In the landscape of Australian politics, something remarkable is brewing from the ground up. The community independents movement has evolved from a rural experiment to a nationwide phenomenon, reinvigorating democracy in my home country. At its heart, this movement isn’t about profile candidates, big funding or big media, but communities deciding they deserve better representation, and doing something about it.
The results have been striking. Seven new community independents were elected in 2022, comprising a cross bench of 16 in total (with 3 new Greens elected then too). Incumbent independents increased their margins. Other so-called safe seats around the country became a contest too, as the major party vote continued to decline to around 33% each, now level with minor parties and independents.
Leading into the upcoming election on the 3rd of May, there are now 37 community independent candidates running, in every state and territory. These campaigns are engaging people of all persuasions in a way not seen for generations, if ever.
Just before the last election I spoke with Cathy McGowan, Australia’s first female independent MP back in 2013. She wrote a book in 2020 about her experience, and it rapidly catalysed a movement. Back then, she talked of the potential to transform politics in this country by 2030. So leading into this 2025 election, I was keen to know how she was seeing things, as the movement continues to rapidly grow, and so too do major party efforts to marginalise it.
Cathy was kind enough to join me for as frank and positive a conversation as ever, and with some surprising takes on things, even risking sounding like a heretic, she says. We start with a brief exchange on what we’re seeing in the US right now.
Recorded 7 April 2025.
For more behind the scenes, become a supporting listener below.
Music:
Regeneration, by Amelia Barden.
Indi sings for Cathy, with Sal Kimber.
The RegenNarration playlist, music chosen by guests.
The RegenNarration podcast is independent, ad-free and freely available, thanks to the generous support of listeners like you. If you too value what you hear, please consider joining them.
Become a paid subscriber to connect with your host, other listeners and exclusive benefits, on Patreon or the new Substack.
Or donate directly via the website (avoiding fees) or PayPal.
You can also visit The RegenNarration shop. And share, rate and review the podcast.
Thanks for your support!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Cathy (00:00):
It's not so much the vision of transforming, because
I haven't actually got a visionof what that looks like, but
this involvement of people indemocracy.
Absolutely I believe in itAnd I'm seeing it everywhere,
huge numbers of people puttingtheir hand up and saying I want
to be involved.
What that produces for thecountry, I actually don't know.
All I know it's for the better.
AJ (00:24):
In the landscape of Australian politics, something
remarkable is brewing from theground up.
The community independentsmovement has evolved from a
rural experiment to a nationwidephenomenon, reinvigorating
democracy in my home country.
At its heart, this movementisn't about profile candidates,
big funding or big media, butcommunities deciding they
(00:47):
deserve better representationand doing something about it.
The results have been striking.
Seven new communityindependents were elected in
2022, comprising a crossbench of16 in total, with three new
Greens elected.
hen too, Incumbent independentsincreased their margins.
(01:08):
Other so-called safe seatsaround the country became a
contest too, as the major partyvote continued to decline to
around 33%, now level with minorparties and independents.
And leading into the upcomingelection on the 3rd of May,
there are now 37 communityindependent candidates running.
See the links in the show notesfor a great interactive map of
(01:30):
all this.
These campaigns are engagingpeople of all persuasions in a
way not seen for generations, ifever.
Just before the last election, Ispoke with Cathy McGowan, who
was Australia's first femaleindependent MP back in 2013.
She wrote a book in 2020 abouther experience and it rapidly
(01:53):
catalyzed a movement.
Back then, she talked of thepotential to transform politics
in this country by 2030.
So, leading into this 2025election.
I was keen to know how she wasseeing it, as the movement
rapidly grows and so too domajor party efforts to
marginalise it.
Cathy was kind enough to joinme for as frank and positive a
(02:16):
conversation as ever, and withsome surprising takes on things.
Even risking sounding like aheretic, she says at one stage.
G'day Anthony James, here forThe RegenNarration, your
community-supported independentpodcast, with thanks to
incredibly generous listenerslike Michael Gooden in New South
Wales and Edward Surgeon overin the Middle East.
(02:38):
I'm grateful for your supportevery day I do this Goodo.
nd Ed, thanks for being paidsubscribers for over three years
now, making all this possible.
If you're not yet part of thisgreat community of supporting
listeners, I'd love you to joinus.
Get benefits, if you like, andhelp keep the show on the road.
Just follow the links in theshow notes, with my enormous
gratitude, as always.
(02:58):
Okay, right now, it's a warmwelcome to Cathy McGowan.
Cathy (03:06):
N time to be in the US, huh.
AJ (03:08):
Is it what I was just asking someone today, actually,
if this feels like a longernarrative arc, everything that's
happening at a federal levelnow, or whether it's something
completely different.
And she said, yes, completelydifferent.
No one knows where it's goingto go.
Cathy (03:22):
Gosh will he get away with it?
AJ (03:26):
It's a really good question and this is something that's
been enthralling as we've goneacross the country that
listening to people, includingTrump voters, for a year now,
pre and post election that'swhat's really interesting me.
There's so many people who, Awould have preferred better
options and b are saying, hey,this isn't what we voted for,
(03:47):
but then there are others sayingno one else was serving us,
maybe this will.
So it's a very.
It's not like all of them arerabid.
You know gun-toting mediajuggernaut yeah backers of the
guy that people on the groundare just looking for some
representation.
It sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Yeah, and how are you?
Cathy (04:10):
I'm really well.
It's autumn here and it'sschool holidays.
That's all lovely, and thenwe're just getting ready for the
Helen Haynes election.
So you know, diving into howbest I can support her.
Yeah.
And everybody else.
So that's all good fun.
AJ (04:24):
Yeah, We'll get to that, yeah, yeah, and everybody else,
so that's all good fun We'll getto that.
Yeah, yeah, you know where I'dlove to start this, cathy.
It's actually with where weleft off, which, funnily enough,
was actually just before the2022 election Was it really.
And we've had emails since, butwe spoke just before that
election.
Yeah, Okay, good, If you canthink back to then.
I'm wondering can you rememberif you were surprised by how
(04:50):
many new community independentswere elected then?
Cathy (04:54):
I thought we might get three community new people up
and I knew there were a lot morethan I think there were 22
running.
There were a lot more than Ithink there were 22 running.
So yeah, it was an absolutedelight to get Helen Haynes back
, rebecca Sharkey back, wilkieback, but that was good.
And plus we got the six newones on that crossbench.
And then another surprise wasDai Lee coming in from Fowler,
(05:19):
so she was an independent in herown right.
So her getting up was also likeoh, that's interesting.
So even though she wasn't partof that community independence
movement, she did run acommunity type campaign and won
against Labor and the Liberals.
So that was quite exciting.
AJ (05:37):
Yeah, I agree, that was often left off the map with
these community independentdiscussions, but I felt the same
way.
I'm so happy that you arenoting that too.
And then what was sointeresting too for us in Curtin
being one of those seats, thatwas, you'd have to say,
unexpected.
I mean, it was a four-monthstanding start in another safe
seat, and that got up too.
(05:59):
What really stood out to me inthat sense was how many women
were ushered into parliamentthis way.
They were all women, these newcommunity independents that were
elected.
But that wasn't an accidenteither, right?
There's a whole bunch ofcommunity movement around that.
Cathy (06:14):
Yeah.
So it's not so much that therewas a whole lot of women who got
elected that surprises mereally it's that the option of
not.
I mean the parties are sobiased in who they select and
it's a built-in oh, I don't knowwhat the word is, but they have
(06:35):
a type, who they like, but allthe parties do, and that means
that many women who don't fitthat type just can't play into
that game.
So there's a whole lot ofreally skilled, qualified, able
people out there who just happento be women, who can't get into
that game because of who theyare and their life experience.
(06:57):
So that's one thing.
So there's a huge number.
It's not so surprising.
It's just, if you're interestedin politics and you can't get
into that game, well, where areyou going to go?
But the other part of it isbecause it's community-based,
that does play to a lifeexperience that more reflects
women than men.
(07:18):
I think initially it did, but Iknow in this current election
there's at least four one, two,three, four men that I know are
running good community people.
So I just think in the initialsense it was such a, it was such
a new way of working that therewere and there were so many
really competent, qualifiedwomen as leaders who could step
(07:38):
into that role.
But I think as a communityindependent gets more maturity
about it.
Many of the men who areexperienced in community
understand about communityorganising.
It won't be so gendered, but Ijust think getting going it was
a natural place for lots ofwomen leaders whose ambition
perhaps had been frustrated inother areas.
(08:00):
You know, like Kate Cheney, Imean, really she was just
waiting for politics, wasn't she?
And same with Allegra Spender,and the parties just weren't the
right place for them.
So it made obvious sense thatthey would come into this place.
So I note the gender, but Idon't think it's surprising.
I just think there was I can'tquite find the words about that
(08:20):
describe this frustration withthe system.
So they had to go somewhere andso the community place was a
very logical place that playedto their strengths.
AJ (08:31):
Yeah, I hear you.
It's been interesting watchingthis.
You know, here too in theStates, this gendered backlash,
maybe I could call it, and Iguess even generally, though, to
see that there are blokesstepping up in this way this
time is really pleasing.
It feels like it was thenecessary, as it was seemingly
(08:51):
the necessary thing to havewomen en masse a few years ago,
and in the context of the wayParliament particularly was then
too, that men would get theiract together as well.
Cathy (09:03):
Well, the really lovely one to watch is over in.
I come from Victoria, sosouthwest Victoria, in the
coastal seat of Wannan, and it'saround the towns of Hamilton
and Warrnambool and Port Ferry.
Alex Dyson is running there.
This is his third time, so it'snot like he's new to the game.
He just didn't get up.
So I just think there's a wholesense of okay, those six teals
(09:27):
who got in, they were women butthere wasn't men running.
They just didn't get elected.
Yeah.
So it's a really and Alex didreally well, Like he went from a
zilch base so he reallyincreased his following.
But anyhow, Alex is runningagainst Dantian, so he's going
(09:47):
to do really well.
It'll be very close there.
Another one that will be closeis a guy called Ben Smith is
running in Flinders, which issouth in the Mornington
Peninsula, the southeast cornerof Melbourne.
So he's running in thatelectorate as a community
independent.
Now it's currently held by aLiberal.
Whether he's able to crack iton his first go I'm not sure,
(10:08):
but I was talking to him and hehad his campaign launch last
week and 400 people turned up tothat.
So that's not insignificant.
And then there's another seatthat I really am watching
closely.
It's in the Northern Territory,the seat around Darwin.
It's called Solomon and there'sa guy called Phil Scott running
there and again that's a Laborseat.
(10:30):
So it's going to be a realstretch for him to win.
But I think he'll do reallywell.
And often, you know, the thingabout this community
independence movement is it'snot a one-off.
You've actually got to buildyour base, You've got to build
your culture, You've got tobuild your culture, You've got
to build your communityinvolvement and then, once you
get elected it doesn't stop Likefor the rest of your life.
(10:51):
You're actually going to haveto be doing the work.
So it really is important toput the foundations in and
winning isn't necessarilywinning in your first attempt.
Winning is really building acommunity of practice that's
going to be there and providethe support over the longer term
.
But anyhow, that's examples ofthree guys.
I know there's another guyrunning in another Victorian
(11:12):
seat, Jika Jika.
It's again a Labor Party seatand I can't think of his name,
Chris, somebody.
He's also running down there.
So you know those guys.
Some will do well, someone,some, some will do a really good
job building their base.
Who knows really?
AJ (11:29):
yeah, and occasionally lightning strikes, like in
Curtin where it was such a shortlead time yeah but, as you say,
the community building's goneon.
we might talk more about that.
It was interesting even at thetime because Fred Chaney, an
experienced Liberal Partypolitician and Kate Chaney's
uncle, said he had never seenpeople engaged as they were then
, and that was then, let alonewhere it's come to now.
(11:51):
But we emailed soon after Cathy, because the thing that stood
out to me, amongst other thingswas, but perhaps most was that
these were all urban electoratesthat had someone elected and it
was ironic, given that themovement started in Indi, in a
rural, regional seat.
Cathy (12:10):
No, no, but the thing is that those guys got elected Like
it wasn't that there wasn'tregional seats, running
candidates who did really reallywell.
They just didn't crack it.
AJ (12:21):
Yeah.
Cathy (12:21):
So it's getting elected isn't like?
Isn't the measurement ofsuccess of your campaign?
Like it's one measure, but upin Cowper, kaz Heist, she got
within a really tiny bit ofwinning and groomed the same
thing.
