Deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley says Labor and the Greens believing Australia had become a “lefty country” is “complete rubbish”.
Ms Ley made the remarks during a speech to the NSW Liberal state council meeting on Saturday as she discussed the Coalition’s defeat at the May Federal Election.
“Two months on from the Federal Election and the Labor Party, the Greens, their supporters, their cheerleaders on Twitter, want you to believe that the Liberal Party will never form government again,” she said.
“They want you to believe that Anthony Albanese will be Prime Minister for the next 20 years.
“They want you to believe that Australia, the lucky country, has become Australia, the lefty country – it is complete rubbish.”
Stream more on politics with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends October 31, 2022
The Coalition was reduced to 58 seats nationwide following the Federal Election, which saw them booted from office after nine years in power.
The Liberals lost the NSW seats of Bennelong, Reid and Robertson to Labor, and Mackellar, Wentworth and North Sydney to teal independents.
Peter Dutton took over the Liberal Party leadership from Scott Morrison in the wake of the election defeat, while Ms Ley became deputy leader after Josh Frydenberg lost his seat of Kooyong in Melbourne.
Ms Ley said Australians were “relying on us to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and stand up for them”.
“The Liberal Party has been written off before but let me assure you, under Peter Dutton’s leadership we’ve got a big three years ahead,” she said.
“Because Peter and I have a three year plan. It’s not a six year plan, it’s not a nine year plan, it’s a three year plan. And NSW is central to that plan.”
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet, in his speech to the meeting, noted a lesson from the Coalition’s federal election loss in May was how the Liberal Party chooses its candidates.
He said he wanted the party to have more female and culturally diverse candidates contesting the March 2023 state election.
“One of the most important rights of our party members is the power to select candidates that represent your values. This state council made a decision for democratic reform,” Mr Perrottet said.
“Today I can announce that within two weeks we will open preselections across the state for the next election.
“As the leader of the parliamentary party, I want to see more women, I want to see more cultural diversity, I want the best talent to put their hands up for a future government in 2023.”
Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi has labeled comments made by former prime minister Paul Keating about Adam Bandt as “disgusting” and “disappointing”.
Mr Keating dubbed Mr Bandt a “bounder” and a “distorter of political truth” after the Greens leader said Labor is a “Neoliberal” party during a National Press Club address on Wednesday.
Senator Faruqi came to the defense of her leader and supported his comments about the characterization that Labor has become more “neoliberal” over time.
Stream Sky News live & on demand with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends October 31, 2022
“I think the attacks on Adam’s character like this are frankly pretty disgusting and disappointing,” she told the ABC on Thursday.
“There is no doubt that over the last three or four decades Labor have adopted neoliberalism.”
Mr Keating ridiculed Mr Bandt’s assertions, pointing to a range of “mammoth changes”, including Medicare and compulsory superannuation, enacted under Labor.
“How could any reasonable person describe the universality of Medicare as an exercise in conservative neoliberalism,” Mr Keating told Nine newspapers.
“Or providing the whole Australian community, every working person, with mandated capital savings leading to substantial superannuation assets and retirement incomes.
“How could any reasonable person describe these mammoth changes as ‘neoliberalism’, a word associated with the likes of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.
“And more than that, the world’s leading system of minimum award rates of pay, a safety net superintended by the Fair Work Commission – a Keating government creation. Again, hardly an exercise in neoliberalism.
“But Bandt is a bounder and a distorter of political truth.”
Mr Bandt confirmed his party’s support of the Climate Change Bill – which enshrines its emissions reduction target of 43 per cent by 2030 and net zero by 2050 into law – during the National Press Club address.
However, he said the Greens would still challenge the government to end fossil fuel production.
“To be crystal clear, the Greens have improved a weak climate bill,” Mr Bandt said during on Wednesday afternoon.
The Greens had initially threatened to block the bill over the “weak” 43 per cent 2030 emissions reduction target and concerns that it could be ratcheted back by future governments.
Labor then amended the bill to clearly enshrine the 43 per cent target as a floor – or a minimum requirement -rather than a ceiling to higher goals, but the Greens continued to steadfastly refuse to support the legislation if it failed to act on coal and gas .
Ms Faruqi flagged their support for the legislation showed it can still work with the government despite having differing opinions.
“We clearly have disagreements with Labor and a whole range of policies but we have shown that we want to work in good faith the way we can and our negotiations on this bill are a prime example of that,” she continued.
