the sense that there is so much more hanging on this for the Liberal Party than there is necessarily for the Parliament.

And I think there's even a school of thought that says Giselle Kaptarian, in many ways, is what the party's future should be in these seats.

Sit with the thought that the Liberal Party has just six seats in all of New South Wales.

Two of those are in regional areas, so four in metropolitan.

They don't really have any in the city at all.

This would be the seat that could show a path forward.

And there's a school of thought that some in the party say Giselle Capitarian did better than what Paul Fletcher, the incumbent, was going to do in getting there.

So if they were to lose, the wrong learning from this for the party would be to go, no, not Giselle Capitarian.

She is the future, and that's why Susan Lee wants her in the outer front bench as a way of rewarding these seats.

So how they deal with if it is that it is such a narrow loss, whether they need to look to a Goldstein and say, okay, Giselle, we're going to support you for three years and start running from today.

And in the hope that in three years' time, you might be able to get across that line.

That's really interesting.

Look, I can't imagine how stressful it is for both of those candidates, can I say?

Because it's just like the never-ending count.

That's

fluorescent lighting, eating poor food for days in windowless rooms, probably stressful.

It's also so stressful.

Okay, but we'll keep a watching brief on that because you're right it does send signals about the future direction of the Liberal Party and obviously they need people like Giselle Kapterian to capture

I think the look and

feel and contemporary representation of what a modern Australia and the cities looks like and she she does all of that in spades I think.

The other big thing that's happened when we're recording this on a Tuesday is something we've been waiting for, you know, in the calendar, if you like, and that is the Fair Work Commission and its decision on the minimum wage.

Now, the minimum wage decision has now been handed down, 3.5%

increase for those wages from July the 1st.

Now, inflation, just to give you a measure, is currently at 2.4% annually.

And so, this is obviously above inflation, so it's a real pay increase that people will feel, even though these people aren't on very big wages.

So, I'm not saying they're living large, but it will be noticed.

It's not eaten up by inflation.

Politically, though, Brett, this is another kind of win for the Prime Minister, if you like.

He backed an increase in the government's submission to fair work during the election.

He did that at the last election as well.

And the government's got that result and they can say, hey, wages keep growing under us.

Yeah, you'd be buying a choke raffle ticket if you were in the Labour Party at the moment.

It's just these kind of little wins are really what is buoying that party along after, you know, six months where they were genuinely worried that this moment wouldn't come in terms of being in government, let alone having some wins like this, that the figure figure comes out both ahead of where inflation is at and finds that sweet middle point, which it typically does between, say, where the unions were asking for and then where the business community was working for.

The Prime Minister can then point to it in saying, you know, wages for some of the people who are doing it the hardest are going to edge up just a little bit.

By no means is anyone in Labor going to be celebrating and saying things are that much easier today, that it is this work in progress rhetoric, which is why you do see when the Treasurer comes out after a rates decision, the smile is compressed because, yes, of course, they're thrilled personally about these results and the fact that you can say, We wanted people to get ahead.

This result helps people to edge ahead that little bit more.

But it is really tough out there at the moment.

And as much as the broader rhetoric starts to change, when you get those bills landing and we're coming into winter and those heating bills in particular are going to start to go up, yes, there's a little bit of relief there from the government.

This is the hardest period of the year.

So, the fact that there is a bit of improvement is obviously welcome news, not just for the government, but for people out there that are on this minimum wage.

Now, the Prime Minister was asked, is that going to lead to higher prices?

He said no

but you know already you're going to hear you know pushback from industry like looking right now at the Australian Restaurant and Cafe Association who have expressed deep disappointment in the fair work decision and they say this is in the face of falling productivity and a flat hospitality demand outlook.

It's sort of Armageddon a little bit in terms of their response.

You know this sector's doing it it hard.

Look, I think it'd be interesting to see how the opposition ultimately plays this.

Some of these issues are a bit tricky for them.

They shied away from industrial relations at this last election.

Peter Dutton did not want that to be an issue.

Now they have in their opposition Tim Wilson, who is someone

who loves a Barney.

He's up for it.

So far he's played it carefully, although let's see by the end of the day if that's still going to be played that way, because it's a tricky one, right?

Like these workers are doing it tough, but yet if you look at the industry,

you know, they're really in the ear of particular of everyone, but of the coalition sort of wanting more advocacy for their issues.

So, Brett, it is, you know, industrial relations, not hard to land.

Yeah, and I think if you look at that, look, the work from home policy was a disaster.

And if you look at it in the kind of more fulsome element of if you take part of the work from home policy that the Liberal Party was, when the coalition was putting forward, and you add it together with that idea of tax-deductible lunches, you can see a world in which advice coming into the coalition is, you know, small businesses are really struggling out there.

We want incentives to get people back into the office and into the cities and then into these stores and maybe you can pop out and buy a coffee from an inner city cafe as opposed to being at home and maybe making it yourself.

The trouble that the coalition got itself into was not having the nuance to enable to deliver that message and trying to be targeted and focused in where it was reading.

And where they learn from that will be interesting going forward.