And then you've still got HelenHaynes and Rebecca Sharkey
there holding that regionalthing.
So I think you've got to bereally careful about defining
(12:42):
success by the urban ones.
They had a particular styleabout them, but the others, the
regional ones, did really well.
So I suppose I react to thiswant to separate urban and rural
out, because I just don't thinkit's a valid distinction.
It just might just take youlonger in the country to get
your act together, but it didn'tin India, like we got up first
(13:03):
go.
So yeah, I don't think you cantalk regions and urban in this.
I think there are certainlydifferences within electorates,
but it does come from what sortof base you're starting from.
So in Kuyong, monique Ryan,there was an independent who'd
run before her and he had doneyou know he did all the
grassroots work.
(13:23):
You know he got organised.
So she came in on the back ofsomebody else.
So you can't generalise,because each electorate has
their own particular story.
And what was it about that thatactually enabled them to win.
And I just think you're doing adisservice to the complexity of
it all by just saying it's ruralor regional, or it's women or
it's not women.
There's always.
Once you get into it, you cansee a whole lot of other trends
(13:46):
happening, and a lot of it doeshave to do with the leadership
in the electorate.
It has to do with who youropposition is.
It has got a lot to do with howthe preferences flow.
So, yeah, there's always sortof a complexity about it For
those of us who get involved.
Yes, and it's just.
We constantly rile against theeasily to be done thing.
(14:09):
Is this a rural or regionalthing, or is it an urban thing?
Is it a gender thing?
It's always much morecomplicated.
AJ (14:15):
Oh yeah, it's music to my ears.
It's something funnily enough,as I've heard from a lot of
people, even saying get the hellout of the States while you can
.
You know those sorts ofmessages.
It's been the same message backfrom what we're hearing with
people on the ground and what welearned about some people who
were elected, and sometimescommunity folk who were elected
by people at a state level whowere voting for Trump at a
(14:39):
federal level.
So it's all sorts ofcomplexities which I'll explore
more, but I've got a questionfor you too on that note then,
cathy, as I looked over thosecommunity independents that were
elected last time, there wasn't, to my eyes, a great diversity
of professional backgrounds.
They were, in a sense, stillthat quintessential
(14:59):
parliamentary professionalbackground setting of lawyers
and doctors and so forth.
What are you seeing on thatfront?
Cathy (15:06):
Are you seeing a more diverse suite this time around
than I'll be seeing from here Ican't say I haven't paid any
attention to occupations at allbecause I don't actually think
it's not relevant because thecommunity picks who they want
and all these people are chosenby their community because the
community has decided that's whothey want.
(15:27):
It's having an opinion about itis so irrelevant and then
trying to generalise about itaround so I think there's 37
active community independentcandidates running in this
election and trying togeneralise about that from a
community perspective, like alocal organising team who picked
who they want by some othercriteria, would take you down a
community perspective like alocal organising team who picked
who they want by some othercriteria, would take you down a
(15:48):
rabbit hole which would be soirrelevant to anything.
AJ (15:51):
Yep, hear you.
I read that there are furtherprojected swings that you
described in the regions towardscommunity independence, but
perhaps not so much for thoseurban independents that were
elected last time.
Is that something that you'reobserving?
And I noted that because allI've seen to date when there has
(16:13):
been a community independentelected, is that the margin
increases next time.
That's somewhat of a pattern,certainly obviously in Indi, so
I was curious that this might bethe case.
It had seemed that if peopleget a taste of this, there's
sort of no going back.
But what are you seeing?
Cathy (16:29):
Well, I can't speak.
I am not across what'shappening in Australia and I
certainly haven't been in thecity.
So I can't talk about Perth orMelbourne or Sydney.
I've got no idea really, justwhat I read in the paper.
But what I do know, with theexception of Zali paper.
But what I do know, with theexception of Zali, everybody
else wins on preferences.
So when I read Canberra,journalists mostly pontificating
(16:52):
about what's happening, I askthe question have they actually
looked at the preference flow?
Because it's not the first.
Lots of the media cover youknow the first or second, who's
your most preferred and who'syour second most preferred.
But I just know in Groom, whichis Toowoomba, susie Holt came
(17:16):
in second because everybody butgave her their preference.
So I'm always sceptical aboutwhat I'm reading but I have to
look really carefully to seewell what questions were asked
and did they actually followthrough on preferences?
So that's one thing, but thesecond thing I see is that I
think it's I have anotherversion of that story about once
(17:37):
you're in.
You're in Because in Victoriathe Victorian government changed
not only the funding rules.
The Victorian government changednot only the funding rules but
also we had three independentsin the last Victorian government
and in my neighbour here wasSusanna Sheed, the member for
Shepparton, and then herneighbour was Ali Kappa, who's a
member for Mali Mildura, andboth they'd both Susanna had
(18:01):
been in for two, I think, termsand Ali won and Susanna was an
incredibly effective member ofparliament, independent, and she
had delivered so much for herelectorate you know, millions of
dollars, new hospital, newschools, all this sort of stuff
and she got knocked off.
And she got knocked off at thelast election, I think for a
(18:24):
number of reasons.
One is that she relied onpreferences to get elected and
in this particular case, inShepparton, the National Party,
who won the seat, ran a superblynegative campaign against her,
basically saying she wasLabor-lite and the reason why
she was able to get all thisstuff was she was too aligned to
(18:45):
the Labor Party.
So they ran that campaign andwhile Susanna only lost by, say,
maybe 1,000 votes, less than1,000 votes, it was enough of
swinging voters said, oh, wewon't give her, our preference
was enough.
But also this other thing thathappened there that might
interest some of your listenersis that the Labor Party in
(19:07):
Victoria at the last electionmostly concentrated on its inner
urban seats, which they won,but they didn't put many
resources into the country.
So Susanna didn't get thebenefit of a strong Labor Party
candidate campaign and thepreference flow that would have
come from that.
So the Labor vote dropped offenormously and Susanna wasn't
(19:28):
able to get enough of thosevotes to get her in.
So it's very easy to make thosesort of generalizations that you
make about once you're in.
You're in.
But it really does come down toyour numbers, it really does
come down to your campaign andit definitely comes down to your
opposition.
Because if your opposition inthis case the Nats were more
(19:49):
cleverer than you were and morestrategic in how they campaigned
and run that really strongnegative campaign which they did
effectively well, it was enoughto knock Susanna off and even
though she was loved andprobably the same number of
people gave her the firstpreference, it didn't follow
through.
And the same with Ali Kappa.
So I do think you have to bethose who understand elections,
(20:12):
understand it's all aboutnumbers and it's got nothing to
do with other stuff.
And if you don't actuallyunderstand your numbers it's
really hard to win because youdon't win on, you don't actually
win an election on a good vibe.
That helps create theenvironment.
But if you don't actually goand get your 51%, then it
(20:33):
doesn't happen.
AJ (20:34):
That's really interesting, cathy, because so much of course
of the independence movementwas built on an ethic of when
they go low, you stay high, yougo and meet people directly and
ideally and certainly we saw inCurtin you transcend that
negative campaign.
It worked in Indi, it worked inCurtin, so to think that's sort
(20:57):
of the underpinning drivingforce of the movement but not
enough.
Cathy (21:03):
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm not saying that, I'm justsaying that's very important,
because that's your competitiveadvantage.
Yeah.
Your competitive advantage isyou're not like them.
But what I've been hearingabout what's happening in Curtin
is there's an incrediblynegative campaign running
against Kate Cheney and I thinkthat works.
I mean, it works, that's whythey do it.
AJ (21:24):
Yeah, and I think that works .
Cathy (21:26):
I mean it works.
That's why they do it.
So it's got nothing to do withwhether or not she's a fantastic
member of parliament, which Ithink she is and has she
delivered enormously.
It's.
Will this negativity, trump,even being your best self and
Trump excuse that expression?
But I think it does Absolutely.
The major parties understand whythey do it, but it doesn't say
(21:48):
the answer is to go negative,like you lose every bit of
competitive advantage you've gotif you play that game.
So you know Kate very likelymight lose out this election,
but it won't mean she'll be dead.
It means that all those peoplewho supported her will come in
much more wiser at the nextelection.
So it doesn't, this stuffdoesn't stop.
(22:08):
So all those 25, 30 000 peoplewho voted for kate, it might not
be enough.
She'll probably get that samenumber giving her a first
preference.
Will she get the nextpreference?
Maybe, maybe not, but even ifshe doesn't, those that
community movement won't stop.
And I would feeling if, if, ifthat negative campaign works
over in WA I don't know who thecandidate against her is, but if
(22:31):
it works, I would not like tobe that person because, assuming
the Libs win that seat back.
They're going to be up againstan organised, community-based
I'm going to call it guerrillamovement for the next three
years.
And it's going to call itguerrilla movement for the next
three years and it's going tomake that being the Member of
Parliament so incrediblychallenging because every single
thing you do will bescrutinised now because there's
(22:53):
going to be such an effectivealternative model and I don't
think that's a bad thing.
I think that would be a reallygood thing because it would
really make that Member ofparliament step up.
It will really build theknowledge and experience of the
community people about howpolitics really works and it
will really sharpen that teamfor the next election because
(23:15):
next time around they'llactually understand that
negativity and how it's playedand that community group will be
more skilled about well, okay,how do you campaign, being your
best self and being positivewhen this happens, and that's
important for them to understandthat and then to win at that
next election.
But you've got to learn how todo it.
You can't just default tobecause they're nasty.
(23:36):
I'm going to be nasty Becausethat doesn't win you any votes.
That just takes you down to themud and you're absolutely going
to lose if you do.
That takes you down to the mudand you're absolutely going to
lose if you do that.
AJ (23:44):
Yeah, are you seeing it?
I wonder, in that context,being aware that there is
legislation tabled by Labor thatthe Liberal National Coalition
has agreed to, to attempt tomarginalise community
independent success in thefuture, does this make you feel
like this particular electionhas more on the line?
Cathy (24:09):
Well, it's actually.
I'll just correct you.
To my knowledge, thatlegislation's actually been
passed.
AJ (24:15):
Is that right?
Cathy (24:15):
Because both the opposition and the government
ganged up and got it through.
AJ (24:19):
Okay, it just doesn't apply for this election.
Cathy (24:22):
No it doesn't come until next year, I think July next
year, okay.
So yeah, I think it's reallyserious.
But the thing is to me it'sabout there's two.
I feel a bit heretical sayingthis because I'm not asking
people to agree with me.
I suppose I'm putting analternative view that
(24:42):
legislation is about money anddonations.
So if you're running a campaignbased on spending huge amounts
of money, it does have a reallybig impact on you because it
talks about how you get moneyand how you spend it.
And it gives the major partiesjust an enormous advantage
because the way it's structuredit enables them to put it all
together and run sort ofnational campaigns.
(25:05):
So there's certainly it'sincredibly advantageous for them
.
But I just keep thinking thecommunity independence, when
it's legitimate, is not actuallyabout money.
It's actually about thatcommunity voting for who they
want.
And that's why the way thecommunity gets organised is
really important.
And even though the mainstreammedia might be running a scare
(25:28):
campaign and going vote LaborLiberal, you know the big brands
if the community don't want itand the community gets organised
, it has no impact or littleimpact.
So that's the strength I thinkof the community gets organized,
it has no impact or littleimpact.
So that's the strength, I think, of the community.
Independent movement isactually not thinking.
The answer is money and I don'twant to take away from the
(25:53):
power of money.
But if you've got a really goodcommunity grassroots
organization that'sfundamentally integrated into
its community, so it's reallylegitimate and you've got a
really good candidate and yourun a strong community campaign,
I think that plays a muchbigger game than putting, you
know, trillions of dollars intobillboards somewhere.
AJ (26:11):
Yeah.
Cathy (26:12):
Because community is stronger than that.
And if community wantssomething and it works together
for it, than that, and ifcommunity wants something and it
works together for it, Iactually think that that is a
much stronger strategy thanputting a whole lot of money
into things.
But I'm not at all naive aboutit.
I understand the power of money, but I actually think a
combined community is strongerthan a lot of money.
AJ (26:34):
Yeah, interesting.
So I'm drawing a thread therereally, between what you were
saying before about thepossibilities in Curtin not
being the end of the road if itgoes one way or another, and
similar with this if it happensto be that this legislation does
stay in place and apply to thenext election.
Not the end of the road.
Cathy (26:54):
No road.
