Coco Venaglia from Yes2Renewables, a campaign of Friends of the Earth, joined us to talk about "yes"-style, positive campaigning — how to build a shared, hopeful vision for renewable energy and climate solutions, rather than campaigning only against the things we oppose.

Host: What is actually the vision of a world that we want to move towards? Yes2Renewables has done some good research on how to engage the community in building a positive, shared vision, so Coco's going to give us a very quick run-through of a large body of work they've done. Thanks.

Coco Venaglia: Hi everybody, I'm Coco, from Yes2Renewables. I've come from working on the ground in the Clarence Valley, New South Wales, so please forgive me if I seem a bit tired!

Thank you so much for the invitation — I've been talking with the group here about the toolkit we've developed over the last year. It felt like a natural fit, partly because we're not that far away geographically — I live in Castlemaine, near Melbourne — and partly because Tasmania is such a beautiful part of the country. On that note, I want to pay my respects to the Palawa people of lutruwita, and to the First Nations community in the part of New South Wales I've just come from, who made us the most beautiful cookies as a parting gift from our last workshop. I want to express solidarity with First Nations people across the continent — protecting climate is also about protecting Country.

Most of you will have heard of Friends of the Earth — a grassroots environmental group that's been active around the world for a couple of decades. Yes2Renewables is a campaign of Friends of the Earth. I'm not only here to talk about renewables, even though that's my bread and butter and I do see it as an important part of the pathway forward — I know people in the room will have mixed experiences and perspectives on renewables, and you're all working on different pieces of the puzzle.

I want to acknowledge upfront that we've recently been involved in things like the Voice "Yes" campaign, and other positive campaigning work, so some of what I share may be familiar — but hopefully it's a useful reminder. Personally, I think that as an environment movement, between fighting coal mines, gas expansion, and doing so much "no" campaigning, we've lost a bit of our vision for what we're actually aiming towards. So I've spent time exploring what that vision could look like, and how we rebuild it.

Why now

This feels like an especially important moment, with One Nation gaining ground and Coalition governments stepping backward on climate solutions — and federal Labor, in my view, doing an okay job in their majority moment, but one where they could be doing a lot better. Through Yes2Renewables we do grassroots organising, and if anyone wants to explore what that could look like for their own campaign, I'd love to have that conversation. What we want is renewable energy done well — with community and nature at the forefront.

I think we're living through a once-in-a-generation opportunity to actually have a say in what a massive new energy industry looks like — the last time anyone had that kind of opportunity was over a hundred years ago. That's part of why I've focused on renewables.

The toolkit

Over the last year I've been developing a toolkit aimed at helping people do more positive, "yes"-style organising — to help sell the vision of the future we actually want to see. My own organising is centred on renewables, but the approach translates to other kinds of organising too. We've built a toolkit, available online and designed to be shared, and a national organisers' network — open to anyone in a grassroots community who wants to hold conversations about renewables, from electrification through to large-scale renewable projects.

What the research shows

Since 2022 we've had updated perception data on how people feel about climate change and about renewables as a solution. That data shows 62–67% of people nationally strongly support renewable energy. So there's clearly something going on: most people support renewable energy and climate solutions, but that support isn't being reflected or heard — and that's having real negative effects on our progress. We think a genuinely good way to move climate solutions forward in Australia is to start selling the vision of the future we actually want, especially right now, when populism is gaining a foothold in the broader social narrative — well beyond climate and renewables. We need to be able to talk about the kind of society we're aiming towards.

Telling the positive story

The way I'd propose doing this is by proactively empowering each other to tell the positive stories — about renewables, or whatever aspect of this you're working on. Painting a picture of what things look like when we look forward isn't just about building a positive shared vision; it's also an investment in our local social fabric. That kind of local social investment inoculates communities against division and against narratives like One Nation's, or misinformation more broadly — those things thrive where there's a lack of information and a lack of hope.

Bringing it back to the local level: we know that our friends and neighbours are some of the most powerful people when it comes to shifting someone's perspective. I ran a workshop yesterday in the Hunter region, and a passionate academic in the room pointed out that although we know catchy three-word phrases statistically "work," I don't think that's what's needed right now — I think people are looking for more depth and connection. Being told "we need to act for future generations" is something I believe, but I don't think it's actually selling the vision or helping people on that journey. What I'm trying to explore is how we hold more in-depth conversations with friends and neighbours, in a way that makes everyone feel included.