“It has now improved with the genuine floor, which means that the target cannot go backwards.”
The bill will be sent to the Senate where it is now expected to pass when Parliament returns in September.
For the first time in Australian history, a federal environment minister has set the wheels in motion to reject a coal mine.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has proposed the rejection of Clive Palmer’s Central Queensland Coal Project on the grounds it is likely to damage the Great Barrier Reef.
The decision remains a “proposal” because a final decision can only be made after 10 days of further consultation, including public comment. But given the wide range of reasons cited by the minister, it is unlikely to be approved.
The planned mining site is just 10 kilometers from the Great Barrier Reef near Rockhampton, and was likely to have contributed to ocean pollution, according to the minister.
“Based on the information available to me at this stage, I believe that the project would be likely to have unacceptable impacts to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, and the values of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and National Heritage Place,” Ms Plibersek said.
Clive Palmer’s proposed coal mine site is just 10 kilometers from the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.(abcnews)
The decision was also based on potential impacts to local water resources.
Although it is the first time a federal environment minister has proposed to reject an application to develop a coal mine, the Queensland government recommended the rejection last year.
The move was announced the same day the government passed its climate bill through the lower house, with the support of the cross bench including the Greens.
The Greens have been pushing the government to reject all coal and gas projects while the government has said it will approve those that stack up environmentally.
“That’s now one down and 113 to go. There’s 114 of these projects in the pipeline,” Greens leader Adam Bandt said.
The Greens have also been pushing for a “climate trigger” that would require the potential impacts of coal and gas projects on climate change to be considered by the environment minister. As it stands, the potential climate change impact of this mine was not considered in the approval process.
Conservationists, activists glad minister ‘listened to warnings’
The preliminary decision was applauded by conservationists and climate activists.
“This is the right proposed decision for the Great Barrier Reef from the environment minister,” Cherry Muddle from the Australian Marine Conservation Society said.
“We are glad she has listened to warnings from government-appointed and independent scientists, as well as the Queensland government who said the mine was ‘not suitable’ to proceed in April 2021.
“In the wake of the fourth mass bleaching event on the reef since 2016, it is vital new coal and gas projects like this one are refused. It shows the government are serious about saving the reef and tackling the issues that threaten it.”
Queensland’s environment department deemed Clive Palmer’s project “not suitable” to proceed last year.(Facebook: Great Barrier Reef Legacy/File photo)
The proposed project included two open-cut pits north of Rockhampton over an area of more than 2,660 hectares.
The detailed reasons for the proposed decision have not yet been released, but included impacts on a world heritage area, and on-water resources. The project’s potential impacts on threatened species was not listed as a reason for rejection.
The public has 10 days to comment on the proposed decision.
Mr Palmer’s company Central Queensland Coal was not available for comment.
The Queensland government concluded in 2021 the mine would generate royalties for the state of between $703 million and $766 million in total.
There is now a recurring motif in Australian politics where you see a headline declaring a senator has done something idiotic, unspeakable or downright insane and then get mildly disappointed to discover it’s just Lidia Thorpe again.
This is of course the existential peril of the attention seeker – sooner or later people stop paying attention.
Whatever the latest outrageous thing Thorpe has said, it no longer merits any outrage simply because it is her saying it. She is the Pauline Hanson of the left.
And so when she did her silly swearing in stunt this week it carried all the weight of a crazed doomsayer on a sandwich board with scrawled inscriptions about the End of Days.
What Thorpe is useful as, however, is a totem pole – no, a shining beacon if you will – that serves to remind us all just how utterly crazy the Greens really are and why they should never be trusted with policymaking in this country.
And while it is obviously a national tragedy that they now have 12 senators in the upper house, it is also why Labor’s negotiation with the minor party over its climate change bill has all the hallmarks of a chainsaw negotiating with a porkchop.
As The Australian reported on its front page on Wednesday, the bill is now set to pass after the Greens supposedly secured concessions — although what those concessions were tellingly elusive.
More telling was the report’s shrewd observation that the government would only accept amendments “if they did not fundamentally change the intent, mandate or principles of the legislation”.
In other words as long as they didn’t effectively amend anything much at all.
Indeed the only thing that really matters is Labor sticking to its 43 per cent reductions target and the Greens do not have a hope in hell of changing that.
And the Greens will of course ultimately have no choice but to pass the legislation because otherwise they will again be seen as climate pariahs — victims of their wilful idiocy a decade ago.
