tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/crossbenchers-3384/articlesCrossbenchers – The Conversation2024-02-14T04:18:58Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2165332024-02-14T04:18:58Z2024-02-14T04:18:58ZTasmania is going to an early election. Will the country’s last Liberal state be no more?<p>After months of speculation about an early election and a battle to keep minority government alive, Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff – Australia’s last remaining Liberal Premier – has called an election for March 23, three years into a four-year term.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1757302388355186803"}"></div></p>
<p>In making the announcement, Rockliff said he wanted the stability of majority government.</p>
<p>“I’m not going to allow myself or my government to be held to ransom for the next 12 months. It’s bad for Tasmania, it’s bad for Tasmanians.”</p>
<p>What issues are likely to dominate the campaign? What is the likely outcome, and will it have any implications beyond the shores of Australia’s island state?</p>
<h2>What’s been going on?</h2>
<p>The Tasmanian Liberals have governed since 2014, but recently Rockliff has had to manage a series of ructions. </p>
<p>There have been seven reshuffles since the 2021 election, sparked in some cases by high profile ministerial resignations. </p>
<p>In mid-May 2023, two government back benchers <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-12/tasmania-liberal-government-in-minority-mps-defect-over-stadium/102333446">quit the party</a> to sit on the cross bench, citing a range of grievances. </p>
<p>Lara Alexander and John Tucker’s agreement with Rockliff to guarantee supply and confidence in the House lasted until early February when the premier issued a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-02/tas-premier-rockliff-issues-early-election-threat-to-mps/103413562">second ultimatum</a> effectively demanding the rebel MPs support all government legislation.</p>
<p>Given neither of the independents were willing to cede their independence an early election became inevitable. Now, the real question is whether Tasmanian voters will blame the premier or the rebel MPs for taking them to the polls a year early?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-tasmanian-afl-team-turned-into-a-political-football-205846">How the Tasmanian AFL team turned into a political football</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Due to Tasmania’s 25-seat Lower House (which has been <a href="https://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/47584/47_of_2022-srs.pdf">restored</a> to 35 members for this election), these events have stretched Rockliff’s talent pool and contributed to a feeling among voters that the government is approaching its used by date.</p>
<p>Rubbing salt in the wound, Labor and the Greens have relished pointing out that a party which had <a href="https://www.premier.tas.gov.au/speeches/state-of-the-state-address">promised to deliver</a> stable majority government was now in minority. Indeed, Jeremy Rockliff cited
the need restore majority government and avoid “governing with one hand tied behind my back” as a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-02/tas-rockliff-stateline-analysis-early-election-trigger/103413270">justification</a> for going to the polls a year early.</p>
<p>Given Tasmania’s proportional Hare Clark electoral system, where candidates only need to secure about 15% of the vote after preferences to win a seat, it seems inevitable that forming government will require some form of power sharing or coalition arrangement. </p>
<p>This is reinforced by polling data that suggests Tasmanian voters are turning their backs on both major parties. A <a href="https://au.yougov.com/politics/articles/48296-the-tasmanian-state-liberal-vote-is-down-17-since-the-last-election">YouGov poll</a> conducted in January had both Liberal and Labor polling around 30% (31% Liberal, 27% Labor), with the Jacquie Lambie Network (20%), Greens (15%) and other independents (7%) sharing the remaining 40%.</p>
<h2>The key issues</h2>
<p>This all suggests that well established campaign strategies will once again be trotted out. </p>
<p>The government will talk up the strong (but <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-04/tasmanias-economy-slumps-from-first-to-sixth-in-aus/103065236">slowing</a>) economy and run a scare campaign against
minority government. This approach has served the Liberals well in the past, but their current minority status may undermine the pitch. </p>
<p>Labor, the Greens, independents, and the Jacqui Lambie Network will all point to the failure to address persistent housing, hospital, and transport challenges, as well as growing concerns about transparency and accountability.</p>
<p>One wildcard is government support for Hobart’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/11/the-devils-and-the-detail-of-the-715m-afl-stadium-dividing-tasmania">proposed waterfront AFL stadium</a>. Most Tasmanians want an AFL team, but many have concerns about the mooted funding
model in which the government covers most of the cost – and the financial risk.</p>
<p>Finally, the rise and dominance of hyper-local issues is making it hard for parties to develop and deliver a cohesive long-term strategy for the state. History shows that laundry lists of election promises don’t provide the basis for good government.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/tasmanias-reached-net-zero-emissions-and-100-renewables-but-climate-action-doesnt-stop-there-160927">Tasmania's reached net-zero emissions and 100% renewables – but climate action doesn't stop there</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Federal eyes on the campaign</h2>
<p>Mainland pundits will be watching the election closely for two main reasons.</p>
<p>Firstly, the March poll will be an early test of electoral support for a more conservative Liberal party in Tasmania and beyond. While Rockliff is a moderate, the conservative faction of the Tasmanian Liberals is in the ascendancy with former long-serving federal senator Eric Abetz seeking to make a comeback in the state seat of Franklin. </p>
