Abstract

Dear Comrades, On Saturday the 18th of September, I received what purports to be a ‘backgrounder’ on Alliance revenue policy. I say ‘purports’ because as a backgrounder it leaves a lot to be desired. a) Anyone not already familiar with the issues would have considerable difficulty working out what the dispute is all about. b) You would expect a REAL backgrounder on what is a controversial matter within the federal Party to present BOTH sides of the question. This ‘backgrounder’ is a one-sided polemic in favour of one option, an option which breaks with previous Alliance policy and which is vehemently opposed by at least ONE of the federated parties (the NLP). It is true that the document is a badly argued and not very convincing polemic, but its defects as a polemic don’t add up to virtues as a backgrounder. This reply is an attempt a) to explain the issues, b) to argue for the alternative option and c) to respond to the backgrounder. It is a labour I perform with some reluctance and not a little difficulty since I don’t have access to much of the relevant data. I resent the fact that I have had to spend so much time on this task when a more even-handed backgrounder or a companion piece explaining the NLP’s alternative would have saved me the trouble. Undemocratic attempts to manipulate the debate - which is what this backgrounder seems to be - are not just shabby in themselves: they tend to waste the time and the energy of party workers.