And so despite holding the numbers, the Greens don’t actually hold the cards.
And even if they did the unthinkable and blocked it again it would be even better for Labor because it could force a double-dissolution and — based on this week’s Newspoll — get an even more thumping majority.
why?
Because far from caving in to the la-la left, Anthony Albanese has been the model of a strong, pragmatic and rationalist Labor Prime Minister.
He has been tough on China, tough on border protection, tough on the Teals and tough on the Greens.
His Treasurer Jim Chalmers is already reining in spending to drive down inflation and debt, his Defense Minister Richard Marles is strengthening the ADF, and his Government Services Minister Bill Shorten just delivered the woke brigade the sweetest smackdown in years by simply asserting that mothers give birth to children.
To invoke another piece of reproductive vernacular, Labor has finally got its balls back.
This is what good government looks like, and its color sure ain’t green.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has rejected claims his government’s flagship social housing policy was denying accommodation for thousands of Australians as he hit back at the Greens for blocking developments across the country.
Labor took a slate of housing policies to the election in a bid to bolster public accommodation for vulnerable families.
The platform is a key priority for the Prime Minister who has often spoken of his own experience living in social housing.
But newly elected Greens MP Max Chandler-Mather asked Mr Albanese if the government’s plan to establish 4,000 new dwellings a year for five years would see the “waitlist grow” and deny thousands of families the “same chance”.
“I indeed do understand the importance of having a secure roof over your head, and what that can do for the opportunity to advance in life. I know it because I have lived it,” Mr Albanese said.
Stream more on politics with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends October 31, 2022
“I know that the member’s political party has substantial representation in local government and what I’d encourage him to do is to actually encourage the Greens political party to back affordable housing rather than just oppose it.
“Because in my local area, when there’s been programs in Marrickville, they have been opposed.”
Demand for public housing is significantly outstripping supply with the waiting list increasing by more than 8,000 households in 2021 while less than 4,000 new dwellings came online in the same period.
The waiting list currently sits at 163,508, according to new data published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
The Albanese Government’s $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund will build up to 30,000 new properties for vulnerable Australians over the next five years.
Up to 10,000 of those dwellings will be provided to frontline workers, with the remaining 20,000 to be allocated for vulnerable families.
Mr Chandler-Mather said the waitlist would continue to grow if only 4,000 houses were made available a year when the list has grown by an average of 7,662 a year since 2018.
The Prime Minister said the Commonwealth was committed to the issue and would continue to work with state and local governments to bolster the supply of social housing.
“We also established a National Housing Supply and Affordability Council that will work with state and local government importantly to deliver increased housing, be it social housing or affordable housing, particularly through community housing organisations,” he said.
The government has also pledged $200 million for maintenance of existing housing in indigenous communities, $100 million for crisis accommodation for women and children and $30 million for veterans at risk of homelessness.
A passenger who arrived in Australia from Indonesia has been fined $2,664 for failing to declare McMuffins in their luggage amid an outbreak of foot and mouth disease overseas.
The Labor government has rolled out biosecurity dogs at Darwin and Cairns airports as part of a $14 million package to bolster Australia’s protection from FMD.
Detector dog Zinta inspected the passenger’s backpack at Darwin Airport and found two egg and beef sausage McMuffins from McDonalds in Bali and a ham croissant.
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Murray Watt said the seized meals would be tested for FMD before being destroyed as Australia remains “FMD-free”.
“This will be the most expensive Maccas meal this passenger ever has, this fine is twice the cost of an airfare to Bali,” he said in a statement on Monday.
Stream more national news live & on demand with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends October 31, 2022
“But I have no sympathy for people who choose to disobey Australia’s strict biosecurity measures, and recent detections show you will be caught.
“Zinta was placed at Darwin Airport as part of the Albanese Government’s tough new biosecurity defences, and it’s excellent to see she is already contributing to keeping the country safe.”
FMD is a highly contagious disease of livestock causing fever followed by the development of vesicles (blisters) in the mouth and on the feet.
Indonesia is currently battling an FMD outbreak, which has sparked fears it could spread to Australia and cripple the $80 billion livestock industry.
The viral disease has also been reported in countries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and South America.
Mr Watt reinforced that biosecurity is “no joke” as goods must be declared to enter Australia.
“Biosecurity is no joke—it helps protect jobs, our farms, food and supports the economy,” he said.