<p>Abetz will likely be elected, but it remains to be seen whether this occurs despite a broader swing against the Liberals. </p>
<p>If the party can retain government in Tasmania, it may provide an early indication that the national political tide is turning.</p>
<p>Secondly, the election may provide further evidence of fragmentation in Australian politics. </p>
<p>If significant numbers of Tasmanians, particularly those from regional and less well-off communities, vote for independents or minor parties, the major parties will have some serious soul searching to do. They’ll need to rethink their strategies for future state and national elections.</p>
<h2>What does the crystal ball say?</h2>
<p>Tasmanian elections are notoriously hard to predict.</p>
<p>Given the most likely outcome will be some form of coalition or power-sharing arrangement, negotiations after polling day will be just as important and interesting as the vote itself.</p>
<p>Will the Liberals be willing to form a minority government, and would Jeremy Rockliff be prepared to lead it? </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nothing-left-in-the-tank-resigning-tasmanian-premier-peter-gutwein-deserves-credit-on-covid-and-economics-180596">‘Nothing left in the tank’: resigning Tasmanian premier Peter Gutwein deserves credit on COVID and economics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>After ten years in the wilderness (not such a bad place to be in this part of the world!) Labor is desperate to govern, but will be reluctant to enter into an agreement with the Greens due to past experience. They may, however, be willing to govern with the support of the Jacqui Lambie Network and/or independents.</p>
<p>Tasmanian politics has always had a unique and interesting dynamic, and the March election is unlikely to disappoint. The real test is whether members of the next Tasmanian Parliament are able to put the interests of the community above petty politics to deliver the good government Tasmanians deserve.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216533/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Eccleston is an appointed a member of two public advisory boards providing advice to the Tasmanian government.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Hortle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After frontbench resignations, MPs going rogue and months of speculation, the Apple Isle is headed to the polls. What can we expect?Richard Eccleston, Professor of Political Science; Director, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of TasmaniaRobert Hortle, Research Fellow, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2031382023-04-03T04:47:16Z2023-04-03T04:47:16ZIt’s not easy, but history shows minority government has worked in NSW before. Here’s what Chris Minns must do<p>Although Labor has returned to power in NSW, it will be in a minority government, with probably 45 seats, two short of a majority, to the Coalition’s 36 (assuming the Liberal Party wins the seat of Ryde, where it is currently ahead as counting continues).</p>
<p>Labor’s position could be further diminished as the government has to provide a speaker. The obvious strategy will be to offer the position to a crossbencher to maintain its numbers on the floor of the lower house. Independent MP for Lake Macquarie, Greg Piper, is a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-28/nsw-election-counting-results/102152726">likely</a> candidate, as he was appointed <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/key-independent-appointed-assistant-speaker-as-perrottet-woos-crossbench-20220215-p59wq9.html">assistant speaker</a> by the previous government.</p>
<p>Incoming premier Chris Minns has <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/nsw/department-heads-in-firing-line-as-unions-warn-of-damaged-relations-20230402-p5cxdi.html">said</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>It’s always been the case, at least for the last 15 years, that the NSW upper house has been controlled by the crossbench and that will be the situation in the lower house, as well. So legislation will have to be navigated through those two parliaments but it’s not necessarily difficult or different from what’s been in place for the last two years.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In fact, <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lc/roleandhistory/Pages/The-history-of-the-Council.aspx">no government</a> has had a majority in the Legislative Council since 1988, a situation that looks set to continue in the new parliament. </p>
<p>It is true that towards the end of its term, the Coalition government slipped into a minority position in the lower house, but it could count on the support of a former Liberal on the crossbench. Despite his optimistic prediction, Minns may find the situation he faces in the lower house more complex and difficult, particularly as he has a large legislative agenda to implement.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1640498767811211264"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-long-history-of-political-corruption-in-nsw-and-the-downfall-of-mps-ministers-and-premiers-147994">The long history of political corruption in NSW — and the downfall of MPs, ministers and premiers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Fluid, complex and hard to predict</h2>
<p>There are 12 crossbenchers, ranging across the spectrum: Greens and progressives, disenchanted or disendorsed Liberals, ex-Shooters, other regional MPs. </p>
<p>The government will need crossbench votes to win divisions. Three sitting independents – Alex Greenwich, Joe McGirr and Piper – have already offered to support Minns on confidence and supply motions, which will give the government stability in office.</p>
<p>This accords with the principle that independents having the balance of power should support the party with the majority of seats. However, like the other crossbenchers, they will vote on other measures according to their assessment of merit.</p>