AJ (27:03):
No Speaking then of community movement.
How incredible it has been towatch and be part of the
Community.
Independence Project Conventionand the exponential growth in
participation.
Could you describe to us thattrajectory, Cathy, how that has
grown and how you've interpretedthat?
Cathy (27:18):
Kathy how that has grown and how you've interpreted that.
So there's a couple of parts ofthis story and you're asking me
, so I'll give my version of it.
There are other versions whenyou talk, not versions.
Other perspectives, yeah, otherpeople's roles.
There was a lot of people doinga lot of things, so there's a
lot of ways of viewing thisparticular event.
(27:39):
But the thing that, from myexperience, was in 2020, I put
out my book Kathy Goes toCanberra and all these people
got in touch and said we wantsome of that and initially I
thought, well, I could handlethem by the phone, but it was
taking up.
You know, hour-longconversations was too much.
So I said to some of my friendsin Indi we had regularly done
(28:00):
Indi shares explaining how Indiworked.
Could we do an Indi shares sothat these people who are
ringing me up we could have oneevent and they could connect,
and Indi had already done threeor four of those.
Indi didn't have enoughcapacity at the time to do it
because it was really busygetting Helen Hayne elected and
other things.
So the group of friends said,well, we should do this and we
(28:24):
agreed that we would take theIndiShares model and make it
open to more people.
We got caught in COVID, sorather than having bringing
everybody together, which we haddone previously, we did it
online and we opened it up.
So in February 2021, we had thefirst what we called convention
community independenceconvention and there was
something like 300 people atthat from about 80 electorates.
(28:46):
So that was just in response toword of mouth.
And then after that, we couldsee that there was interest.
So me and some of our friendsformed the Community
Independence Project, which wasan organisation all voluntary,
but it would provide a centrepoint where people who were
(29:07):
rather than just being me sothere were four of us people
could go and connect, and sothat project got underway.
And then we had the 2022election.
So we had another conventionafter that to say, oh my God,
what's just happened.
And then, 23, we had anotherone, and in 24, we had the
fourth one.
So the 24th one was a thousandpeople from over a hundred I
(29:32):
think can't remember the number125 electorates, and it was
people gearing up to this comingelection.
So there was a lot of interestin how do you get organised, how
do you get a candidate going,and it was 12 months out, so
there's a lot of good timing.
So that's where the interestcame from.
Now, the Community IndependenceProject is a networking project.
(29:55):
It brings people together, itruns a platform, a networking
platform and introduces peopleto each other.
So if, for example, you'reinterested in running a campaign
in or whatever in NorthernTerritory, the Community
Independence Project would linkyou up with other campaign
(30:17):
managers or other leaders inother electorates who have
already done it and say you guystalk to each other.
So it does that networking andit also does regular online
Zooms so that some of thosepeople who have already run
campaigns can talk about whatthey've done.
So it shares information.
But it doesn't actually dothings in that sense.
But it does a huge amount ofnetworking and connecting and
(30:41):
sharing information about whatyou need to know, how you go
about doing it, who you need tocontact.
So that's the community and itstill operates.
There's, I think, four or five.
I was a director, I'm no longerdirector, but it does that work
and it's got a good web page.
So if people listening todaywant to find out more about the
CIP for the next election, theycan go onto the web page and
(31:05):
link into this group of people.
Now it's totally different toClimate 200.
So people say, well, what'sClimate 200?
So Climate 200 is a standalonefunding body.
It amasses money, puts it inand spreads it out and it also
does some service delivery, butmostly it's a funding body which
(31:26):
is totally and utterlydifferent to the work we do.
So they're miles apart.
And what I love about CIP is itactually builds a national
community of practice.
So when we have the conventions,people flock to that because
we've got all the experiencedexperts are talking about what
(31:49):
they've learned.
It's not outside experts, it'snot people who know stuff.
It's people who've had skin inthe game, have had a go at
running and have got goodknowledge about how this might
work.
So that makes it reallydifferent because it's not
someone telling you how to dostuff.
It's people who've already donestuff sharing that knowledge,
whereas C200, none of those guyshave ever had skin in the game.
(32:13):
They haven't been candidates.
So they're money people whocollect and that's what their
expert is, and they've got areally high profile, which is
good for collecting money anddispersing money very useful.
Cip doesn't need a high profilebecause we only work with the
people who want to be engaged.
They find us very quickly, sowe're not about a whole lot of
(32:36):
other people doing busy work.
We actually are working withthe people who are seriously
interested in building community, running campaigns and finding
candidates.
So it's a very differentapproach.
AJ (32:48):
Yeah, I hear you.
It's been something that themedia seems to be very focused
on, doesn't it?
The Climate 200 aspect?
Cathy (32:56):
Yeah, well, they always like money, don't they?
And personalities you knowSimon Holmes at court.
You know a big personality.
AJ (33:05):
Yeah, big family, et cetera.
Yeah, yeah, it does.
You mentioned media too before.
Is there a growingunderstanding in the media about
what the difference is and themovement in general?
Cathy (33:17):
Oh, crikey gets it a bit.
They've got a journalist who'sbeen interviewing a whole lot of
candidates.
The Saturday Paper get it.
AJ (33:25):
Yeah.
Cathy (33:27):
Some of the ABC journalists appreciate it
because they've got regionalpeople who are doing work in
their regions, so they get it aswell.
I don't know.
I don't spend a lot of timeanalyzing the media because it's
not really relevant to whatwe're trying to do.
It's like it's a, it's an over,it's an.
There is an over story, whichis, and that's not problem.
(33:51):
The fact that they, the mainmystery media, doesn't under
understand community is likewell, that's their loss.
Really, it's not really aproblem we have to manage.
AJ (34:01):
Yeah, that's interesting.
I've often thought, you know,with the phrase doing politics
differently, that the movementsort of operates by as well.
That doing media differentlysounds pretty enticing to me as
well, obviously being in thefield.
Cathy (34:14):
Yeah, well, that's right, yeah.
AJ (34:16):
I'm wondering, cathy, with all that growth and now seeing
what, are there 37 candidatesstanding.
Cathy (34:22):
I think so.
That's what the CIP webpage has.
AJ (34:26):
Yeah, yeah, which is worth a look.
It has a terrific interactivemap where the candidates are
standing and the incumbents too,in every state and territory
now, and in that, manyelectorates.
I wondered, cathy, andconscious of what you spoke
about in your book too, hay,like the presence of your family
, your ancestors, your mum anddad, in why you ran and how you
(34:49):
ran, why you stepped up.
What have you heard amongst allthese people who are standing
that motivates them?
Cathy (34:58):
Hmm.
So I could talk about thepeople who are standing.
That motivates them.
So I could talk about thepeople who are standing as
candidates, but that's not themagic.
The magic is the communitieswho are organising and what
drives them.
And it's not got anything to dowith.
It's got everything to do withpeople wanting a better choice,
(35:20):
and I am absolutely sure aboutthat.
And it always starts with asmall group of people who are
dissatisfied with their currentMP and they think we deserve
better.
So five or six people gettogether and then, if that group
of people decide that they'reonto something they actually do,
(35:40):
that engaging with theircommunity is is there enough
interest in this community forsomething better?
So, traditionally, kitchentable conversations or surveys
or some form of testing the vibein the community.
And if there's not, nothinghappens.
Happens, if communities arebasically happy with their
representation, that there's nomovement.
(36:04):
So it doesn't matter.
You and lots of people ring upand say I'm gonna be a candidate
, I'm a great person, I couldwin the seat, and we say, well,
that's good.
Have you got a community groupbehind you?
Oh, no, I don't need that, Iknow I'm really good.
Okay, well, that's fine, yourun.
So they and people do likethere'll be.
There'll be hundreds ofindependents running this
election because that's exactlywhat they think.
(36:26):
You know, I've got a goodfamily behind me, I'm local, I
could do all that great run the.
It's got nothing to do withthis other model of actually
representing your community.
So the art of the communityindependence is to actually
represent your community.
So I and they choose who theythink is going to best represent
(36:49):
them, based on the researchthat they've done to do it.
And there's success and there'snot so success.
Some communities pick the mostbrilliant person who could do it
and once they get out in thefield people go oh, I don't
think so, I'm not going to votefor them.
You know, don't like them Notgoing to work.
So that's fine.
(37:09):
You know there's no loss thatthe community has done that,
because they'll have another go,because that group of people
are not going to go away.
They'll say, oh, at the nextelection we need to have learned
how do we do this?
And has community independenceproject?
Can you put us in touch withsomebody who has done the
selection process?
What can we learn aboutselecting a candidate who's done
it well?
What are the criteria?
(37:31):
What do you need to know.
So they go and learn about that.
They do it differently.
Next time, pick a moreappropriate candidate.
But, as what you were sayingbefore, it doesn't stop.
Like every election from hereon in.
It's not a one-off.
So building your foundations,building your community,
building your culture, is justsuch a fun, for the work is just
(37:54):
so fundamentally important.
And I can give you anotherexample, too, about why the type
of candidate is not so muchrelevant.
I don't think is.
I was talking to one of thecandidates the other day and I
was asking her how it was goingand she said we're building
community and the campaign isthe vehicle for building
(38:17):
community.
And she said we might or mightnot get elected, but we know
that there is going to becatastrophic events come our way
.
And this community work we'redoing is going to be long-term
foundation work for ourcommunity managing next drought,
flood, bushfire, whatever.
That's why we're doing it.
(38:38):
And she was saying every dayshe goes out, she can feel her
community getting stronger.
As they come together, as theywork for something, a shared
vision from shared values,they're building their community
.
And she said this is the mostimportant work I'm doing because
we know the climate is changing, we know bad things are going
(38:59):
to happen, and to have this20,000, 30,000 people in a
community have engaged in thisway, we will be in a much better
place to do this work.
So I think she encapsulated forme what I really think is the
driving force, and in betweenthat you get a member of
parliament who's going torepresent you and help make your
(39:20):
governance better, so that yourcommunity then will be better
able to do what it needs to do.
AJ (39:26):
Yeah, beautiful, I wonder, Cathy, taking a view over the
last three years of federalparliament and seeing how all
those new independents and thebigger crossbench that almost
held the balance of power andcertainly had its influence.
What I don't know if excited isthe word, but what excited you
most, what impressed you most orenlivened you most?
Cathy (39:48):
Oh yeah, I can tell you I love watching.
I still listen to Question Timeand I still love watching when
the independents get there andthey move their amendments in
the third reading speech and getthrough.
But I just want to tell youwhat most excites me is the
other day.
One of the projects I'm workingin outside of politics is about
(40:10):
agriculture, regen, and it'sabout how do we get the
workforce we need in agriculture.
So I'm involved in this projectand there's an organisation set
up called Jobs and SkillsAustralia and the other day I
was on a team with the CEO andthe commissioner and the
commissioner.
I was talking about jobs withthe CEO and the Commissioner and
the Commissioner.
I was talking about jobs.
How can we work together and toget the skilled workforce the
(40:34):
really skilled workforce we needto do the work we need to do.
Anyhow, the Commissioner goesKathy, I know you're really
interested in rural and regionalAustralia and you'll be so
pleased to hear that part of thelegislation that set us up says
that we have got to payparticular attention to jobs and
skills and workforce inregional Australia and we've got
to report back to parliamentabout rural and regional
(40:57):
Australia very specifically aspart of our legislation.
I nearly jumped out of my skinbecause I had heard Helen Haynes
move the amendment inparliament to that legislation
when they were setting up Jobsand Skills Australia.
She moved the amendment to sayyou must report and make a
particular effort on rural andregional Australia.
So here her legislation wascoming back to me on a topic
(41:22):
that was of great interest, andI know she's done that on
housing, she's done it on health, energy.
So her amendments are going tomake the most fundamental
difference to how the publicservice does its job.
And because she's there,because no one else did it, the
Labor, liberal Greens wouldnever have put that amendment in
.
Yeah, and she was able to get itthrough.
(41:43):
Do the negotiations with TonyBurke at the time and get it
through so that, like we haven'tdone the work yet, we still
haven't got addressed theproblem of workforce.
But to know that thecommissioner knows and that when
he's speaking to me he knowsthat I know, oh, it's when the
rubber hits the road about whyyou do this work, so that's
(42:08):
really, really been significantfor me.
So I texted Helen Haynesstraight away and said Helen,
guess what just happened?
And she laughed and she saidyeah, it's really good to hear
that story.
Thank you.