“Passengers who choose to travel need to make sure they are fulfilling the conditions to enter Australia, by following all biosecurity measures.”
FMD affects all cloven-hoofed animals including cattle, sheep, goats, camelids, deer and pigs.
The virus is carried by live animals and in meat and dairy products, as well as in soil, bones, untreated hides, vehicles and equipment used with these animals.
The government has rolled out sanitation foot mats at all international airports, along with support on the ground for Indonesia and neighboring countries.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is adamant Australia’s strong biosecurity will stop the incursion of foot and mouth disease.
The package contains $9 million for frontline biosecurity and industry preparedness measures.
A further $5 million is used to provide technical expertise and support to Indonesia, Timor-Leste and Papua New Guinea to assist their work in combatting livestock diseases.
“The Federal Government is taking this seriously, and we need every traveler to do their bit too,” Mr Watt said.
The federal government has flagged it is open to reforming Australia’s brand-new controversial $7 billion unemployment scheme and has announced the creation of a parliamentary committee to scrutinize it.
Key points:
The government has announced a parliamentary committee will examine Workforce Australia
The Employment Minister says the system requires “fresh parliamentary scrutiny and oversight”
The committee is set to report back to parliament in September next year
It comes following months of concern and confusion from jobseekers prior to the launch, as well as a deluge of criticism from them since.
Employment Minister Tony Burke said on Tuesday the federal government would create a lower house committee to examine the implementation of Workforce Australia, the program that replaced the maligned jobactive program last month.
Workforce Australia was passed under the Morrison government and voted for by Labor prior to the May election. Contracts with job service providers worth $7 billion were also signed.
Under the shift, those engaged in mutual obligations earn points for activities in return for the sub-poverty line JobSeeker payment.
But Mr Burke said on Tuesday while Labor supported the principles behind Workforce Australia, including mutual obligations, some aspects required “fresh parliamentary scrutiny and oversight”.
“While the [Coalition] spent nearly two years designing and building the software for the new system, they did not properly explain it to the Australian people,” he said.
“We are concerned we have ended up with a system that is driven more by the details of contracts with providers than the legislation the previous government brought to parliament.”
Mr Burke said the committee would take evidence on “where best practice is occurring and where it is not”.
“It will recommend where we can make long-term reforms, as well as where we can make more immediate improvements,” he said.
The committee is scheduled to report back to parliament in September 2023.
System needs to be ‘fit for purpose’
The transition to Workforce Australia has been shaky.
In the lead-up to launch, jobseekers said the changes had been poorly communicated, with some still unclear about what the changes meant for them and their JobSeeker payments just days before the program kicked in.
Social services advocates also voiced concern many of the “punitive” aspects from jobactive remained a part of Workforce Australia, and a new points-based system would force people into more mutual obligations sooner.
Since the scheme launched, jobseekers have reported a raft of issues, including being unable to access the app and online portal, being recommended jobs based on states they do not live in, and further confusing communication.
Mr Burke noted that on Tuesday, saying it appeared “user experience of the system varies wildly from person to person and provider to provider”.
Workforce Australia was passed under the Morrison government and voted for by Labor when it was in opposition.(ABC News: Danielle Bonica)
Labor made a series of last-minute tweaks to the original design of Workforce Australia last month.
It also extended a suspension on payment penalties, though advocates want to see it stretched further until at least October.
The Australian Council of Social Service has welcomed the creation of the parliamentary committee.
“For too long, people who’ve been looking for paid work have been blamed for being unemployed rather than actively and positively supported to find jobs,” acting CEO Edwina MacDonald said.
“The announcement of this review is a good move to ensure the voices of people who use these services inform the reform process, and that feedback from the experiences of the early days of this new model can be used to ensure Workforce Australia is fit for purpose .’
A group of Pacific workers who breached their visa conditions are fighting to get them back, although advocates say it should never have reached this point.
Key points:
Under the PALM scheme, workers can only take jobs with approved employers
Officials are attempting to reinstate some of the 24 Pacific workers who are still eligible to work
Farmers say the highly skilled workers are essential for picking and planting
The 24 workers in Bundaberg “absconded” from the Pacific Australian Labor Mobility (PALM) scheme by getting jobs with a non-registered employer when working on the farm they were at dried up.
A spokesman for the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) said officials had met with the employees to discuss their individual cases, but solicitor Dana Levitt said they should have helped sooner.
She said the workers were brought to Australia by an approved employer but there were issues with pay and conditions.
