Abbott the eco worrier

So, the opposition leader is going green. Tony Abbott's recent foray into environmental policy suggests he's courting the environmental vote and wants Green preferences in the lead up to this year's federal election.

Mr Abbott may have ousted former leader Malcolm Turnbull because of the latter's support for an ETS, and is also on record referring to climate change as "crap", but it looks like he is trying to reinvent himself as touchy-feely on green issues.

Last week, the opposition leader suggested a federal takeover of state powers over the Murray-Darling, as well as the creation of a $750 million land army for environmental remediation projects.

At the same time, he has challenged the federal government over its failed promise to take Japan to the International Court on the issue of whaling.

As a former Senator for a party (Australian Democrats) that argued in favour of a referendum on whether or not the Commonwealth should take over the Murray-Darling Basin, I can hardly disagree with the new leader's stance. We also touted the concept of a land army for environmental work – our only qualm with John Howard's Green Corps was the possible exploitation of young workers – but the idea was a good one and the results impressive.

Mr Abbott is also right to hold the Rudd Government to account on its May 2007 commitment to "...initiate legal action in the international courts to stop the slaughter of whales".

So what's not to love about the new Kermit-green opposition leader? As Greens Senator Hanson-Young said: "It's NOT that easy being Green.” While agreeing in principle with Abbott's policy thrust, the response from Green pollies has been lukewarm.

Obviously, they don't want the coalition on their electoral turf – especially in an election in which environmental issues will be front and centre thanks to the CPRS debate. There's enough competition for the green vote, so who needs another challenger?

Nonetheless, worthy policy ideas (like the Murray-Darling proposal) need debate and support, especially from those who have traditionally espoused such views. The Greens are quibbling over the timeline (2013 for Abbott's referendum which compares with 2019 for the government's plan).

But apart from that, why the reticence? It may just be that many of us are still trying to work out what Mr Abbott actually stands for.

He may lambast the government for a lack of court action on whaling, but it's unclear where the coalition stands on court action – Environment Spokesperson Greg Hunt seemed to endorse it, yet the leader opposes court action – no wonder Minister Penny Wong has called Mr Abbott's stance a "backflip".

This is Abbott's weakness: he still has to outline exactly his position on a number of key issues including the environment and industrial relations as well as to clarify his stance on issues that affect female voters, such as abortion and RU486.

Recently, when quizzed by the media on policy issues, Mr Abbott has deflected questions with talk about upcoming speeches or spruiked his book.

It's an opposition leader's prerogative to outline specific policy detail when it suits them, but Mr Abbott risks looking like he doth flip-flop too much.

When I tabled paid-maternity-leave legislation in 2002, Tony Abbott was against it. Now he supports the model. Last year, he was influential in arguing for negotiation on the CPRS in order to avoid a double dissolution election. Now he opposes the model and declares "bring on” an election. He wants a tougher approach on industrial relations, but eschews WorkChoices' "excesses”.

It looks like Mr Abbott's first move is to try the greener grass in an attempt to woo a non-traditional constituency and restore his credibility in environmental debates.

He may have succeeded in a small way – a Courier Mail poll last week asking which major party was 'greener' elicited this cute response from 'Colin of Asia': "Tony just went and planted a tree, Kev talked about planting a few trees but his plan is still in committee waiting for advice from his PR men.”

His policies may be unclear, but Abbott is fast being defined as an action man, in direct contrast to the Prime Minister.

And Mr Rudd is ignoring expectations at his peril. Look how fast President Obama acted to correct the impression he was doing nothing. Now is the time for Rudd to give up committees and become action man.

If he misses his main chance to tap into community enthusiasm for green solutions, he will lose his place in history. All that pent-up public enthusiasm has to be directed somewhere. If Rudd is not careful, it will turn to strong dislike of his government.

The environmental vote is not to be sniffed at. In the last Newspoll, the Greens were on 11 per cent (highest 13 per cent in WA, lowest 9 per cent in Queensland and SA) with stronger support among women and younger people. By no means are these unprecedented results for a minor party. In fact, it could be argued, given the topics du jour (climate change, ETS, water, animal rights etc), they should be doing better.

As long as 'environment' and 'water' can out-rate 'national security' as issues of importance, they can't be ignored. The challenge is to harness what Tony Abbott rightly has called a "vote changer” issue – not just for the electoral benefit, but for the planet as well.