AJ (42:18):
Yeah, it's really good for me too, I mean just as a
constituent, because it sayssomething too.
I think, about the value of thesix years Helen's been at it
now and the six that you were atit in the seat prior, of the
building value of experience.
Really, isn't it the buildingimpact that can be had with this
(42:39):
movement?
Yeah.
Yeah, it's been.
I have to tell you from myexperience on the grounding
curtain, before we took off lastyear anyway, was extraordinary
to.
In fact, what stood out to mefirst but really strikingly was
during the campaign in 2022,when Kate was standing, how
people would react, because Katewas essentially going around
(43:03):
and saying tell me about you.
It wasn't let me tell you aboutme, what I'm going to do and
whatever and what I'm selling orwhat I'm giving.
It was tell me about you andthe impact that had on people
and I'll never forget.
On election night and shehadn't won yet, so this was win
or lose there was such a feeling, well, of community, I suppose.
(43:24):
And she said to everyone, it wasa packed house at Claremont
Showgrounds.
Who has been involved in apolitical campaign?
I think it was the other wayaround who has never been
involved in a political campaign?
And the whole house puts theirhand up.
Cathy (43:39):
It was amazing to see.
AJ (43:40):
And then to see then, a couple of years, as I did before
we left, of monthly meet-ups,monthly briefings just in
community, monthly meetups,monthly briefings just in
community, in parks and halls,work, concerted,
well-facilitated workshops onparticular issues.
Housing was one of the big ones, but multiple.
Cathy (43:59):
Electricity.
She did a fantastic job onelectricity, yes.
AJ (44:02):
Submissions coming out of those workshops.
So you're having a direct impactand, of course, as you're
saying, it's the substratethat's tended Like.
We got to know each other inthe process and you'd learn from
each other, and there's allthat bridging of different
perspectives and all that sortof stuff.
People got to know theirelectorate.
Well, I got to know myelectorate in a way I never even
(44:22):
imagined, to tell you the truth, if we go back to younger days
as a bloke in that area, so thatwas amazing Then to see in
parliament that there was thisconcerted push from that
crossbench to really systemiclevers like the one you just
described.
But we could be talking abouttruth in political advertising,
(44:44):
transparency, integrity,obviously, anti-corruption stuff
, stuff, intergenerationalresponsibility even with sophie
scomp's recent bill about, uh,explicit obligation to future
generations, let alone all therenewable energy stuff,
community-owned aspects to thatand and what you talked about
last time too just being agenerator of innovation, having
(45:05):
this kind of engagement thosethings that I would characterize
as almost no-brainer stuff.
You know truth and integrityand honesty you know yeah.
Anything that our 10-year-old'sbeen taught as we brought him up
to be number one, and then yougo live your life to think that
(45:25):
that could be applied in ourparliament but has been to a
large degree again scuppered bymajor parties along the way.
Some stuff obviously gotthrough, which has been enormous
yeah look, I'm not nearly socritical of parliament.
Cathy (45:39):
I mean, I know what you're talking about and I know
it's talked about, but the thingis it basically works.
It basically works really welland it's basically most people
are reasonably happy with it.
It's the top when you're not,that you get to complain about
yes so I am.
I am much more wanting people tounderstand that we actually in
(46:02):
australia, here we actually havea really good system and it
works because people do engageand because we can engage and
because the system's open toengagement.
Like this whole communitymovement happened and we could
get elected and we could getinto parliament and we could do
the work we needed to do.
Like the system is working andthen the system tries to change
(46:24):
itself.
You know, oh, you're going toofar, we'll change the rules.
Well, that's okay, that's goodin my sense.
So then you get to adapt and dothat.
So that's one thing I alwayssay to people.
Basically, it's working.
Okay, you got to make sure, atthe edges, keep a really good
eye on it, because that's wherethe change will take place.
But the other thing that Iabsolutely know about parliament
(46:48):
is that I really should get theactual figure, but about 91% of
all legislation is passedcollaboratively.
AJ (46:58):
Yep.
Cathy (46:59):
And it's only a very small percentage that's even
voted on and it's controversialstuff that's voted on.
The fact that the whole nationworks, we've got good systems in
place, is something I wouldnever, ever take for granted,
and so basically the system hasgot integrity.
Basically, the system worksreally well.
(47:23):
Like every four times a year Iget called up to Senate
estimates in my role withAgriFutures and I've got to
answer questions to the Senateon how we're doing stuff, how
our money's spent, how we'rereporting it, like really tight,
really good, reallyprofessional governance
management.
So I don't think people have toworry about the system not
working.
I really don't.
What we want it to do is bebetter, and the more we can
(47:44):
engage in it.
The more democracy you put intothe system, the better it is.
I think it doesn't work to handpass your democracy or your vote
to a big party.
I don't think that helps, butit doesn't mean to say it's not
working.
And in Victoria at the moment,like the Labour Party, the
current government peoplebasically think they've been
(48:05):
there too long and they're goingto kick them out.
And well, maybe we haven't.
The opposition has got a bitmore work, but you know there's
a whole vibe in the communitywhen it's not working the way
you want it to work and you canchange.
Currently, we change the system, so I'm much more one for
talking about what's working andhow do we make it better as
(48:26):
opposed to saying, oh, it's allterrible, because clearly it's
not all terrible.
There's a lot of it that worksreally and in my experience of
enormous integrity andprofessionalism and effective
governance really which isprobably not what everyone
thinks, but that's my experienceof it.
AJ (48:46):
What's going through my head is again the media angle, just
partial to my experience in theworld.
Obviously it's just.
That's not a story you hearenough of, and an old mentor of
mine used to.
Well, he pretty much taught meit.
I was a much angrier young guybefore I met him, so I'm partial
to what you're saying and Iwish it was a story that was
told more.
(49:07):
But I guess what you'd say inturn is that's our choice.
Again, we can get involved.
Before we sign off, cathy, I'dlove to just make point of your
role as chair of AgriFutures,and I've seen you say that a
similar sort of animation withcommunity at the centre could
have similar transformative,positive transformative effects
(49:27):
in that field.
How are you seeing it now?
How's it going?
Cathy (49:31):
It's slow work, I'm sure, yeah, it's slow work Really,
but that's okay, becausebuilding solid foundations and
doing work carefully and slowlyis really important because then
it's going to last.
So definitely it's.
The work of engaging communityin the work of agri-futures is
(49:53):
very important and it's growing.
Traditionally, research hasn'tbeen one to engage well with a
wider community.
They engage with a narrow setof people who know stuff experts
.
So widening it up is a bit of achange.
But you know, when I talk topeople about it, and
(50:14):
particularly on this topic ofdoing research around carbon,
around the transition to netzero, about how agriculture is
going to respond, people flockto it.
They're really keen to beengaged in it.
I just don't think we've gotthe mechanism yet how to sieve
it, funnel it, do something withit.
That's going to take a lot moretalking around because
(50:36):
agriculture is quite differentin the way you're working.
But people are keen.
We just haven't yet found themechanisms that are going to
create the longer termfoundations for how we do this.
But yeah, there's greatinterest in it and I certainly
get invited all over the countryto talk about some of the
research we're doing and everytime I do people go oh my God,
(50:57):
that's really interesting.
How do we get involved?
AJ (51:00):
Yeah, now, this is what I see too.
I mean I even remember justnoticing the cross-threads the
convention, the CommunityIndependent Project Convention
in I guess it was 22 after theelection, that sort of oh my God
, what's just happened?
Moment.
And you were in discussion withDavid Pocock, who became
Senator out of the ACT and youfigured he might end up being an
(51:21):
unofficial spokesperson forregenerative agriculture, given
his background.
That doesn't appear to havesort of manifested in any public
way.
But what I noticed was that thechat space during your
conversation took off in anindependence movement context
that did excite people.
Cathy (51:38):
Yeah, and I think we've got quite a bit more work to do
there, so maybe next time whenwe talk, we could talk about
that.
It's definitely a work inprogress.
AJ (51:47):
Yeah, let's do that.
All right For now.
Cathy, also, back then you saidthat within a decade, we could
transform Australian politics.
So that was 2021.
2022 happened and I thought,wow, that was a bit, probably a
bit quicker as it was, as yousaid today, a bit quicker than
expected.
Do you still believe in thatvision?
Cathy (52:09):
It's not so much the vision of transforming, because
I haven't actually got a visionof what that looks like, but
this involvement of people indemocracy.
Absolutely I believe in it andI'm seeing it everywhere, huge
numbers of people putting theirhand up and saying I want to be
involved.
So what that produces for thecountry, I actually don't know.
All I know it's for the better.
(52:30):
Yeah, and I know we will winsome seats and lose some seats
and again, I'm not.
So that's all good.
And if Kate loses in Curtin, Iwouldn't want to be her
opposition.
Quite frankly, it's like whoamy God, what the standards she
will hold that person to willactually change.
If the Liberals win, it wouldfundamentally change the way it
(52:50):
works, which is not going to bea bad thing.
So, yeah, I don't have apredetermined outcome.
I do have a knowledge that thisengagement in democracy and the
more people do it and the morepeople do the community way I
just know that has to be better.
AJ (53:08):
So yeah, yeah, it's fair to say that it's expected to be a
minority government next time.
Cathy (53:16):
Yeah.
AJ (53:16):
And a bigger crossbench.
It does make me wonder.
I'll put something to you coulda community independent be
prime minister one day?
Cathy (53:25):
No, I don't think so.
Why is that?
Well, I don't think they wantto be.
I think that's it.
They don't go there with theintention of running the country
.
So maybe one day a communitymight elect somebody with the
intention of we want you to bethe Prime Minister and they
(53:47):
might pick someone who's goingto do that, but certainly that's
not the vibe at the moment.
The vibe at the moment is wewant someone who's going to do
that, but certainly that's notthe vibe at the moment.
The vibe at the moment is wewant someone who's going to
represent us.
Yeah, but Malcolm Turnbull isof a different opinion.
Malcolm Turnbull, when he sawthe calibre of the crossbench,
he says some of these should beministers.
AJ (54:05):
Well, exactly.
Cathy (54:05):
Absolutely some of it, yeah, so anyhow, that's for
others.
All right, tell me the story,Cathy, behind your music choice
this time, yeah, so from littlethings, big things grow, I think
just in another space, and timecaptures so much of what we're
trying to do and in the 2013election, kev Carmody and.
AJ (54:28):
Paul Kelly.
Cathy (54:29):
Paul Kelly gave permission for us to adapt that
song for Indi, and one of ourlocal singer-songwriters, sel
Kimber, adapted some of thewords for it.
So yeah, but it's a beautifulsong and I really love it, and
it constantly reminds me thatyou start where you're at and
you work within your circle ofcontrol and you grow.
(54:49):
That that's the magic of it.
AJ (54:52):
Wonderful Cathy.
It's been fun and an honour tospeak to you again.
Thanks a lot for spending thetime.
Cathy (54:57):
See you later and enjoy US for us.
Very keen to follow yourinterviews there.
It's great.
Thank you Bye-bye.
AJ (55:12):
That was Cathy McGowan, dubbed the godmother of the
Australian CommunityIndependents Movement, though
I'm not sure how much she'llappreciate me repeating that she
may never speak with me again.
Links in the show notes, ofcourse, including to that
community independents projectInteractive Map, which leads to
all other kinds of ways to getinvolved in your area.
Thanks again to you, generoussupporting listeners for backing
(55:34):
this effort to do mediadifferently, and if you've been
considering joining us, I'd loveyou to Links in the show notes
for that too.
You're listening to S.
Kimber singing for Cathy'scampaign launch back in 2013.
My name's Anthony James.
Thanks for listening.
Sal (55:57):
Now in Daza region, made up of great valleys that stretch
from the Murray, yak and Dandato Ye.
It's the home of proud peoplewho value their freedom.
They want to have power overwhat leaders say.
Come on, from the little things, good things grow.
(56:21):
From the little things, goodthings grow.
Well, the new voice for Indiwas created in springtime when
twelve people gathered toexpress their concerns.
Then kitchen table talking washeard all over Indi, gathering
(56:43):
opinions to listen and learnFrom new things.
Punters (56:48):
Big things grow and learn from New Beans Big Beans
Road.
From New Beans Big Beans Road.
Sal (56:56):
Well, the locals chose Cathy, who was born in this
valley.
She's sixth generation of afamily farming crew.
Being a teacher, runs abusiness, a community leader.
Now she wants to speak up forme and for you From the green
(57:18):
sweeping strokes.