“These workers were faced with overheads that they couldn’t meet because they weren’t getting sufficient work,” Ms Levitt said.
“Unable to make ends meet, these workers were very open and vulnerable to inducement from other employers who were not approved employers in the scheme.
“These workers went with that non-approved employer, fell foul of the program and their visa conditions, and have been trying to navigate their way back into the PALM scheme ever since.”
Reluctance to complain creates vulnerability
The PALM scheme allows Australian businesses to hire workers from nine Pacific Island countries and Timor-Leste for seasonal work or longer engagements of up to four years, under certain circumstances.
Approved employers must ensure the workers are well supported, and provide sufficient hours of work, a minimum standard of accommodation and the same workplace rights as Australian workers receive.
Last month, DEWR officials met with the workers, and they are now working with the Department of Home Affairs to re-engage those that are still eligible.
“These are matters the department takes seriously,” a spokesman said.
It is a condition of the visa that workers continue to be employed by their sponsor or another approved in the scheme, and not change employers unless approved by the federal government.
PALM scheme employees can access country liaison officers and a support phone line if they have issues with their employment, but Ms Levitt said there was reluctance to report issues to the same authority that they relied on for visas.
Advocates say workers are reluctant to complain to the same authority that approved their visas.(ABC Wide Bay: Johanna Marie)
“There’s a huge deterrent effect for workers to actually seek help through the right channels,” she said.
“There’s no distinction between the people that are going to sport you and the people that are going to help you.
“There needs to be … an independent body that workers can approach when they have issues related to their inability to make ends meet, or their desire to move to another approved employer.”
Worker shortage exacerbates issues
Traditionally, farmers have relied on seasonal backpacker labor for planting and harvest work, but since the pandemic, working holiday-makers are yet to return in the same numbers.
Bundaberg Fruit and Vegetable Growers chief executive Bree Grima said that it made it even more critical the Pacific workers were supported.
“If it wasn’t for them, we simply would not have been harvesting our crops or planting our crops either,” she said.
“We’ve had some brilliant numbers come into Queensland and into regional areas, a lot more than we’ve had before.
“So we need to make sure that the workers that are here, that they are keen to stay here, that they’ve got the support mechanisms to ensure that they’ve got that work available for them.”
She supported calls for independent and confidential advice, but said there was already a lot of support and protection built into the scheme.
“There’s a lot of work and time and effort that goes into becoming an approved employer, and there should be,” she said.
“It is a difficult process to go through but I do support that it does do a lot of background checks and ticks a lot of boxes.
“These workers, they are highly skilled, they’re putting a lot into the community, and we need to make sure that we’re looking after them in every aspect.”
The Victorian government is under pressure to speed up promised integrity reforms, following a scathing report detailing “extensive” misconduct by its MPs.
Key points:
The Greens will introduce legislation this week to fast track anti-corruption measures
The proposed bill aims to stifle the influence of lobbyists and make ministerial diaries public
The government has promised to implement 21 recommendations from an IBAC report by June 2024
The Operation Watts investigation — a joint probe between the state’s ombudsman and the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) — a covered rampant nepotism and the widespread misuse of public resources within the Victorian Labor party.
The Victorian Greens will introduce an anti-corruption bill when parliament summarizes this week to strengthen IBAC’s powers and establish a Parliamentary Integrity Commissioner within the next few months — almost two years sooner than the timeline indicated by the government.
The Labor Party has promised to implement all 21 of the report’s recommendations, which includes advice to establish a Parliamentary Ethics Committee and an Integrity Commissioner by June 2024.
But Brunswick MP and Greens integrity spokesperson Tim Read said the government should act immediately on the reforms.
Tim Read says integrity issues have been present in Victorian parliament for years.(Facebook: Tim Read Greens)
“There’s no reason why the government couldn’t make a good start on it this year and have an integrity commissioner appointed early next year,” Dr Read told the ABC.
“There’s a lot of precedent to this — it’s not as if there’s a hell of a lot of thought that needs to go into it.”
Catherine Williams from the Center for Public Integrity said the government must start implementing some reforms before November’s state election if it was determined to crack down on corruption.
“It’s very easy for governments to make promises to introduce change, however, we know from past experience what we need to see are steps being taken,” Dr Williams said.
“A commitment is one thing, what we really require is action.”
The Liberal opposition has also backed the push to speed up reforms, with Matthew Guy saying he would be “more than happy to look into it” when parliament returns.
