Parliaments Are Made To Share Power

What a relief it is to see our elected independents understand the results of the Tasmanian election. What our major parties like to call a “hung parliament” – as if it was some dreaded disease. But is a hung parliament really a bad thing?

What does it mean when no single party wins outright control of a parliament?

It means voters didn’t overwhelmingly back just one voice. It is an accurate reflection of the diversity of views in our community.

Instead of giving one party unchecked power, it forces all parties to work together. It means laws and policies have to pass a broader test: not just one party’s ideology, but the scrutiny and input of a wider range of representatives.

We can call it a collaborative parliament, a crossbench-influenced government, or a more representative democracy— because that’s exactly what it is.

Strong leadership doesn’t mean ruling alone. It means building consensus in the chamber and earning trust across the electorate. Yes, it’s challenging work, but better politics.

Why are we increasingly in this position? Well, because the Tasmanian electoral system was specifically designed to elect individual members which, together, will represent the entire electorate. It was never designed to deliver majority government for a party. Yet, ever since the Hare-Clark electoral system was introduced, the major parties have threatened Tasmanians to vote for majority government or risk chaos. It is little wonder many Tasmanians are still wed to preferencing Liberal or Labor.

Scott Bennett in A critical analysis of the Hare-Clark Voting System (2011) explains the rationale behind Hare-Clark: It is more about the representation of interests than party control of the Parliament. However, “this is not a view that the Liberal or Labor parties have ever been prepared to accept”.

The last real debate on the subject was during a 2010 University of Tasmania forum. Bennett wrote: the forum noted “multi-party systems are increasingly common in advanced democracies” and nothing to be too worried about. Speakers pointed to such governments in New Zealand and Denmark, as well as the ACT, which is the longest-standing government in Australia having governed as a coalition between Labor and the Greens since 2008.

Only a few years later, Tasmanian Labor Leader David Bartlett, found himself in a similar position but had the maturity to recognise that his minority government “allowed for more debate and transparency”.

“What it allows us to do is have mature, sensible, effectively mutually beneficial conversations, because they [minority governments] are not about opposition for opposition’s sake, they’re about what’s for the best of the constituency.”

He knows first-hand that minority government can work. Which is why, 15 years later, David Bartlett has been asked to share his experiences of governing in minority with the Greens. David Bartlett adamant minority Tasmanian government can work if cool heads prevail – ABC News

If the Parliament works democratically, it allows its members to represent the differing views of the electorate. That’s when informed decision-making can take place. There is room for everyone’s position. Which is why “the newly-elected independent members of the crossbench cannot be expected to trade away their principles”, according to Bartlett.

Further reading

Bennett, Scott — “Inglis Clark’s Other Contribution – A critical analysis of the Hare-Clark Voting System” [2011] SGSocUphAUCon 6; (2011) 23 Upholding the Australian Constitution 35

Editor’s note: The term ‘hung parliament’ often carries a negative connotation, conjuring images of indecision and stalemate, much like a ‘hung jury.’ A hung jury can’t come to any conclusion and gets dismissed in a retrial. A hung parliament has to negotiate so that multiple perspectives are part of the discourse and decision. These are completely different. However, in a parliamentary system, it signifies something quite different and arguably, more democratic: a situation where no single party has a majority. This necessitates negotiation, collaboration and the inclusion of multiple perspectives in policy-making, reflecting a broader range of the electorate’s views. As seen in recent Tasmanian elections, voters often express a desire for diverse representation, indicating a clear preference for shared decision-making rather than single-party dominance.

Read Part 2 here: What is this Elusive Stable Government?

Christine Bayley is a Tasmanian community advocate and spokesperson with People Before Major Parties – Tasmania and Save Rosny Parks. She is dedicated to empowering locals and raising community voices.

Tasmanian Times (TT) is a community-based news and current affairs service covering the island state of Tasmania. It exists to provide a diverse view of Tasmanian issues. TT creates and supports independent media content utilising the best of modern technologies and tried-and-true practices of public-interest journalism.

Support us in expanding our coverage and developing new content by and for Tasmanians.

New initiatives on the way include: