Cossomby,

<<Also, SPQR, I stand by 'silly'. The artificial grass would be a conservation issue if real grass yada yada yada ...>>

I think you've been smoking some of that real grass!

1) Why does it have to look like grass?

2) Surely, if they wanted something that looked like it was living
[ in contrast to the non-lifelike/alien appearance of many of its leaders --see here: http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201008/r624472_4214244.jpg ]
the Greens might have found some native plant in the bush which gets by on little water and light.

Dear Paul,

Spot on!

otb,

Diversions and hijacks?

Avoid using words like those.
They don't make you sound clever.
Keep them to a minimum.

Why does it have to look like grass?

Why not?

This is a silly issue, purely for the purpose of denigrating a Green politician, or should I say devertigrating.

Premium synthetic turf is not cheap, but it wouldn't make much of a dent on that $414,000.

The question remains, how to spend that sum of money on an already plush executive suite.

Sadly, Greens Senator Larissa Waters doesn't seem to have responded to the article in The Courier Mail.

If she continues to ignore and side-step questions from the public it is 'Not a Good Look' for a Party that always demands full disclosure from others.

On the beach: I couldn't find in the Courier article where its says the Paddington office was "an already well appointed executive suite".

How do we know that?

Yes, and how do we know whether the Senator
responded to the Courier article or not.
Did you check with erh office or with the
Courier Mail - and would they tell you?

Your assumptions are just that - assumptions.