Daniel Andrews has committed to implementing the recommendations from the report.
Premier Daniel Andrews said on Friday the government would be “faithful” to the timeline provided by the integrity agencies.
“Some of it will be able to be achieved quickly, other elements of those recommendations in that reform will take a bit longer, but we’re committed to all of them,” Mr Andrews said.
“If we can better it, if we can do it even faster, then of course we will.”
Reports reveal misconduct likely to be repeated
Last week, a fresh report from the Victorian Ombudsman into Labor’s red shirts affair warned that until corruption was addressed with the “necessary rigour”, the scandals were “unlikely to be the last”.
The calls for urgent reform come amid other integrity investigations involving the state government, including political donations by a property developer linked to big projects.
Concerns were raised over a potential conflict of interest stemming from Lizzie Blandthorn’s appointment as Planning Minister in June, due to her brother’s role as a director at construction lobbying firm Hawker Britton.
Dr Read said while the recent IBAC investigations had shone a spotlight on the state’s weak parliamentary accountability laws, the Greens’ integrity platform was not new.
“For years, there’s been concern about inadequate integrity measures in the Victorian government and parliament — it’s just happened to intensify over the past couple of months,” he said.
Legislation to weaken the influence of lobbyists
Under the integrity and anti-corruption reforms proposed by the Greens, lobbyists would also be prevented from having an undue influence on state MPs.
If passed, the bill would legislate codes of conduct for ministers and lobbyists, make ministerial diaries publicly available and lengthen the waiting period from when a minister leaves parliament before becoming a lobbyist.
“If a minister meets with a property developer, we should know about that,” Dr Read said.
“And if a minister becomes a lobbyist for a property developer, then there should be a time lag between those events.”
In Victoria, parliamentary secretaries and ministerial officers must wait 12 months before taking up lobbying work, while ministers and cabinet secretaries must wait 18 months.
Catherine Williams says governments need to put their words into actions.(Supplied)
Dr Williams said the “cooling-off period” should be a minimum of two years, and ideally, five years.
“Influencing networks don’t dissipate in such a short period, and that’s the purpose of the prohibition,” she said.
“If you want it to be meaningful it needs to be substantially longer.”
In 2019, the Greens attempted to establish a Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, but the bill failed to garner enough votes.
“There’s nothing like being vindicated, however, everybody would have been better off had the government supported us,” Dr Read said.
“And not just the government, but also crossbenchers who voted against the idea.”
The opposition has committed to boosting funding for IBAC and the state’s ombudsman if it wins the November election.
Under the plan, the coalition would pump an extra $10 million into IBAC’s annual budget and increase the Victorian Ombudsman’s funding by $2 million per year. IBAC would also gain broader powers for public hearings.
Daniel Goleman has a blunt warning for jobseekers in 2022 and beyond: It’s no longer enough just to be smart.
Dr Goleman, an American author and psychologist, has spent decades touting the importance of ’emotional intelligence’ in the workplace and other areas of life.
And it appears companies and organizations have caught up with him.
“[In the mid-1990s] someone said to me, ‘you know, you can’t use the word emotion in a business context’. Today, it’s very, very different,” he tells ABC RN’s Future Tense.
But what exactly is emotional intelligence or EI? And is it just more work-speak or ‘a must-have skill’ of the future?
What is emotional intelligence?
There are several definitions of emotional intelligence, but it boils down to understanding your emotions, understanding the emotions of those around you, and acting accordingly.
Dr Goleman, who put the term on the map with his 1995 book Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, says it has four main components.
Dr Daniel Goleman says we can all work on our emotional intelligence. (Getty Images: Daniel Zuchnik)
first-up, self awareness. Or as Dr Goleman puts it: “Knowing what you’re feeling, why you feel it, how it makes you think and want to act, how it shapes your perceptions.” So, for example, being able to label an emotion like anger and know the causes behind it.
The second part is “using that information to manage your emotions, in a positive way. To stay motivated, to stay focused, to be adaptable and agile, instead of rigid and locked in.”
The third part involves connecting with other people’s emotions — practicing empathy. It’s “understanding how someone else feels without them telling you in words, because people don’t tell us in words, they tell us in tone of voice and facial expressions, and so on”.
And finally— relationship management or “putting that all together to have effective relationships.”
Dr Goleman also makes a key point: It’s not simply about being nice.
