The Article titled “Democracy Tas Style” posted on TT the 6 Nov 2009 (HERE )was written from the standpoint that our parliamentary system of government could now be measured more in the breach than in the observance of democratic principles: that our presumed democratic freedoms and protections have progressively been whittled away (by successive governments) to the point where we are left with the trappings of a parliamentary democracy, but not the reality.
The truncated pulp mill review and approvals process; and the blatantly undemocratic Section 11 provisions alone support such a judgement.
The Article identified political parties themselves as being “at the heart of the problem”, particularly as they select most candidates for political office – a process demonstrably corrupted by selection considerations other then merit. As Dr Tony McCall so succinctly put it: cronyism, nepotism, corporatism and patronage are all contemporary features of the Tasmanian political scene. We consequently end up with party hacks, cronies, family hangers-on and the like, as our parliamentary representatives.
The Article then went on to advocate greater support for Independent candidates in future so as to return power to the people by going outside the established party system. It flagged the possibility of change away from Parties to, say, a coalition of Independents, or even an ‘Independents Party’ (differently constituted).
It is considered both timely and appropriate to revisit this subject now, for three main reasons:
Firstly, the recent revelation that a prominent Northern Tasmanian businessman had been willing to fund campaigns for Independent candidates for the upcoming State election – but had apparently been unsuccessful in attracting the quality candidates he was seeking. What can we reasonably infer from this?
On a positive note: that there are key business people also disenchanted with the major political parties and their inability to produce results that serve the wider public good. Those of us viewing the major party system as “the enemy within”, subverting rather than promoting a democratic system of government, can take heart from the fact that not all business leaders have vested support in the major political parties. And that’s important for the future!
The negative of course is the apparent unwillingness of talented individuals to offer themselves as candidates – perhaps because of having to make large personal sacrifices to serve (salary, family and so on).
Another possibility is the view held by some that politics is manifestly a dirty business, best left to the dimwits who are otherwise unable to hold down a respectable job. If so, that is alarming and makes parliamentary reform a very distant prospect. How such a negative image of politicians can be reversed is a question we should all ponder if we wish to attract the best and brightest to represent us in parliament.
The second reason for a “revisit” flows from a recent newspaper article (The Australian, Feb 25) quoting Tony Fitzgerald, the man credited with cleaning-up public life in Queensland through the corruption inquiry he headed in the late 1980’s. Some excerpts in relation to the major parties:
* There is in Australia an amoral political culture run by a governing class preoccupied with amassing power for itself.
Small groups control the Labor and Liberal parties (and indirectly, our national destiny)
Dynasties are emerging as politics become for some, the family business.
Misleading, or deceptive conduct is barred in Commerce but secrecy and misinformation (euphemistically called spin) are routinely employed by politicians.
Media management insults and confuses the electorate which is denied comprehensive, accurate information so essential to the proper functioning of democracy.
Political access and influence can be purchased and patronage is dispensed to supporters and used to silence critics.
The plethora of “consultants” who feed off Government are mostly former MP”s or party hacks.
The “political class” is interested only in the acquisition and exercise of power, not democratic ‘theory’.
Whichever party exercises parliamentary control, can, and routinely does, indulge its adherents, supporters and ideology.
Well-connected individuals and small wealthy groups are provided with access to, and influence on, the political process. Decisions favouring “special interests” are common.
Because all parties grasp their opportunities when in power, Opposition criticism is muted and the risk of an electoral backlash is low.
All these party-political machinations are clearly observable in Tasmania. However, it was his final point that I found most alarming, and the third reason for this ‘revisit’: “the general public is becoming increasingly cynical, apathetic, and disengaged”
There is of course evidence for this statement everywhere. Does it mean in effect that we have given up and cravenly ceded our democratic rights to the whim of a “governing class”, no matter how inept or corrupt?
Any of the observations attributed to Mr Fitzgerald should be repugnant to citizens who value our democratic heritage. The cumulative affect of them is devastating. But for the public to be “apathetic” and disengaged” in the face of this reality is, in every way, un-Australian. We have been willing to go to lands afar to fight for the democratic rights of foreign nationals- surely we are prepared to fight for our own!
To again quote Dr McCall, we can best exercise our democratic rights at the ballot box; and that opportunity presents again on the 20th March. However, my concern is that there are so many major distractions in our public life at the moment (pulp mill, forestry issues, water-quality, health concerns etc) that we may be diverted, and lose sight of the bigger picture: that it is the failings of government that have permitted and even promoted these blights on our community life. It is unthinkable that any government with a record of “corrupt” practice and failure to govern in the interests of all the people, should be rewarded with a further term in office. It’s time therefore to put aside any reservations we may have about the smaller parties, or Independents, and vote to send a resounding message to the so-called ‘ruling classes’ around the nation: we have had enough and will no longer tolerate your anti-democratic behaviour.
And thereafter, we should organise for effective reform of our parliamentary system so as power is again vested in the people, not political parties controlled by wealthy individuals and groups.
Are we up for it, I wonder?