From the green sweeping strokes.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
Vote for the voice that comesfrom the land.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
(57:40):
We must make a choice.
Yeah, we must make a stand.
Young people are frustrated.
They don't trust the system.
They're tired of the fighting,guessing who's on whose side.
(58:04):
We're facing huge problems whensolutions are short term.
Let's vote for respect,compassion this time.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
We're not a poly party.
(58:25):
The community of in and out.
We're not just a one off.
We're in for a long time.
It's time for our MPs to engagewith their people with honesty
and trust.
It can all be transformed.
From little things to things,great.
(58:47):
From little things to things,things grow.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
Now your turn.
From little things big thingsgrow.
From little things, big thingsgrow there you go, and I vote
for a voice, a voice for it, andI vote for the voice that comes
(59:10):
from this land.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
We must make a choice, we mustmake a stand.
From little things, big thingsgrow From little things.
Big things grow from littlethings.
(59:34):
Big things grow from littlethings, big things grow.
It's not so much the vision of transforming, because
I haven't actually got a visionof what that looks like, but
this involvement of people indemocracy.
Absolutely I believe in itAnd I'm seeing it everywhere,
huge numbers of people puttingtheir hand up and saying I want
to be involved.
What that produces for thecountry, I actually don't know.
All I know it's for the better.
AJ (00:24):
In the landscape of Australian politics, something
remarkable is brewing from theground up.
The community independentsmovement has evolved from a
rural experiment to a nationwidephenomenon, reinvigorating
democracy in my home country.
At its heart, this movementisn't about profile candidates,
big funding or big media, butcommunities deciding they
(00:47):
deserve better representationand doing something about it.
The results have been striking.
Seven new communityindependents were elected in
2022, comprising a crossbench of16 in total, with three new
Greens elected.
hen too, Incumbent independentsincreased their margins.
(01:08):
Other so-called safe seatsaround the country became a
contest too, as the major partyvote continued to decline to
around 33%, now level with minorparties and independents.
And leading into the upcomingelection on the 3rd of May,
there are now 37 communityindependent candidates running.
See the links in the show notesfor a great interactive map of
(01:30):
all this.
These campaigns are engagingpeople of all persuasions in a
way not seen for generations, ifever.
Just before the last election, Ispoke with Cathy McGowan, who
was Australia's first femaleindependent MP back in 2013.
She wrote a book in 2020 abouther experience and it rapidly
(01:53):
catalyzed a movement.
Back then, she talked of thepotential to transform politics
in this country by 2030.
So, leading into this 2025election.
I was keen to know how she wasseeing it, as the movement
rapidly grows and so too domajor party efforts to
marginalise it.
Cathy was kind enough to joinme for as frank and positive a
(02:16):
conversation as ever, and withsome surprising takes on things.
Even risking sounding like aheretic, she says at one stage.
G'day Anthony James, here forThe RegenNarration, your
community-supported independentpodcast, with thanks to
incredibly generous listenerslike Michael Gooden in New South
Wales and Edward Surgeon overin the Middle East.
(02:38):
I'm grateful for your supportevery day I do this Goodo.
nd Ed, thanks for being paidsubscribers for over three years
now, making all this possible.
If you're not yet part of thisgreat community of supporting
listeners, I'd love you to joinus.
Get benefits, if you like, andhelp keep the show on the road.
Just follow the links in theshow notes, with my enormous
gratitude, as always.
(02:58):
Okay, right now, it's a warmwelcome to Cathy McGowan.
Cathy (03:06):
N time to be in the US, huh.
AJ (03:08):
Is it what I was just asking someone today, actually,
if this feels like a longernarrative arc, everything that's
happening at a federal levelnow, or whether it's something
completely different.
And she said, yes, completelydifferent.
No one knows where it's goingto go.
Cathy (03:22):
Gosh will he get away with it?
AJ (03:26):
It's a really good question and this is something that's
been enthralling as we've goneacross the country that
listening to people, includingTrump voters, for a year now,
pre and post election that'swhat's really interesting me.
There's so many people who, Awould have preferred better
options and b are saying, hey,this isn't what we voted for,
(03:47):
but then there are others sayingno one else was serving us,
maybe this will.
So it's a very.
It's not like all of them arerabid.
You know gun-toting mediajuggernaut yeah backers of the
guy that people on the groundare just looking for some
representation.
It sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Yeah, and how are you?
Cathy (04:10):
I'm really well.
It's autumn here and it'sschool holidays.
That's all lovely, and thenwe're just getting ready for the
Helen Haynes election.
So you know, diving into howbest I can support her.
Yeah.
And everybody else.
So that's all good fun.
AJ (04:24):
Yeah, We'll get to that, yeah, yeah, and everybody else,
so that's all good fun We'll getto that.
Yeah, yeah, you know where I'dlove to start this, cathy.
It's actually with where weleft off, which, funnily enough,
was actually just before the2022 election Was it really.
And we've had emails since, butwe spoke just before that
election.
Yeah, Okay, good, If you canthink back to then.
I'm wondering can you rememberif you were surprised by how
(04:50):
many new community independentswere elected then?
Cathy (04:54):
I thought we might get three community new people up
and I knew there were a lot morethan I think there were 22
running.
There were a lot more than Ithink there were 22 running.
So yeah, it was an absolutedelight to get Helen Haynes back
, rebecca Sharkey back, wilkieback, but that was good.
And plus we got the six newones on that crossbench.
And then another surprise wasDai Lee coming in from Fowler,
(05:19):
so she was an independent in herown right.
So her getting up was also likeoh, that's interesting.
So even though she wasn't partof that community independence
movement, she did run acommunity type campaign and won
against Labor and the Liberals.
So that was quite exciting.
AJ (05:37):
Yeah, I agree, that was often left off the map with
these community independentdiscussions, but I felt the same
way.
I'm so happy that you arenoting that too.
And then what was sointeresting too for us in Curtin
being one of those seats, thatwas, you'd have to say,
unexpected.
I mean, it was a four-monthstanding start in another safe
seat, and that got up too.
(05:59):
What really stood out to me inthat sense was how many women
were ushered into parliamentthis way.
They were all women, these newcommunity independents that were
elected.
But that wasn't an accidenteither, right?
There's a whole bunch ofcommunity movement around that.
Cathy (06:14):
Yeah.
So it's not so much that therewas a whole lot of women who got
elected that surprises mereally it's that the option of
not.
I mean the parties are sobiased in who they select and
it's a built-in oh, I don't knowwhat the word is, but they have
(06:35):
a type, who they like, but allthe parties do, and that means
that many women who don't fitthat type just can't play into
that game.
So there's a whole lot ofreally skilled, qualified, able
people out there who just happento be women, who can't get into
that game because of who theyare and their life experience.
(06:57):
So that's one thing.
So there's a huge number.
It's not so surprising.
It's just, if you're interestedin politics and you can't get
into that game, well, where areyou going to go?
But the other part of it isbecause it's community-based,
that does play to a lifeexperience that more reflects
women than men.
(07:18):
I think initially it did, but Iknow in this current election
there's at least four one, two,three, four men that I know are
running good community people.
So I just think in the initialsense it was such a, it was such
a new way of working that therewere and there were so many
really competent, qualifiedwomen as leaders who could step
(07:38):
into that role.
But I think as a communityindependent gets more maturity
about it.
Many of the men who areexperienced in community
understand about communityorganising.
It won't be so gendered, but Ijust think getting going it was
a natural place for lots ofwomen leaders whose ambition
perhaps had been frustrated inother areas.
(08:00):
You know, like Kate Cheney, Imean, really she was just
waiting for politics, wasn't she?
And same with Allegra Spender,and the parties just weren't the
right place for them.
So it made obvious sense thatthey would come into this place.
So I note the gender, but Idon't think it's surprising.
I just think there was I can'tquite find the words about that
(08:20):
describe this frustration withthe system.
So they had to go somewhere andso the community place was a
very logical place that playedto their strengths.
AJ (08:31):
Yeah, I hear you.
It's been interesting watchingthis.
You know, here too in theStates, this gendered backlash,
maybe I could call it, and Iguess even generally, though, to
see that there are blokesstepping up in this way this
time is really pleasing.
It feels like it was thenecessary, as it was seemingly
(08:51):
the necessary thing to havewomen en masse a few years ago,
and in the context of the wayParliament particularly was then
too, that men would get theiract together as well.
Cathy (09:03):
Well, the really lovely one to watch is over in.
I come from Victoria, sosouthwest Victoria, in the
coastal seat of Wannan, and it'saround the towns of Hamilton
and Warrnambool and Port Ferry.
Alex Dyson is running there.
This is his third time, so it'snot like he's new to the game.
He just didn't get up.
So I just think there's a wholesense of okay, those six teals
(09:27):
who got in, they were women butthere wasn't men running.
They just didn't get elected.
Yeah.
So it's a really and Alex didreally well, Like he went from a
zilch base so he reallyincreased his following.
But anyhow, Alex is runningagainst Dantian, so he's going
(09:47):
to do really well.
It'll be very close there.
Another one that will be closeis a guy called Ben Smith is
running in Flinders, which issouth in the Mornington
Peninsula, the southeast cornerof Melbourne.
So he's running in thatelectorate as a community
independent.
Now it's currently held by aLiberal.
Whether he's able to crack iton his first go I'm not sure,
(10:08):
but I was talking to him and hehad his campaign launch last
week and 400 people turned up tothat.
So that's not insignificant.
And then there's another seatthat I really am watching
closely.
It's in the Northern Territory,the seat around Darwin.
It's called Solomon and there'sa guy called Phil Scott running
there and again that's a Laborseat.
(10:30):
So it's going to be a realstretch for him to win.
But I think he'll do reallywell.
And often, you know, the thingabout this community
independence movement is it'snot a one-off.
You've actually got to buildyour base, You've got to build
your culture, You've got tobuild your culture, You've got
to build your communityinvolvement and then, once you
get elected it doesn't stop Likefor the rest of your life.
(10:51):
You're actually going to haveto be doing the work.
So it really is important toput the foundations in and
winning isn't necessarilywinning in your first attempt.
Winning is really building acommunity of practice that's
going to be there and providethe support over the longer term
.
But anyhow, that's examples ofthree guys.
I know there's another guyrunning in another Victorian
(11:12):
seat, Jika Jika.
It's again a Labor Party seatand I can't think of his name,
Chris, somebody.
He's also running down there.
So you know those guys.
Some will do well, someone,some, some will do a really good
job building their base.
Who knows really?
AJ (11:29):
yeah, and occasionally lightning strikes, like in
Curtin where it was such a shortlead time yeah but, as you say,
the community building's goneon.
we might talk more about that.
It was interesting even at thetime because Fred Chaney, an
experienced Liberal Partypolitician and Kate Chaney's
uncle, said he had never seenpeople engaged as they were then
, and that was then, let alonewhere it's come to now.
(11:51):
But we emailed soon after Cathy, because the thing that stood
out to me, amongst other thingswas, but perhaps most was that
these were all urban electoratesthat had someone elected and it
was ironic, given that themovement started in Indi, in a
rural, regional seat.
Cathy (12:10):
No, no, but the thing is that those guys got elected Like
it wasn't that there wasn'tregional seats, running
candidates who did really reallywell.
They just didn't crack it.
AJ (12:21):
Yeah.
Cathy (12:21):
So it's getting elected isn't like?
Isn't the measurement ofsuccess of your campaign?
Like it's one measure, but upin Cowper, kaz Heist, she got
within a really tiny bit ofwinning and groomed the same
thing.
And then you've still got HelenHaynes and Rebecca Sharkey
there holding that regionalthing.
So I think you've got to bereally careful about defining
(12:42):
success by the urban ones.
They had a particular styleabout them, but the others, the
regional ones, did really well.
So I suppose I react to thiswant to separate urban and rural
out, because I just don't thinkit's a valid distinction.
It just might just take youlonger in the country to get
your act together, but it didn'tin India, like we got up first
(13:03):
go.
So yeah, I don't think you cantalk regions and urban in this.
I think there are certainlydifferences within electorates,
but it does come from what sortof base you're starting from.
So in Kuyong, monique Ryan,there was an independent who'd
run before her and he had doneyou know he did all the
grassroots work.
(13:23):
You know he got organised.
So she came in on the back ofsomebody else.
So you can't generalise,because each electorate has
their own particular story.
And what was it about that thatactually enabled them to win.
And I just think you're doing adisservice to the complexity of
it all by just saying it's ruralor regional, or it's women or
it's not women.
