Libs’ pairing action threat to conventions guaranteeing our democracy - 3rd April 2018 Heraldsun
Theo Theophanous: Libs’
pairing action threat to conventions guaranteeing our democracy
Theo Theophanous, Herald Sun
3 April 2018
IN my recent column in the Herald Sun I noted the
importance of conventions in the parliamentary system. Some go back hundreds of
years. They exist to preserve our democratic institutions, based on honour and
respect between adversaries.
I was concerned with the convention related to protections afforded to
members in one house of parliament against attacks from members in the other
house.
This convention is important in ensuring fearless debate and criticism
across the two houses.
It stops parties or coalitions with a majority in the upper house from
pursuing members in the lower house to potentially bring down a government.
The
Legislative Council sat into Good Friday to debate the fire services reform.
Picture: Nicole Garmston
That’s why the Parliamentary Privileges Committee, which has been
established in the Victorian upper house by the Liberals and Greens to further
investigate the Ombudsman’s findings, cannot, and should not, be used to attack
Labor members in the lower house.
Parliamentary conventions, as all parties know, are integral to debate
and the smooth running of parliament on which we all rely.
That’s why the Liberals’ approach to the pairing convention during the
firefighters’ legislation debate is dangerous.
It has cracked wide open the notion that parliamentary conventions were
sacrosanct.
Whoever wins the next election should hope it is with a substantial
majority. Otherwise, if a couple of their MPs are taken ill or a family member
is in an accident and they are unavoidably absent, a motion of no confidence
could pass and an elected government could fall.
MP
Bernie Finn.MP Craig Ondarchie.
On Good Friday, Liberal MPs Bernie Finn and Craig Ondarchie requested
pairs on the pretext of wanting to practise their religion.
The government agreed on compassionate grounds and sent two of its own
members home in a pair arrangement.
Finn and Ondarchie left the chamber but suddenly reappeared to vote down
the Firefighters Bill.
Tearing up the rule book of conventions on which parliament relies could
have long-lasting implications for our democracy.
Irrespective of what one might think about the firefighters’ issue — and
there are mixed views in all parties — the use of deception to defeat the laws
cannot be justified.
The Liberal Party will say they were frustrated by the fact that the
government had not granted a pair to crossbench member, Rachel Carling-Jenkins,
who was absent due to illness. She had in the past indicated she would vote
against the legislation. Without her vote being paired the legislation was
likely to pass, giving the government a much-needed win.
The issue here turns on whether Carling-Jenkins asked for a pair.
I am informed she did not. In not asking for a pair she would have known
the legislation would likely pass in her absence.
MPs in
the Legislative Council during the all nighter. Picture: Nicole Garmston
There is speculation about why she chose to facilitate the passing of
the legislation by not asking for a pair. But what is clear is that if she did
not request a pair it was a deliberate choice on her part. Effectively she was
utilising the technique of not requesting a pair to abstain from the vote.
The Liberals were incensed at the prospect of the legislation passing
because the government brought on the vote on Good Friday and in the absence of
Carling-Jenkins.
They hatched a plan to breach a long standing
convention as well as trust between the Parties by requesting pairs for Finn
and Ondarchie on religious grounds so that two government MP's would be sent
home. Their Members then turned up to vote down the legislation.
The Liberals defeated the legislation, but at what cost?
The Liberals defeated the legislation, but at what cost?
Whatever one might say about the 21 MPs involved in the electorate
officer payments saga, most believed they were acting within the rules as part
of an approved pooling arrangement and the Ombudsman said as much. They did not
deliberately set out to deceive and the money was repaid.
By comparison, the cricketers tampering with the ball was a clear,
deliberate attempt to gain advantage by deception.
Similarly, the Liberal Party deliberately set out to gain a voting
advantage by deception. In doing so, they have lost the moral authority to
lecture Labor on the Ombudsman issue.
And yet the Liberal Party and the Greens have
established a Parliamentary Privileges Committee in the Upper House to further
enquire into Labor MP's. No doubt this committee will try to stretch the bounds
of convention, by trying to also investigate Labor Lower House MP's.
The Committee will be hopelessly divided and majority and minority reports will probably ensue. Ironically, minority reports too are only allowed by convention and could be blocked by a majority on the Committee.
And when the various Committee recommendations come to Parliament they will pass or fail depending in part on whether someone is ill or absent without a pair.
The Committee will be hopelessly divided and majority and minority reports will probably ensue. Ironically, minority reports too are only allowed by convention and could be blocked by a majority on the Committee.
And when the various Committee recommendations come to Parliament they will pass or fail depending in part on whether someone is ill or absent without a pair.
Without conventions, uncertainty and deception will be the hallmarks of
our democracy.
Theo Theophanous is a commentator and former state labor minister
Comments