One thing worth naming: our vision is genuinely beautiful. The people trying to stop or delay climate solutions don't have a beautiful vision to sell — they have delay tactics, distraction and division. That means positivity is actually our most powerful tool.

"No" campaigns have got us to where we are, and everyone in this room who's been fighting coal and gas for decades deserves real credit for that — we've achieved a lot, and there's more "no" campaigning to do. But "yes" campaigns show us where we're trying to get to, so we need to save some energy for that "yes" campaigning too.

Case study: Good4TheGong

This is a case study from when I ran Good4TheGong in the Illawarra, around the offshore wind zone proposal there, where there was a lot of misinformation circulating. It started with pamphlets in letterboxes about the proposed offshore wind zone, with no other real information provided — and even as an environmentalist, I felt conflicted, because I want renewable energy, but putting turbines in the ocean is a genuinely big step, and I needed to explore what that actually meant. Because of that information gap, misinformation filled it — a bit like what's happened with the Bass Strait proposal here, which has its own real issues too. The public conversation became aggressive and was completely dominated by negative framing.

Through Good4TheGong we deliberately created space in the community for people to engage with the issue in a more balanced way. We made room for people to raise real concerns — this was a genuine public policy question that mattered, and we said so. People from anti-offshore-wind groups came to our events and told us they felt they could actually have that conversation there. We also ran positive events focused on the future of renewables more broadly, rather than picking apart every individual project — because the vision of what we're working towards, as a community, is something we need to build and express together, and that vision is part of what helps us work out which projects are right and which aren't.

Principles for the conversation

Leading with values is one of the most impactful things we can do. We in this movement love facts, figures and integrity — those are highly valued in the environment movement — but in a lot of spaces, people don't have the capacity to wade through all that information, or to hear past some of the more topical, populist phrases. Leading with values means connecting with what hurts, what feels hopeful, and what people actually care about, and building from there. We're not going to win everybody over, but it helps channel people's energy more effectively towards good solutions.

Being inclusive is a big one right now. I'm not sure exactly how this plays out in Tasmania, but having grown up in a regional area myself, I know these spaces can be very divisive and cliquey. I think the environment and social justice movements have, at times, created a sense of exclusivity, where people don't see themselves as welcome — and the right is winning a negative narrative partly because we're not making space for people to see themselves as belonging. That's something worth really looking at.

Making things simple and specific is something the far right does very well — simplistic answers to complex problems. I'm not saying we should copy those tactics, but a vision built around climate solutions, a safe society, safe jobs, safe healthcare — those things can be expressed simply, and they make plain sense; it's hard to argue against wanting them.

Focusing on what we're for, rather than only what we're against, matters a lot right now. It's easy to say "I'm against billionaires," "I'm against unchecked AI," and so on — and we are — but we can forget to make space for what we're actually for, and that's something we need to keep working on. I feel real tension about this because the Victorian election is four months away, and there's a genuine risk of losing a lot of the progressive policy ground we've fought hard for.

This is why I think it's such an important moment to talk about hope and about the vision we want moving forward, and to tell our success stories — because we do have real wins. We're over 40% renewable energy nationally, we've protected more land, we've ended native logging in Victoria (which does have flow-on effects for Tasmania, so there's still work to do there too). There's a lot we've achieved that we should be talking about more, as a stepping stone that says: we're doing well, we just need to keep going.

I think the key idea here is stepping stones — we've always had ambitions, but we haven't always been eloquent about how we get there, and about aiming for the milestones along the way before the ultimate goal. If that's useful to reflect on for your own campaigns or the vision you want for your area, it helps, because people can see real opportunity in that, and see themselves in the story — we can't always see ourselves in the "end state" alone.

Q&A

Coco Venaglia: Thanks so much for having me — I really encourage questions, because I don't know enough about what's happening here in Tasmania, and I'd love to learn more.

Guest: I don't know if you're aware of the Robbins Island wind farm proposal in the north-west of Tasmania — it's the wrong project in the wrong place. It's done a lot of damage. On the other hand, we've got Cattle Hill wind farm, which is going great, and there's no real problem there. Do you have resources in your toolkit that communities can use to support a good wind farm project once the misinformation starts flowing in, as it does whenever there's a bad project?

Coco Venaglia: Yes, we do. Our toolkit is one piece of a broader set — the Post Mill Network, Community Power Agency, and Farmers for Climate Action all have really strong resources as well, and I'm happy to send through the ones that speak most directly to what you're describing. Together, we all work in this space and try to cover the different pieces of the puzzle to help communities engage constructively. It really does come down to the specifics of each area — one thing we offer as a campaign is to work directly with any community that wants help analysing a project, and negotiating or advocating either against it, or for changes they'd like to see. Because every project and every decision-maker is different, that one-on-one work is genuinely necessary, and we're here for it.

Guest: Thank you — and is the King Island one that's been approved also a problem, or have I got the name wrong?

Coco Venaglia: There are definitely some problematic projects going on here, from what I'm hearing.

Host: Anyone else — any questions, or reflections?

Guest: Just to add a bit more context — Robbins Island is probably one of the worst places in the world to put a wind farm. Then there's Cattle Hill, which is fine, and a few others like Patriarchs Plains — some of these are places even the bird experts say are reasonable places to put a wind farm. But between the environment movement and people who just don't like the look of turbines, or worry they cause health issues, wind farms generally have become quite unpopular down here. The other flashpoint is data centres — people say "data centres are bad," but that's not really true; everyone's got a data centre in their pocket. So that's the landscape here, and it's a pretty live issue.

Coco Venaglia: I've actually heard the same thing from a number of people in Tasmania — that right now, the conversation isn't in a good place for anyone. I'd love to explore that further with people who are interested in what the possibilities might look like, because there clearly are real problems — Robbins Island isn't the right location, and I'm also concerned about the Bass Strait offshore wind proposal in terms of its impact on the swift parrot's flight path.

It's not renewables at all costs — it's renewables done right, and we need to have that harder conversation about what "done right" actually looks like for Tasmania specifically. It sounds like you've already got some strong bird expertise and people having that conversation.

Guest: It really comes down to nuance, and I also want to acknowledge that when things are this tense in regional communities, it can be genuinely hard to have that conversation without feeling unsafe.

Coco Venaglia: There's a lot to learn there, and while there are limits to what's possible in some spaces, I'd love to explore what an opportunity to have that conversation properly in Tasmania could look like — even starting from some of the better examples you already have.

Host: Chris and Wendy — you're on mute. There we go, you're unmuted now.

Guest: Thanks, Coco. I've just joined a group called Protest Protectors, run by the Australian Democracy Network, and some of what you were describing lines up with things they've developed too.

Coco Venaglia: Even though they're framed around protecting protest, I think their approach works just as well for a discussion about renewables, or almost any contested issue. Quickly, from what I recall of their framework: zoom out and don't get trapped in the "crime" frame — that negative framing. Lead with what's already been won — put ordinary people at the centre, which you've mentioned already — and don't repeat the other side's words, even to deny them; that's a genuinely important one. Then, name who's doing this and why, because it helps to be specific about who the actual players are — rather than telling only the story of bad law-making. And when it comes to protest specifically, they also talk about naming it clearly when policing turns violent. The eighth point is to always end with the solution — which I find genuinely hard sometimes, because I don't always have the answer. Anyone interested can look up the Australian Democracy Network and Protest Protectors, or just get in touch with me.

That last point is a good example of the problem we keep running into with renewables, and with social-justice issues more broadly — we don't have an easy solution. These aren't easy conversations, and there's no silver bullet. We believe getting to 100% renewables will help limit and slow down the damage, but we don't have absolute certainty it'll be enough, especially since it depends on every other country doing its part too. That's a genuinely hard conversation to hold, which is why I keep coming back to: what do we actually want this country to look like right now? We're in a real battle over the narrative of what this country should be, and unfortunately we have to keep building our own version of that story. As I said, I feel real tension about this, with One Nation gaining ground — it feels like a real fight right now, and we need to keep moving towards that vision in the incremental, "stepping stone" way we've talked about, while doing more work, together, on what that shared vision actually looks like across all our different campaigns.

It's 7:30, so if there are any last comments or questions — I'd genuinely love to keep the conversation going with anyone interested, so please email me; my email's in the chat. I'll share the toolkit, along with the details of the campaigners mentioned tonight, since I think it's really valuable to hear directly from people with on-the-ground experience — I know they'd be happy to talk with you. One last thing: Friends of the Earth is currently campaigning for an AI moratorium, because right now there's essentially no regulation around what AI and data centres look like in Australia, and we're at real risk of bad outcomes as a result. So we're asking for a moratorium while a proper national framework gets built — if anyone's interested in that, we've just reached a thousand signatures, so please help share it.