There's always.
Once you get into it, you cansee a whole lot of other trends
(13:46):
happening, and a lot of it doeshave to do with the leadership
in the electorate.
It has to do with who youropposition is.
It has got a lot to do with howthe preferences flow.
So, yeah, there's always sortof a complexity about it For
those of us who get involved.
Yes, and it's just.
We constantly rile against theeasily to be done thing.
(14:09):
Is this a rural or regionalthing, or is it an urban thing?
Is it a gender thing?
It's always much morecomplicated.
AJ (14:15):
Oh yeah, it's music to my ears.
It's something funnily enough,as I've heard from a lot of
people, even saying get the hellout of the States while you can
.
You know those sorts ofmessages.
It's been the same message backfrom what we're hearing with
people on the ground and what welearned about some people who
were elected, and sometimescommunity folk who were elected
by people at a state level whowere voting for Trump at a
(14:39):
federal level.
So it's all sorts ofcomplexities which I'll explore
more, but I've got a questionfor you too on that note then,
cathy, as I looked over thosecommunity independents that were
elected last time, there wasn't, to my eyes, a great diversity
of professional backgrounds.
They were, in a sense, stillthat quintessential
(14:59):
parliamentary professionalbackground setting of lawyers
and doctors and so forth.
What are you seeing on thatfront?
Cathy (15:06):
Are you seeing a more diverse suite this time around
than I'll be seeing from here Ican't say I haven't paid any
attention to occupations at allbecause I don't actually think
it's not relevant because thecommunity picks who they want
and all these people are chosenby their community because the
community has decided that's whothey want.
(15:27):
It's having an opinion about itis so irrelevant and then
trying to generalise about itaround so I think there's 37
active community independentcandidates running in this
election and trying togeneralise about that from a
community perspective, like alocal organising team who picked
who they want by some othercriteria, would take you down a
community perspective like alocal organising team who picked
who they want by some othercriteria, would take you down a
(15:48):
rabbit hole which would be soirrelevant to anything.
AJ (15:51):
Yep, hear you.
I read that there are furtherprojected swings that you
described in the regions towardscommunity independence, but
perhaps not so much for thoseurban independents that were
elected last time.
Is that something that you'reobserving?
And I noted that because allI've seen to date when there has
(16:13):
been a community independentelected, is that the margin
increases next time.
That's somewhat of a pattern,certainly obviously in Indi, so
I was curious that this might bethe case.
It had seemed that if peopleget a taste of this, there's
sort of no going back.
But what are you seeing?
Cathy (16:29):
Well, I can't speak.
I am not across what'shappening in Australia and I
certainly haven't been in thecity.
So I can't talk about Perth orMelbourne or Sydney.
I've got no idea really, justwhat I read in the paper.
But what I do know, with theexception of Zali paper.
But what I do know, with theexception of Zali, everybody
else wins on preferences.
So when I read Canberra,journalists mostly pontificating
(16:52):
about what's happening, I askthe question have they actually
looked at the preference flow?
Because it's not the first.
Lots of the media cover youknow the first or second, who's
your most preferred and who'syour second most preferred.
But I just know in Groom, whichis Toowoomba, susie Holt came
(17:16):
in second because everybody butgave her their preference.
So I'm always sceptical aboutwhat I'm reading but I have to
look really carefully to seewell what questions were asked
and did they actually followthrough on preferences?
So that's one thing, but thesecond thing I see is that I
think it's I have anotherversion of that story about once
(17:37):
you're in.
You're in Because in Victoriathe Victorian government changed
not only the funding rules.
The Victorian government changednot only the funding rules but
also we had three independentsin the last Victorian government
and in my neighbour here wasSusanna Sheed, the member for
Shepparton, and then herneighbour was Ali Kappa, who's a
member for Mali Mildura, andboth they'd both Susanna had
(18:01):
been in for two, I think, termsand Ali won and Susanna was an
incredibly effective member ofparliament, independent, and she
had delivered so much for herelectorate you know, millions of
dollars, new hospital, newschools, all this sort of stuff
and she got knocked off.
And she got knocked off at thelast election, I think for a
(18:24):
number of reasons.
One is that she relied onpreferences to get elected and
in this particular case, inShepparton, the National Party,
who won the seat, ran a superblynegative campaign against her,
basically saying she wasLabor-lite and the reason why
she was able to get all thisstuff was she was too aligned to
(18:45):
the Labor Party.
So they ran that campaign andwhile Susanna only lost by, say,
maybe 1,000 votes, less than1,000 votes, it was enough of
swinging voters said, oh, wewon't give her, our preference
was enough.
But also this other thing thathappened there that might
interest some of your listenersis that the Labor Party in
(19:07):
Victoria at the last electionmostly concentrated on its inner
urban seats, which they won,but they didn't put many
resources into the country.
So Susanna didn't get thebenefit of a strong Labor Party
candidate campaign and thepreference flow that would have
come from that.
So the Labor vote dropped offenormously and Susanna wasn't
(19:28):
able to get enough of thosevotes to get her in.
So it's very easy to make thosesort of generalizations that you
make about once you're in.
You're in.
But it really does come down toyour numbers, it really does
come down to your campaign andit definitely comes down to your
opposition.
Because if your opposition inthis case the Nats were more
(19:49):
cleverer than you were and morestrategic in how they campaigned
and run that really strongnegative campaign which they did
effectively well, it was enoughto knock Susanna off and even
though she was loved andprobably the same number of
people gave her the firstpreference, it didn't follow
through.
And the same with Ali Kappa.
So I do think you have to bethose who understand elections,
(20:12):
understand it's all aboutnumbers and it's got nothing to
do with other stuff.
And if you don't actuallyunderstand your numbers it's
really hard to win because youdon't win on, you don't actually
win an election on a good vibe.
That helps create theenvironment.
But if you don't actually goand get your 51%, then it
(20:33):
doesn't happen.
AJ (20:34):
That's really interesting, cathy, because so much of course
of the independence movementwas built on an ethic of when
they go low, you stay high, yougo and meet people directly and
ideally and certainly we saw inCurtin you transcend that
negative campaign.
It worked in Indi, it worked inCurtin, so to think that's sort
(20:57):
of the underpinning drivingforce of the movement but not
enough.
Cathy (21:03):
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm not saying that, I'm justsaying that's very important,
because that's your competitiveadvantage.
Yeah.
Your competitive advantage isyou're not like them.
But what I've been hearingabout what's happening in Curtin
is there's an incrediblynegative campaign running
against Kate Cheney and I thinkthat works.
I mean, it works, that's whythey do it.
AJ (21:24):
Yeah, and I think that works .
Cathy (21:26):
I mean it works.
That's why they do it.
So it's got nothing to do withwhether or not she's a fantastic
member of parliament, which Ithink she is and has she
delivered enormously.
It's.
Will this negativity, trump,even being your best self and
Trump excuse that expression?
But I think it does Absolutely.
The major parties understand whythey do it, but it doesn't say
(21:48):
the answer is to go negative,like you lose every bit of
competitive advantage you've gotif you play that game.
So you know Kate very likelymight lose out this election,
but it won't mean she'll be dead.
It means that all those peoplewho supported her will come in
much more wiser at the nextelection.
So it doesn't, this stuffdoesn't stop.
(22:08):
So all those 25, 30 000 peoplewho voted for kate, it might not
be enough.
She'll probably get that samenumber giving her a first
preference.
Will she get the nextpreference?
Maybe, maybe not, but even ifshe doesn't, those that
community movement won't stop.
And I would feeling if, if, ifthat negative campaign works
over in WA I don't know who thecandidate against her is, but if
(22:31):
it works, I would not like tobe that person because, assuming
the Libs win that seat back.
They're going to be up againstan organised, community-based
I'm going to call it guerrillamovement for the next three
years.
And it's going to call itguerrilla movement for the next
three years and it's going tomake that being the Member of
Parliament so incrediblychallenging because every single
thing you do will bescrutinised now because there's
(22:53):
going to be such an effectivealternative model and I don't
think that's a bad thing.
I think that would be a reallygood thing because it would
really make that Member ofparliament step up.
It will really build theknowledge and experience of the
community people about howpolitics really works and it
will really sharpen that teamfor the next election because
(23:15):
next time around they'llactually understand that
negativity and how it's playedand that community group will be
more skilled about well, okay,how do you campaign, being your
best self and being positivewhen this happens, and that's
important for them to understandthat and then to win at that
next election.
But you've got to learn how todo it.
You can't just default tobecause they're nasty.
(23:36):
I'm going to be nasty Becausethat doesn't win you any votes.
That just takes you down to themud and you're absolutely going
to lose if you do.
That takes you down to the mudand you're absolutely going to
lose if you do that.
AJ (23:44):
Yeah, are you seeing it?
I wonder, in that context,being aware that there is
legislation tabled by Labor thatthe Liberal National Coalition
has agreed to, to attempt tomarginalise community
independent success in thefuture, does this make you feel
like this particular electionhas more on the line?
Cathy (24:09):
Well, it's actually.
I'll just correct you.
To my knowledge, thatlegislation's actually been
passed.
AJ (24:15):
Is that right?
Cathy (24:15):
Because both the opposition and the government
ganged up and got it through.
AJ (24:19):
Okay, it just doesn't apply for this election.
Cathy (24:22):
No it doesn't come until next year, I think July next
year, okay.
So yeah, I think it's reallyserious.
But the thing is to me it'sabout there's two.
I feel a bit heretical sayingthis because I'm not asking
people to agree with me.
I suppose I'm putting analternative view that
(24:42):
legislation is about money anddonations.
So if you're running a campaignbased on spending huge amounts
of money, it does have a reallybig impact on you because it
talks about how you get moneyand how you spend it.
And it gives the major partiesjust an enormous advantage
because the way it's structuredit enables them to put it all
together and run sort ofnational campaigns.
(25:05):
So there's certainly it'sincredibly advantageous for them
.
But I just keep thinking thecommunity independence, when
it's legitimate, is not actuallyabout money.
It's actually about thatcommunity voting for who they
want.
And that's why the way thecommunity gets organised is
really important.
And even though the mainstreammedia might be running a scare
(25:28):
campaign and going vote LaborLiberal, you know the big brands
if the community don't want itand the community gets organised
, it has no impact or littleimpact.
So that's the strength I thinkof the community gets organized,
it has no impact or littleimpact.
So that's the strength, I think, of the community.
Independent movement isactually not thinking.
The answer is money and I don'twant to take away from the
(25:53):
power of money.
But if you've got a really goodcommunity grassroots
organization that'sfundamentally integrated into
its community, so it's reallylegitimate and you've got a
really good candidate and yourun a strong community campaign,
I think that plays a muchbigger game than putting, you
know, trillions of dollars intobillboards somewhere.
AJ (26:11):
Yeah.
Cathy (26:12):
Because community is stronger than that.
And if community wantssomething and it works together
for it, than that, and ifcommunity wants something and it
works together for it, Iactually think that that is a
much stronger strategy thanputting a whole lot of money
into things.
But I'm not at all naive aboutit.
I understand the power of money, but I actually think a
combined community is strongerthan a lot of money.
AJ (26:34):
Yeah, interesting.
So I'm drawing a thread therereally, between what you were
saying before about thepossibilities in Curtin not
being the end of the road if itgoes one way or another, and
similar with this if it happensto be that this legislation does
stay in place and apply to thenext election.
Not the end of the road.
Cathy (26:54):
No road.
AJ (27:03):
No Speaking then of community movement.
How incredible it has been towatch and be part of the
Community.
Independence Project Conventionand the exponential growth in
participation.
Could you describe to us thattrajectory, Cathy, how that has
grown and how you've interpretedthat?
Cathy (27:18):
Kathy how that has grown and how you've interpreted that.
So there's a couple of parts ofthis story and you're asking me
, so I'll give my version of it.
There are other versions whenyou talk, not versions.
Other perspectives, yeah, otherpeople's roles.
There was a lot of people doinga lot of things, so there's a
lot of ways of viewing thisparticular event.
(27:39):
But the thing that, from myexperience, was in 2020, I put
out my book Kathy Goes toCanberra and all these people
got in touch and said we wantsome of that and initially I
thought, well, I could handlethem by the phone, but it was
taking up.
You know, hour-longconversations was too much.
So I said to some of my friendsin Indi we had regularly done
(28:00):
Indi shares explaining how Indiworked.
Could we do an Indi shares sothat these people who are
ringing me up we could have oneevent and they could connect,
and Indi had already done threeor four of those.