<p>It is tempting to divide the crossbenchers according to assumed left or right sympathies. Their voting pattern, in reality, will be more fluid, complex and harder to predict.</p>
<p>Of the three MPs combining to guarantee the government in office, for example, one is a progressive (Greenwich), the others are moderates. The crossbenchers may also band together on issues of common concern, such as procedural reforms to give them more influence in the House.</p>
<p>The government’s lack of control of the lower house means it will potentially operate in an entirely different way. </p>
<p>The government will have no assurance its legislative proposals will be passed unamended – or passed at all. It will not routinely be able to gag debate or silence opposition or crossbench MPs. After years of being dominated by the executive government, power has returned to the parliament.</p>
<h2>History shows it can work</h2>
<p>The most relevant precedent is the Legislative Assembly from 1991-95. After that election, the Coalition had 49 seats (48 after appointing a speaker) and Labor 46. Four independents held the balance of power in the 99-seat house.</p>
<p>In return for implementation of a <a href="http://www.cloverarchive.com/archive/issues/other/reform/charter/">charter of reform</a>, three of them – John Hatton, Peter Macdonald and Clover Moore – agreed to support the government on appropriation and supply bills and confidence motions, except where “matters of corruption or gross maladministration” were involved. </p>
<p>Otherwise, the unaligned independents were free to vote as they saw fit, which they certainly did.</p>
<p>The government was forced to negotiate regularly with the independents. It was a slow and sometimes tortuous process. The independents needed time to make their own assessment of proposals and consider the views of interest groups and the opposition. </p>
<p>Under this regime, committees were often established on legislation and other matters, whether the government liked it or not. Debate was unfettered. </p>
<p>In previous parliaments, governments were rarely, if ever, defeated in the lower house; that was not the case between 1991 and 1995.</p>
<p>Government bills were carefully scrutinised and, in some cases, heavily amended; in many instances, better legislation emerged. </p>
<p>The process may at times have been chaotic but the government usually got what it wanted, although it had to accept negotiation and compromise as the price.</p>
<p>Another NSW precedent for coping with a large crossbench is the upper house after the 1999 election. </p>
<p>The balance of power was held by <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lc/articles/Documents/the-declining-membership-of-the-nsw-legislative-/Journal%20article%20-%20Australasian%20Parliamenuncil%20Cross%20Bench%20and%20its%20Implications%20for%20Responsible%20Gover.pdf">13</a> independent and minor party members of the Legislative Council, ranging across the ideological spectrum.</p>
<p>It seemed a recipe for legislative chaos; in fact, it proved to be a relatively stable, even productive, period.</p>
<p>Much of the credit is due to treasurer and leader of the government in the Legislative Council, Michael Egan. He was a skilful parliamentarian and accomplished negotiator who had the ability to accommodate most of the various interests in the house. </p>
<p>His deputy, John Della Bosca, <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lc/roleandhistory/Documents/Transcript%20-%20The%20Hon.%20John%20Della%20Bosca%20-%20Oral%20history%20project%20interview%20-%20Monday%2012%20November%202018%20%5B%20corrected%20%5D.pdf">commented</a> perceptively:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think the idea of having a lot of different crossbenchers actually made it easier, even though in theory they were a block on the government’s program. Generally speaking, because there were so many of them, it was easier to negotiate proposals about amendments or not amending the legislation as proposed. You would think that the more crossbenchers there were, the more difficult it would be, but I think the more crossbenchers there are, in some ways it makes it easier.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Della Bosca <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lc/roleandhistory/Documents/Transcript%20-%20The%20Hon.%20John%20Della%20Bosca%20-%20Oral%20history%20project%20interview%20-%20Monday%2012%20November%202018%20%5B%20corrected%20%5D.pdf">believes</a> better legislation resulted from negotiation with the crossbenchers: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>There were days when we were pretty frustrated with the crossbench, of course, and probably there were many days that they were very frustrated with us, but I think on the whole it achieved exactly that outcome. I do not think there was any legislation you just could not get through because of the crossbench. I do not think we ever brought anything in that did not eventually get passed, though sometimes in a highly modified form.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To govern effectively, the Minns government needs to accept the crossbenchers have legitimate concerns that should be listened to. </p>