But in a decision like this today, where it's got no shortage of people that are going to be pleased to hear that that number is going up, I think I saw some lines from Tim Wilson saying, we note the decision.

And it's sort of like, we're not having this fight right now.

They will want to have a broader fight on industrial relations.

And putting Tim Wilson there, like you say, PK, is a signal that they're up for that debate.

Whether or not, as you edge closer to the election, the bravery might change a little bit.

But in putting Tim Wilson in that portfolio and wanting to have a fight here, we'll make it a really interesting time in this term of parliament where it's not necessarily one about issues that will be determined inside the parliament in votes, but more broadly about the direction that our major parties want this nation to go in.

And this is, can I say, territory that Labor wants to fight on.

They feel like IR, as you said before, so I'll own it.

I have been around a long time.

IR has been a very contested space.

You even think about the late 90s.

Okay, I wasn't a journalist then, but I remember the time and, you know, the huge industrial fights that were had when the Howard government was first elected.

So

these are part of our history, but it seems that

the workers' side of this debate has really been winning these battles, particularly in the hearts and minds.

And so Labor feels like they're on strong territory here.

It'll be interesting to see if the coalition hardheads are able to mount an economic argument that contests that.

They obviously feel like they can do that on the back of productivity, arguing our productivity is down.

But, you know, it seems to me Labor wants to turn that productivity debate more into the AI revolution.

And I think that's probably wise.

And talking with people in Labour about productivity, it's interesting that when you talk to some of the people who have been around for the old greybeards, for one of a better term, and they say, if you talk about productivity in a focus group, people hate the sound of it because it's like, hang on, you're saying I need to work harder.

I'm working as hard as I can right now.

And it is about that communication.

And Jim Chalmers is arguably one of, if not the best, communicator in Labour.

And it would be really interesting to see how he looks to sell this idea of productivity and not about being, you know, you hear it all the time, don't work harder, work smarter.

But how does that become a real thing in workplaces across the country?

And then how do you try and encourage businesses to make the investments now at a time when, you know, some of the Treasury boffins are concerned that one of the takeouts of this Trump moment and the broader tariff wars will be businesses will just pull back and go, hang on, now is not the time for my investment.

I'm going to wait four years.

And as much as you can get over inflation quicker, that decision to not invest in businesses and not look to grow productivity from that sense is one that will have a longer tail and longer consequences.

And so, this will be one of the real tests for Jim Chalmers of how you articulate that, not just to workers out there, but to the business community and try and use this moment that he's got presented before him.

Maybe if the world is kind of reorienting around different factions that are playing out, how does Australia look to reshape its modern workforce for a modern work for a modern time?

Yeah, that's right.

And yeah, productivity is the worst word.

It should be sort of banned.

Australians are working incredibly long hours.

No one contests that either.

But we're not actually getting enough out of those hours.

And that's actually a lot about our slow uptake of AI.

We are really, if you look at the Productivity Commission's recent report,

we're not doing that very well.

And that's on business as well.

Why aren't they investing in some of these innovations?

Anyway, that's a whole other podcast because it is like a bit of a wicked problem in this country at the moment.

Let's not pretend it's not going to displace workers because it will, Brett.

Like there will be implications for workers as a result of that revolution.

And telling someone your job as it currently is might not be available is a really difficult conversation to have with someone, especially after the fact that, you know, maybe if they've got a home loan, they've been paying through the roof for that, or they felt like they've barely been trying to get ahead.

And now you're saying, hang on, I'm sorry, the nature of your work is going to change and it's not going to look like it currently looks like.

And that's where that selling and communication.

And one thing that some of the people in the bigger minds in Labour said, we need to take people on this journey.

It's an awful kind of turn of phrase, but it's like, explain the problem and really be clear to people about what you're trying to do and what you're trying to solve.

That is your best chance to tackle this in a way in which people will go along with you.

Because if you just kind of say, there's not enough productivity here, you need to get better, people aren't going to go along with that.

I MC'd a big AI kind of discussion at Melbourne University, I don't know, several months ago.

And

lots of really techie people did, you know, installations and this is so worth this story, right?

And they did one, which only took like 10 minutes, where they got AI

entirely to do a fun, chatty podcast.

No, I was going to say, I hope you're not going to say this.

And then they played it to us.

And their critique as, you know, the people who had ordered this AI to do this was, you know, it'll get better.

It's not quite that good yet, but, you know, this is the direction it's moving in.

And I didn't think it was not that good.

I thought it was absolutely listenable, sounded about this quality.

And I actually just, my face, like, they were like, are you okay?

And I had to get back on the stage.

I was like, I don't know if I am.

So, yeah.

Just leaving you with that thought.

Whatever jobs you're doing this.

Please tune out right now.

There is, PK said nothing just then.

We will just delete that from the record.

All the way home, I was like, but surely some of my jokes and insults are unique, but I'm not so sure they are.

All right, Brett, on that that cheery note, that's it for politics now.

Thanks for joining me, Brett.

Thank you for having me.

It's a real treat.

And tomorrow, David Spears is with me for another edition.

And you can also send questions to the party room at abc.net.au, and Fran and I will answer them on Thursday.

See ya.