By all means develop a knowledge society to replace the good old tall poppies, she'll be right, dig it up and ship it out mentality.

But we also desperately need to look after and repair the natural and farming environments or we'll have nothing to eat and a very unpleasant place to live.

It's there for the Greens to do, if they expand their vision a bit.

Very narrow viewpoint.

Don't hold your breath professor, it ain't going to happen.

David

The most important thing the Greens could do to increase the liveabilty of our cities would be to stop growing the urban population - otherwise we are in a constant game of catchup since we are building new infrastructure and we still need to maintain the old. Since, very broadly, 2% of infrastructure needs to be replaced every year, then with a population growth rate of 2% (which doubles our population in 35 years) we need to be building/turning over 2+2=4% of infrastructure every year. This means that our infrastructure costs are DOUBLE what they would be with a stable population and the functionality of our cities is degraded since we evidently cannot meet that requrement.

This essay was also written in total ignorance of Australia's and the rest of the world's increasingly precarious food supply situation. Australia cannot feed double its population in a drought year (under current fossil fuel and nutrient supply conditions) and our food production will almost certainly fall as oil supply diruptions are highly likely to hit within the next four years. Food supply problems are exacerbated by any increase in population size and it is exactly the population issue that the Greens have become so hopeless on (since their agenda was captured by the disenfranchised Labor left and they became more a party more interested in socialist social issues rather than the environment that underlies all current and future prosperity).

“In every respect, the Greens are set to move the nation to a place it has to go.”
In every respect? Far from it: They are self-delusional in regard to the most fundamental of all - the impossibility of continuous, unending, growth. This growth will eventually incur overshoot, causing collapse of all those other “respects” which are dear to them.
Focus upon cities is not enough. Cities cannot function indefinitely in the absence of healthy and productive landscapes - the well-being and cohesion of both are a fundamental necessity. Urban “vertical farms”, back-yard and balcony gardens, etc are not conformable with high-density planning; light-rail and other traffic passivation techniques along dense-living corridors are not unanimously accepted by urban planners as a panacea for city problems.
In fact, regardless of schemes mooted for belt-tightening on present living standards and social cohesion, water supplies, and agricultural production - whatever annual percentage improvement to these can be made, an impossible challenge exists if population continues to increase (as it presently does) at a greater exponential rate.
The Greens have a long history of avoiding potholes along their road of good intentions. When they face up to the reality of growth in all its aspects, and accept humans as part of nature rather than separate from it - their credibility should improve; and provide real separation from the incumbent political fossils.

Greens held 12% of the vote at the last federal election.
I do not think they bettered that in NSW.
It was my unhappy task, as a lifelong ALP member to, not man the booths, and not vote for my party.
A third of our membership did the same.
At this, our historic low/shame/self contempt, greens failed to improve.
Right now, greens have power only by riding on Labors back.
Conservative may stop ,giggling now.
Abbott put a list to the greens, in his desperation to rule, not unlike Labors deal.
So Labor, under the weight of Murdock's control/riding orders to coaxing of Abbott, is staggering.
[In fact greens have we are told 13%?]
Are we to consider the greens can make policy's and see 88% of Australians introduce them? why.
Again, dreadful bloke that I am.
Why are more Australians, my guess more than 50 of Labor voters and 90% of conservatives not being heard.
Not contempt not fear just reality both party's must not preference them ever again.
Tell me the Marickville council in Sydney the mess in Tasmania is not evidence of why we must confront them.

The need to 'get off the sheeps back' is hardly new. A century ago commentators were remarking on the stupidity of sending wool to Manchester and buying jumpers back. Now we send raw materials to China and Japan, and buy manufactured goods back.
Will we still be able to afford to do this, in a post peak oil world?
In a world where energy supplies are rare and precious, manufacturers will need to be close to supplies, both of raw materials and of energy.
We know it's coming, but still we do nothing.