Indi didn't have enoughcapacity at the time to do it
because it was really busygetting Helen Hayne elected and
other things.
So the group of friends said,well, we should do this and we
(28:24):
agreed that we would take theIndiShares model and make it
open to more people.
We got caught in COVID, sorather than having bringing
everybody together, which we haddone previously, we did it
online and we opened it up.
So in February 2021, we had thefirst what we called convention
community independenceconvention and there was
something like 300 people atthat from about 80 electorates.
(28:46):
So that was just in response toword of mouth.
And then after that, we couldsee that there was interest.
So me and some of our friendsformed the Community
Independence Project, which wasan organisation all voluntary,
but it would provide a centrepoint where people who were
(29:07):
rather than just being me sothere were four of us people
could go and connect, and sothat project got underway.
And then we had the 2022election.
So we had another conventionafter that to say, oh my God,
what's just happened.
And then, 23, we had anotherone, and in 24, we had the
fourth one.
So the 24th one was a thousandpeople from over a hundred I
(29:32):
think can't remember the number125 electorates, and it was
people gearing up to this comingelection.
So there was a lot of interestin how do you get organised, how
do you get a candidate going,and it was 12 months out, so
there's a lot of good timing.
So that's where the interestcame from.
Now, the Community IndependenceProject is a networking project.
(29:55):
It brings people together, itruns a platform, a networking
platform and introduces peopleto each other.
So if, for example, you'reinterested in running a campaign
in or whatever in NorthernTerritory, the Community
Independence Project would linkyou up with other campaign
(30:17):
managers or other leaders inother electorates who have
already done it and say you guystalk to each other.
So it does that networking andit also does regular online
Zooms so that some of thosepeople who have already run
campaigns can talk about whatthey've done.
So it shares information.
But it doesn't actually dothings in that sense.
But it does a huge amount ofnetworking and connecting and
(30:41):
sharing information about whatyou need to know, how you go
about doing it, who you need tocontact.
So that's the community and itstill operates.
There's, I think, four or five.
I was a director, I'm no longerdirector, but it does that work
and it's got a good web page.
So if people listening todaywant to find out more about the
CIP for the next election, theycan go onto the web page and
(31:05):
link into this group of people.
Now it's totally different toClimate 200.
So people say, well, what'sClimate 200?
So Climate 200 is a standalonefunding body.
It amasses money, puts it inand spreads it out and it also
does some service delivery, butmostly it's a funding body which
(31:26):
is totally and utterlydifferent to the work we do.
So they're miles apart.
And what I love about CIP is itactually builds a national
community of practice.
So when we have the conventions,people flock to that because
we've got all the experiencedexperts are talking about what
(31:49):
they've learned.
It's not outside experts, it'snot people who know stuff.
It's people who've had skin inthe game, have had a go at
running and have got goodknowledge about how this might
work.
So that makes it reallydifferent because it's not
someone telling you how to dostuff.
It's people who've already donestuff sharing that knowledge,
whereas C200, none of those guyshave ever had skin in the game.
(32:13):
They haven't been candidates.
So they're money people whocollect and that's what their
expert is, and they've got areally high profile, which is
good for collecting money anddispersing money very useful.
Cip doesn't need a high profilebecause we only work with the
people who want to be engaged.
They find us very quickly, sowe're not about a whole lot of
(32:36):
other people doing busy work.
We actually are working withthe people who are seriously
interested in building community, running campaigns and finding
candidates.
So it's a very differentapproach.
AJ (32:48):
Yeah, I hear you.
It's been something that themedia seems to be very focused
on, doesn't it?
The Climate 200 aspect?
Cathy (32:56):
Yeah, well, they always like money, don't they?
And personalities you knowSimon Holmes at court.
You know a big personality.
AJ (33:05):
Yeah, big family, et cetera.
Yeah, yeah, it does.
You mentioned media too before.
Is there a growingunderstanding in the media about
what the difference is and themovement in general?
Cathy (33:17):
Oh, crikey gets it a bit.
They've got a journalist who'sbeen interviewing a whole lot of
candidates.
The Saturday Paper get it.
AJ (33:25):
Yeah.
Cathy (33:27):
Some of the ABC journalists appreciate it
because they've got regionalpeople who are doing work in
their regions, so they get it aswell.
I don't know.
I don't spend a lot of timeanalyzing the media because it's
not really relevant to whatwe're trying to do.
It's like it's a, it's an over,it's an.
There is an over story, whichis, and that's not problem.
(33:51):
The fact that they, the mainmystery media, doesn't under
understand community is likewell, that's their loss.
Really, it's not really aproblem we have to manage.
AJ (34:01):
Yeah, that's interesting.
I've often thought, you know,with the phrase doing politics
differently, that the movementsort of operates by as well.
That doing media differentlysounds pretty enticing to me as
well, obviously being in thefield.
Cathy (34:14):
Yeah, well, that's right, yeah.
AJ (34:16):
I'm wondering, cathy, with all that growth and now seeing
what, are there 37 candidatesstanding.
Cathy (34:22):
I think so.
That's what the CIP webpage has.
AJ (34:26):
Yeah, yeah, which is worth a look.
It has a terrific interactivemap where the candidates are
standing and the incumbents too,in every state and territory
now, and in that, manyelectorates.
I wondered, cathy, andconscious of what you spoke
about in your book too, hay,like the presence of your family
, your ancestors, your mum anddad, in why you ran and how you
(34:49):
ran, why you stepped up.
What have you heard amongst allthese people who are standing
that motivates them?
Cathy (34:58):
Hmm.
So I could talk about thepeople who are standing.
That motivates them.
So I could talk about thepeople who are standing as
candidates, but that's not themagic.
The magic is the communitieswho are organising and what
drives them.
And it's not got anything to dowith.
It's got everything to do withpeople wanting a better choice,
(35:20):
and I am absolutely sure aboutthat.
And it always starts with asmall group of people who are
dissatisfied with their currentMP and they think we deserve
better.
So five or six people gettogether and then, if that group
of people decide that they'reonto something they actually do,
(35:40):
that engaging with theircommunity is is there enough
interest in this community forsomething better?
So, traditionally, kitchentable conversations or surveys
or some form of testing the vibein the community.
And if there's not, nothinghappens.
Happens, if communities arebasically happy with their
representation, that there's nomovement.
(36:04):
So it doesn't matter.
You and lots of people ring upand say I'm gonna be a candidate
, I'm a great person, I couldwin the seat, and we say, well,
that's good.
Have you got a community groupbehind you?
Oh, no, I don't need that, Iknow I'm really good.
Okay, well, that's fine, yourun.
So they and people do likethere'll be.
There'll be hundreds ofindependents running this
election because that's exactlywhat they think.
(36:26):
You know, I've got a goodfamily behind me, I'm local, I
could do all that great run the.
It's got nothing to do withthis other model of actually
representing your community.
So the art of the communityindependence is to actually
represent your community.
So I and they choose who theythink is going to best represent
(36:49):
them, based on the researchthat they've done to do it.
And there's success and there'snot so success.
Some communities pick the mostbrilliant person who could do it
and once they get out in thefield people go oh, I don't
think so, I'm not going to votefor them.
You know, don't like them Notgoing to work.
So that's fine.
(37:09):
You know there's no loss thatthe community has done that,
because they'll have another go,because that group of people
are not going to go away.
They'll say, oh, at the nextelection we need to have learned
how do we do this?
And has community independenceproject?
Can you put us in touch withsomebody who has done the
selection process?
What can we learn aboutselecting a candidate who's done
it well?
What are the criteria?
(37:31):
What do you need to know.
So they go and learn about that.
They do it differently.
Next time, pick a moreappropriate candidate.
But, as what you were sayingbefore, it doesn't stop.
Like every election from hereon in.
It's not a one-off.
So building your foundations,building your community,
building your culture, is justsuch a fun, for the work is just
(37:54):
so fundamentally important.
And I can give you anotherexample, too, about why the type
of candidate is not so muchrelevant.
I don't think is.
I was talking to one of thecandidates the other day and I
was asking her how it was goingand she said we're building
community and the campaign isthe vehicle for building
(38:17):
community.
And she said we might or mightnot get elected, but we know
that there is going to becatastrophic events come our way
.
And this community work we'redoing is going to be long-term
foundation work for ourcommunity managing next drought,
flood, bushfire, whatever.
That's why we're doing it.
(38:38):
And she was saying every dayshe goes out, she can feel her
community getting stronger.
As they come together, as theywork for something, a shared
vision from shared values,they're building their community
.
And she said this is the mostimportant work I'm doing because
we know the climate is changing, we know bad things are going
(38:59):
to happen, and to have this20,000, 30,000 people in a
community have engaged in thisway, we will be in a much better
place to do this work.
So I think she encapsulated forme what I really think is the
driving force, and in betweenthat you get a member of
parliament who's going torepresent you and help make your
(39:20):
governance better, so that yourcommunity then will be better
able to do what it needs to do.
AJ (39:26):
Yeah, beautiful, I wonder, Cathy, taking a view over the
last three years of federalparliament and seeing how all
those new independents and thebigger crossbench that almost
held the balance of power andcertainly had its influence.
What I don't know if excited isthe word, but what excited you
most, what impressed you most orenlivened you most?
Cathy (39:48):
Oh yeah, I can tell you I love watching.
I still listen to Question Timeand I still love watching when
the independents get there andthey move their amendments in
the third reading speech and getthrough.
But I just want to tell youwhat most excites me is the
other day.
One of the projects I'm workingin outside of politics is about
(40:10):
agriculture, regen, and it'sabout how do we get the
workforce we need in agriculture.
So I'm involved in this projectand there's an organisation set
up called Jobs and SkillsAustralia and the other day I
was on a team with the CEO andthe commissioner and the
commissioner.
I was talking about jobs withthe CEO and the Commissioner and
the Commissioner.
I was talking about jobs.
How can we work together and toget the skilled workforce the
(40:34):
really skilled workforce we needto do the work we need to do.
Anyhow, the Commissioner goesKathy, I know you're really
interested in rural and regionalAustralia and you'll be so
pleased to hear that part of thelegislation that set us up says
that we have got to payparticular attention to jobs and
skills and workforce inregional Australia and we've got
to report back to parliamentabout rural and regional
(40:57):
Australia very specifically aspart of our legislation.
I nearly jumped out of my skinbecause I had heard Helen Haynes
move the amendment inparliament to that legislation
when they were setting up Jobsand Skills Australia.
She moved the amendment to sayyou must report and make a
particular effort on rural andregional Australia.
So here her legislation wascoming back to me on a topic
(41:22):
that was of great interest, andI know she's done that on
housing, she's done it on health, energy.
So her amendments are going tomake the most fundamental
difference to how the publicservice does its job.
And because she's there,because no one else did it, the
Labor, liberal Greens wouldnever have put that amendment in
.
Yeah, and she was able to get itthrough.
(41:43):
Do the negotiations with TonyBurke at the time and get it
through so that, like we haven'tdone the work yet, we still
haven't got addressed theproblem of workforce.
But to know that thecommissioner knows and that when
he's speaking to me he knowsthat I know, oh, it's when the
rubber hits the road about whyyou do this work, so that's
(42:08):
really, really been significantfor me.
So I texted Helen Haynesstraight away and said Helen,
guess what just happened?
And she laughed and she saidyeah, it's really good to hear
that story.
Thank you.
AJ (42:18):
Yeah, it's really good for me too, I mean just as a
constituent, because it sayssomething too.
I think, about the value of thesix years Helen's been at it
now and the six that you were atit in the seat prior, of the
building value of experience.
Really, isn't it the buildingimpact that can be had with this
(42:39):
movement?
Yeah.
Yeah, it's been.
I have to tell you from myexperience on the grounding
curtain, before we took off lastyear anyway, was extraordinary
to.
In fact, what stood out to mefirst but really strikingly was
during the campaign in 2022,when Kate was standing, how
people would react, because Katewas essentially going around
(43:03):
and saying tell me about you.
It wasn't let me tell you aboutme, what I'm going to do and
whatever and what I'm selling orwhat I'm giving.
It was tell me about you andthe impact that had on people
and I'll never forget.
On election night and shehadn't won yet, so this was win
or lose there was such a feeling, well, of community, I suppose.
(43:24):
And she said to everyone, it wasa packed house at Claremont
Showgrounds.
Who has been involved in apolitical campaign?
