HAVING worked in the ACT Assembly on the staff of a crossbench member for 6 years — under minority governments (Liberal and Labor) and now a little more than a year of majority (Labor) government — it appears clear to me that minority government can deliver a more effective, responsive, transparent, accountable and decent form of democracy.
One of the more obvious changes I’ve noticed since the last ACT election is in how the staff and politicians work together. I don’t think any of us changed our personalities or values in the past year, but what has changed is how much we need each other.
The Opposition, for example, has very little chance of affecting the outcome on a day to day, or month to month, basis. It can’t get the numbers against Government, and so sees little advantage in working closely with the crossbench. Sometimes extra moral pressure from us may help it cast the Government in a worse light — and so it will try to bring us along — but ongoing discussion and exchange of information has become a thing of the past. A shrill position appears to be the best of a bad lot for them.
Similarly, while Government staff members can be helpful and courteous, they no longer need to bring the crossbench into the loop, nor seek our support. The only changes we can now effect are when Government, of its own volition or in response to public pressure, accedes. Given an oppositional opposition rarely helps, the ball ends up almost entirely in the Government’s court.
The upside for the crossbench (and the opposition, I presume) is that we’re under less pressure to be across every piece of legislation in detail. We can espouse principles without being forced to take a position on every practical difficulty. The converse, however, is that we are no longer held accountable for every one of those positions — as we are with minority government — and that’s not a good thing for democracy.
Rules out more robust public exploration
To put it the other way: the ACT workers’ compensation scheme — which focusses on health and rehabilitation which gives workers and their families good financial outcomes where necessary — is the product of a Liberal minority government working with the Labor opposition and the crossbench, built on the support of business, employees, social services and the insurance companies. The ACT’s Asbestos taskforce, and the dangerous substances legislation which creates a safety duty in respect to materials containing asdebstos, is a result of a Labor minority government working with its opposition and the crossbench.
I am of the view that compromise and consensus are positive components for a democratic process, but the shift towards majority government in the ACT hides the compromise inside the government’s caucus or cabinet room, and makes any notion of consensus irrelevant.
Supplementary to that is the extra control the ACT Government feels free to exercise over its consultative bodies. They increasingly report in-confidence to Ministers, which rules out more robust public exploration of the issues at stake.
Given majority government only needs to listen to itself and its selected advisors, large initiatives such as the P-10 government school (necessitating the clsosure of others in West Belconnen) or the ACT Planning System Reform Project have been launched without, it seems, any great regard for community response. That is not to say the initiatives are necessarily misguided in themselves, but the possibility of consequences in the Assembly in the past has meant that the minority Governments were (understandably) a little more careful to bring more evident interest groups along.
It is interesting to note that access to Government in the ACT appears to be getting harder not easier. While the bigger lobby groups might have immediate access to Ministers, smaller organisations and interests groups report it very difficult to get a hearing. Furthermore, business, community and other interest groups that used to regularly lobby all Members in the Assembly are now less inclined to keep the Opposition and the crossbench informed or under pressure. As a result the process of legislative development and debate is losing some of its integrity.
That is the same challenge we face at the national level, where a majority government in both houses, and a weak opposition, undermines accountability. In the short term, the only way forward will be to strengthen the role of civil society, to promote the voices of public scholars and community leaders, to encourage media diversity and look to our cultural and educational institutions.
In the end, the answer will come through the ballot box. Voters need to bear in mind that it might suit the major parties to use their extra resources during campaigns to attack the likely crossbench. But despite claims to the contrary, minority Government is never truly held to ransom by independents or smaller parties. Liberal and the Labor parties work will work together, or with others, when necessary and when it suits them.
Roland Manderson
Legislative Assembly,
Canberra,
ACT
