The something that you detect in the air at the moment in this place is almost certainly the pollen of an electoral spring. Within weeks we will witness the colourful and omnipresent blooming of placards and posters, luring us to cross pollinate with them and propagate a new bed of thistles.
Already, we are entreated within our newspapers to Vote 1 for this or that candidate, not taking into account the unpaid ‘human interest stories’ (featuring photograph of candidate handing over cheque …) and the letters to the editor from recently outraged candidates for party x in electorate y.
One endorsed Liberal candidate informs me, via her advertisement, that she is “Fighting for Democracy …” Excellent! I take this to mean that she is vigorously opposing the anti-democratic practices of her own party. She has my whole-hearted support, and I humbly offer her this advice.
Begin by rallying against the pompous assertion that the state Liberals would ignore the democratic determination of the people of Tasmania in the event that they return a parliament with no majority. Whilst such a possibility remains, the Liberal pledge ‘to govern in majority or not at all’ is anti-democratic in the extreme. It is akin to pledging to accept election if in government, but to refuse office if in opposition. Every single Liberal candidate in this election should be prepared to govern in accordance with the wishes of the people. That is democratic, and if you are not prepared for the cost of the democratic process, don’t bother to nominate yourself as a candidate.
Secondly, I look forward to seeing my Liberal Champion of Democracy going blow for blow with the senior Liberal senator (now a junior cabinet minister) who is the current prince of anti-democratic processes. Eric Abetz proposes disenfranchising young voters who are yet to enrol by closing electoral rolls the moment an election is called. More perniciously, Abetz is a champion of the idea that political ‘donations’ should be made with anonymity (unknown to the public, that is; but very much known and welcomed by the political party from whom the donor is purchasing access and influence). Abetz’s intentions in this area are simply designed to give his party an electoral advantage and therefore could not be more anti-democratic.
So, Jane Howlett, I wish you every success in your fight for democracy, and I assure you that you do not have to look far from home to find its opponents.
I challenge Jane, and all other candidates in the approaching Tasmanian election, to make a public response to the following questions:
• why do unjust laws exist?
• what is the responsibility of a member of parliament when the law of that parliament is not just?
• when the rightness of a law is questionable, should the author of the law encourage open and informed debate, or aggressively promote his or her own view of the rightness of the law?
• is outcome more important than process?