“There’s a difference between being nice and being kind. And it’s really important to understand. You might be nice just not to create waves and get along — but that doesn’t mean that you’re necessarily helping.”
Why does it matter?
Amol Khadikar is a program manager at the Capgemini Research Institute and is based in India.
“[Emotional intelligence] is increasingly seen as a very valuable thing, and its importance has only increased in the last couple of years,” Mr Khadikar says.
Mr Khadikar and his organization tried to measure this with a survey asking 750 executives and 1,500 non-supervisory employees around the world about emotional intelligence.
It found 74 per cent of executives and 58 per cent of non-supervisory employees believe that EI will become a “must-have” skill.
Mr Khadikar says EI will become more important in the years ahead because of one continuing development — as automation and AI see more manual or routine jobs replaced by machines, jobs involving interpersonal skills will be the dominant jobs of the future.
“We [already] see more and more of a demand for people to have skills which require relationship building, more client-facing work,” he says.
“and [the survey] found that the demand for emotional intelligence skills will multiply on average by about six times within the next three to five years.”
AI and automation continue to change the kinds of jobs that us humans do.(Unsplash: Israel Andrade)
Mr Khadikar and his team also built a financial model to assess a potential upside from investing in emotional intelligence training — looking at outcomes like revenue, costs, productivity and workplace attrition.
“We clearly found that there is, essentially, an upside, we found that an investment of around $3 million in an average organization can potentially result in an incremental gain of about $6.8 million over the next three years… And this was a conservative scenario. “
He also cited a study conducted by French personal care company L’Oreal which found that employees with high EI skills outsold other salespeople on an annual basis by around $91,000, resulting in a net revenue increase of more than $2.5 million.
Backed up with training?
Dr Goleman says when he wrote his book in 1995, there was little, if any data, around the benefits of high emotional intelligence.
“Now we know it’s clear,” Dr Goleman says.
“In the workplace, it turns out that emotionally intelligent workers perform better, they’re more engaged in what they do. Leaders who have emotional intelligence get better productivity out of people, and people like working for them,” he says.
But when it comes to exactly how the concept is embraced, it’s much more of a patchwork.
“Most organizations will espouse some interest in [emotional intelligence] — some do it well, some don’t,” Dr Goleman says.
He says while “I think at [an executive level]many people have the luxury of being coached [on emotional intelligence],” training is not widespread outside executive roles.
It’s a point backed up by Mr Khadikar.
“[In our study] we actually found that only about 17 per cent of organizations conduct emotional intelligence training for their non-supervisory employees and only about 32 per cent do so for the middle management employees,” he says.
And Dr Goleman says at worst, some organizations only pay lip service to the idea: Promoting EI but not practicing it.
“It’s the same as with ‘greenwashing,’ where a company or a spokesperson for a company will say, ‘yes, we do this, we advocate emotional intelligence’ … But if you look at their current track record, you realize it’s BS, it’s not true.”
EI in a post-COVID workplace
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted traditional workplaces and as cases spike around Australia, some employers are advising their staff to work from home once again.
So what does emotional intelligence look like in a workplace connected through Teams or Zoom? Or more broadly, in increasingly digitized and fragmented professional environments?
Dr Goleman says workplaces need to make sure one-on-one time still exists, as our emotional wellbeing can take a battering if we’re all totally isolated from one another.
“But one-on-one can be digital too. The idea is that it’s personal, you’re talking to the person about themselves, not just about the task at hand, which tends to happen in group calls,” he says.
“So I think that it’s important to balance the isolation, the specialization that can go on in digital media, with having person-to-person [time] that’s in person or online.”
How do you improve your emotional intelligence?
Dr Goleman says we can all improve our emotional intelligence.
“It’s really about habit change,” he says.
He says the most prevalent manifestation of low emotional intelligence in the workplace is poor listening, so, for example, interrupting people or taking over a conversation too soon.
“If you want to change that, that’s a habit. You’ve practiced it thousands of times.”
Dr Goleman says: “First of all, be mindful that this is a moment I can change. Second, you have to have a different repertoire — a new habit to replace it with. [Then] practice that at every naturally occurring opportunity.”
“When you do that kind of learning, it changes the brain, the circuitry for that behavioral sequence, it takes on the new habit, and you do it automatically after a while,” he says.
“It does take a little work, it takes a little persistence, but our data shows it’s very possible.”
RN in your inbox
Get more stories that go beyond the news cycle with our weekly newsletter.