I think it was the other wayaround who has never been
involved in a political campaign?
And the whole house puts theirhand up.
Cathy (43:39):
It was amazing to see.
AJ (43:40):
And then to see then, a couple of years, as I did before
we left, of monthly meet-ups,monthly briefings just in
community, monthly meetups,monthly briefings just in
community, in parks and halls,work, concerted,
well-facilitated workshops onparticular issues.
Housing was one of the big ones, but multiple.
Cathy (43:59):
Electricity.
She did a fantastic job onelectricity, yes.
AJ (44:02):
Submissions coming out of those workshops.
So you're having a direct impactand, of course, as you're
saying, it's the substratethat's tended Like.
We got to know each other inthe process and you'd learn from
each other, and there's allthat bridging of different
perspectives and all that sortof stuff.
People got to know theirelectorate.
Well, I got to know myelectorate in a way I never even
(44:22):
imagined, to tell you the truth, if we go back to younger days
as a bloke in that area, so thatwas amazing Then to see in
parliament that there was thisconcerted push from that
crossbench to really systemiclevers like the one you just
described.
But we could be talking abouttruth in political advertising,
(44:44):
transparency, integrity,obviously, anti-corruption stuff
, stuff, intergenerationalresponsibility even with sophie
scomp's recent bill about, uh,explicit obligation to future
generations, let alone all therenewable energy stuff,
community-owned aspects to thatand and what you talked about
last time too just being agenerator of innovation, having
(45:05):
this kind of engagement thosethings that I would characterize
as almost no-brainer stuff.
You know truth and integrityand honesty you know yeah.
Anything that our 10-year-old'sbeen taught as we brought him up
to be number one, and then yougo live your life to think that
(45:25):
that could be applied in ourparliament but has been to a
large degree again scuppered bymajor parties along the way.
Some stuff obviously gotthrough, which has been enormous
yeah look, I'm not nearly socritical of parliament.
Cathy (45:39):
I mean, I know what you're talking about and I know
it's talked about, but the thingis it basically works.
It basically works really welland it's basically most people
are reasonably happy with it.
It's the top when you're not,that you get to complain about
yes so I am.
I am much more wanting people tounderstand that we actually in
(46:02):
australia, here we actually havea really good system and it
works because people do engageand because we can engage and
because the system's open toengagement.
Like this whole communitymovement happened and we could
get elected and we could getinto parliament and we could do
the work we needed to do.
Like the system is working andthen the system tries to change
(46:24):
itself.
You know, oh, you're going toofar, we'll change the rules.
Well, that's okay, that's goodin my sense.
So then you get to adapt and dothat.
So that's one thing I alwayssay to people.
Basically, it's working.
Okay, you got to make sure, atthe edges, keep a really good
eye on it, because that's wherethe change will take place.
But the other thing that Iabsolutely know about parliament
(46:48):
is that I really should get theactual figure, but about 91% of
all legislation is passedcollaboratively.
AJ (46:58):
Yep.
Cathy (46:59):
And it's only a very small percentage that's even
voted on and it's controversialstuff that's voted on.
The fact that the whole nationworks, we've got good systems in
place, is something I wouldnever, ever take for granted,
and so basically the system hasgot integrity.
Basically, the system worksreally well.
(47:23):
Like every four times a year Iget called up to Senate
estimates in my role withAgriFutures and I've got to
answer questions to the Senateon how we're doing stuff, how
our money's spent, how we'rereporting it, like really tight,
really good, reallyprofessional governance
management.
So I don't think people have toworry about the system not
working.
I really don't.
What we want it to do is bebetter, and the more we can
(47:44):
engage in it.
The more democracy you put intothe system, the better it is.
I think it doesn't work to handpass your democracy or your vote
to a big party.
I don't think that helps, butit doesn't mean to say it's not
working.
And in Victoria at the moment,like the Labour Party, the
current government peoplebasically think they've been
(48:05):
there too long and they're goingto kick them out.
And well, maybe we haven't.
The opposition has got a bitmore work, but you know there's
a whole vibe in the communitywhen it's not working the way
you want it to work and you canchange.
Currently, we change the system, so I'm much more one for
talking about what's working andhow do we make it better as
(48:26):
opposed to saying, oh, it's allterrible, because clearly it's
not all terrible.
There's a lot of it that worksreally and in my experience of
enormous integrity andprofessionalism and effective
governance really which isprobably not what everyone
thinks, but that's my experienceof it.
AJ (48:46):
What's going through my head is again the media angle, just
partial to my experience in theworld.
Obviously it's just.
That's not a story you hearenough of, and an old mentor of
mine used to.
Well, he pretty much taught meit.
I was a much angrier young guybefore I met him, so I'm partial
to what you're saying and Iwish it was a story that was
told more.
(49:07):
But I guess what you'd say inturn is that's our choice.
Again, we can get involved.
Before we sign off, cathy, I'dlove to just make point of your
role as chair of AgriFutures,and I've seen you say that a
similar sort of animation withcommunity at the centre could
have similar transformative,positive transformative effects
(49:27):
in that field.
How are you seeing it now?
How's it going?
Cathy (49:31):
It's slow work, I'm sure, yeah, it's slow work Really,
but that's okay, becausebuilding solid foundations and
doing work carefully and slowlyis really important because then
it's going to last.
So definitely it's.
The work of engaging communityin the work of agri-futures is
(49:53):
very important and it's growing.
Traditionally, research hasn'tbeen one to engage well with a
wider community.
They engage with a narrow setof people who know stuff experts
.
So widening it up is a bit of achange.
But you know, when I talk topeople about it, and
(50:14):
particularly on this topic ofdoing research around carbon,
around the transition to netzero, about how agriculture is
going to respond, people flockto it.
They're really keen to beengaged in it.
I just don't think we've gotthe mechanism yet how to sieve
it, funnel it, do something withit.
That's going to take a lot moretalking around because
(50:36):
agriculture is quite differentin the way you're working.
But people are keen.
We just haven't yet found themechanisms that are going to
create the longer termfoundations for how we do this.
But yeah, there's greatinterest in it and I certainly
get invited all over the countryto talk about some of the
research we're doing and everytime I do people go oh my God,
(50:57):
that's really interesting.
How do we get involved?
AJ (51:00):
Yeah, now, this is what I see too.
I mean I even remember justnoticing the cross-threads the
convention, the CommunityIndependent Project Convention
in I guess it was 22 after theelection, that sort of oh my God
, what's just happened?
Moment.
And you were in discussion withDavid Pocock, who became
Senator out of the ACT and youfigured he might end up being an
(51:21):
unofficial spokesperson forregenerative agriculture, given
his background.
That doesn't appear to havesort of manifested in any public
way.
But what I noticed was that thechat space during your
conversation took off in anindependence movement context
that did excite people.
Cathy (51:38):
Yeah, and I think we've got quite a bit more work to do
there, so maybe next time whenwe talk, we could talk about
that.
It's definitely a work inprogress.
AJ (51:47):
Yeah, let's do that.
All right For now.
Cathy, also, back then you saidthat within a decade, we could
transform Australian politics.
So that was 2021.
2022 happened and I thought,wow, that was a bit, probably a
bit quicker as it was, as yousaid today, a bit quicker than
expected.
Do you still believe in thatvision?
Cathy (52:09):
It's not so much the vision of transforming, because
I haven't actually got a visionof what that looks like, but
this involvement of people indemocracy.
Absolutely I believe in it andI'm seeing it everywhere, huge
numbers of people putting theirhand up and saying I want to be
involved.
So what that produces for thecountry, I actually don't know.
All I know it's for the better.
(52:30):
Yeah, and I know we will winsome seats and lose some seats
and again, I'm not.
So that's all good.
And if Kate loses in Curtin, Iwouldn't want to be her
opposition.
Quite frankly, it's like whoamy God, what the standards she
will hold that person to willactually change.
If the Liberals win, it wouldfundamentally change the way it
(52:50):
works, which is not going to bea bad thing.
So, yeah, I don't have apredetermined outcome.
I do have a knowledge that thisengagement in democracy and the
more people do it and the morepeople do the community way I
just know that has to be better.
AJ (53:08):
So yeah, yeah, it's fair to say that it's expected to be a
minority government next time.
Cathy (53:16):
Yeah.
AJ (53:16):
And a bigger crossbench.
It does make me wonder.
I'll put something to you coulda community independent be
prime minister one day?
Cathy (53:25):
No, I don't think so.
Why is that?
Well, I don't think they wantto be.
I think that's it.
They don't go there with theintention of running the country
.
So maybe one day a communitymight elect somebody with the
intention of we want you to bethe Prime Minister and they
(53:47):
might pick someone who's goingto do that, but certainly that's
not the vibe at the moment.
The vibe at the moment is wewant someone who's going to do
that, but certainly that's notthe vibe at the moment.
The vibe at the moment is wewant someone who's going to
represent us.
Yeah, but Malcolm Turnbull isof a different opinion.
Malcolm Turnbull, when he sawthe calibre of the crossbench,
he says some of these should beministers.
AJ (54:05):
Well, exactly.
Cathy (54:05):
Absolutely some of it, yeah, so anyhow, that's for
others.
All right, tell me the story,Cathy, behind your music choice
this time, yeah, so from littlethings, big things grow, I think
just in another space, and timecaptures so much of what we're
trying to do and in the 2013election, kev Carmody and.
AJ (54:28):
Paul Kelly.
Cathy (54:29):
Paul Kelly gave permission for us to adapt that
song for Indi, and one of ourlocal singer-songwriters, sel
Kimber, adapted some of thewords for it.
So yeah, but it's a beautifulsong and I really love it, and
it constantly reminds me thatyou start where you're at and
you work within your circle ofcontrol and you grow.
(54:49):
That that's the magic of it.
AJ (54:52):
Wonderful Cathy.
It's been fun and an honour tospeak to you again.
Thanks a lot for spending thetime.
Cathy (54:57):
See you later and enjoy US for us.
Very keen to follow yourinterviews there.
It's great.
Thank you Bye-bye.
AJ (55:12):
That was Cathy McGowan, dubbed the godmother of the
Australian CommunityIndependents Movement, though
I'm not sure how much she'llappreciate me repeating that she
may never speak with me again.
Links in the show notes, ofcourse, including to that
community independents projectInteractive Map, which leads to
all other kinds of ways to getinvolved in your area.
Thanks again to you, generoussupporting listeners for backing
(55:34):
this effort to do mediadifferently, and if you've been
considering joining us, I'd loveyou to Links in the show notes
for that too.
You're listening to S.
Kimber singing for Cathy'scampaign launch back in 2013.
My name's Anthony James.
Thanks for listening.
Sal (55:57):
Now in Daza region, made up of great valleys that stretch
from the Murray, yak and Dandato Ye.
It's the home of proud peoplewho value their freedom.
They want to have power overwhat leaders say.
Come on, from the little things, good things grow.
(56:21):
From the little things, goodthings grow.
Well, the new voice for Indiwas created in springtime when
twelve people gathered toexpress their concerns.
Then kitchen table talking washeard all over Indi, gathering
(56:43):
opinions to listen and learnFrom new things.
Punters (56:48):
Big things grow and learn from New Beans Big Beans
Road.
From New Beans Big Beans Road.
Sal (56:56):
Well, the locals chose Cathy, who was born in this
valley.
She's sixth generation of afamily farming crew.
Being a teacher, runs abusiness, a community leader.
Now she wants to speak up forme and for you From the green
(57:18):
sweeping strokes.
From the green sweeping strokes.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
Vote for the voice that comesfrom the land.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
(57:40):
We must make a choice.
Yeah, we must make a stand.
Young people are frustrated.
They don't trust the system.
They're tired of the fighting,guessing who's on whose side.
(58:04):
We're facing huge problems whensolutions are short term.
Let's vote for respect,compassion this time.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
We're not a poly party.
(58:25):
The community of in and out.
We're not just a one off.
We're in for a long time.
It's time for our MPs to engagewith their people with honesty
and trust.
It can all be transformed.
From little things to things,great.
(58:47):
From little things to things,things grow.
From little things, big thingsgrow.
Now your turn.
From little things big thingsgrow.
From little things, big thingsgrow there you go, and I vote
for a voice, a voice for it, andI vote for the voice that comes
(59:10):
from this land.
Vote for the voice, the voicefor Indi.
We must make a choice, we mustmake a stand.
From little things, big thingsgrow From little things.
Big things grow from littlethings.
(59:34):
Big things grow from littlethings, big things grow.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com