<p>Communication and compromise should be the new order. It may be a wild ride, but democracy is the potential beneficiary.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/itll-be-tough-for-perrottet-to-win-the-nsw-election-but-labor-wont-romp-home-either-198892">It'll be tough for Perrottet to win the NSW election. But Labor won't romp home either</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/203138/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Clune does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Communication and compromise should be the order of the day in minority government. It may be a wild ride, but democracy is the potential beneficiary.David Clune, Honorary Associate, Government and International Relations, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1921842022-10-24T04:00:29Z2022-10-24T04:00:29ZChance to reform the allocation of staff in federal parliament has been lost<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491238/original/file-20221024-15-tf98oj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>How should staff resources be allocated to members of parliament to carry out their legislative and deliberative functions? Disappointingly, the newly released review of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act fails to shift the status quo on this key question. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.pmc.gov.au/government/review-members-parliament-staff-mops-act-1984-0">review of the MOPS Act</a> was the first in its 38 years of operation. It was done behind closed doors by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. The report was delivered to the prime minister and released on October 7, together with the news the government accepted in principle all its recommendations. </p>
<p>Remarkably, parliament has had no formal role yet in the review of the act under which parliamentarians’ staff are employed. The government says it will work with the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Leadership_Taskforce">Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce</a> to drive the “necessary” reforms to the act. </p>
<p>Currently, the prime minister has the power to allocate staff numbers and determine the conditions for staff employment. This means parliament has no role in managing and leading the workforce that supports its members. The review recommends leaving this power structure intact. </p>
<p>While it suggests the <a href="https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-11/ahrc_set_the_standard_report_executive_summary_2021.pdf">new independent human resources body</a> consider principles that may inform staffing allocations, these will not be binding on the PM. </p>
<p>The power of the prime minister to allocate staff numbers, not just for ministerial staff but for all parliamentarians, is anomalous compared to other countries and the states, where they are determined by independent bodies. In Canada, for example, the House of Commons determines the resources needed for fulfilling parliamentary duties. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cutting-crossbench-mps-staffing-would-be-a-setback-for-democracy-185843">Cutting crossbench MPs’ staffing would be a setback for democracy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In the Australian parliament, the allocation to crossbenchers of parliamentary staff has been closely related to potential balance-of-power status rather than parliamentary function. It has <a href="https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/n2109/pdf/ch01.pdf">fluctuated accordingly</a>. </p>
<p>In 2010, crossbenchers holding the balance of power in the House of Representatives negotiated for two additional parliamentary staff, while crossbenchers in the Senate were allocated only one. In 2013, this was reversed, when crossbenchers no longer held the balance of power in the lower house. In 2016, when the Turnbull government was returned with the slimmest of majorities, the staff allocated to crossbenchers in both houses was increased to three, while the Morrison government increased it again to four. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491244/original/file-20221024-17-32l60k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Soon after the 2022 election crossbenchers discovered the Albanese government had cut their staffing allocation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Albanese government’s current reduction of staff for crossbenchers clearly relates to their lack of potential balance-of-power status in the House of Representatives. <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/zali-steggall-seeks-crowdfunding-for-extra-staff-after-albanese-s-cuts-20220812-p5b9f0.html">Reports</a> that independent MPs are resorting to crowdfunding to pay for parliamentary staff indicate the size of the problem. </p>
<p>The prime minister should only hold authority over staffing for ministers. In other countries, and in the states, staff of legislators are employed under different legal authority from staff of the executive. </p>
<p>Employment of parliamentary and electorate staff should be within the purview of parliament. Because the federal parliament lacks this authority in the act, it cannot currently determine staff allocations, set conditions or enact consequences for staff in its workplace. The review presented an opportunity to establish appropriate authority for staffing under the act.</p>
<p>A comprehensive review of the MOPS Act was one of the recommendations of Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins in her landmark 2021 report on Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, <a href="https://humanrights.gov.au/set-standard-2021">Set the Standard</a>. Disappointingly, the long-awaited review of the act has failed to address some of its fundamental deficiencies. These include not only the power of the prime minister to control the number and conditions for parliamentary staffing, but also the power of parliamentarians in the employment relationship with their staff.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-jenkins-review-has-28-recommendations-to-fix-parliaments-toxic-culture-will-our-leaders-listen-172858">The Jenkins review has 28 recommendations to fix parliament's toxic culture – will our leaders listen?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Jenkins report found that problems arise from the extreme power imbalance in parliamentary offices. It argued that professionalising practices in these offices was critical to creating safer workplaces. The MOPS Act review recommends some requirements be placed on parliamentarians as employers. These include:</p>
<ul>
<li>recruiting staff against position descriptions and justifying their appointments</li>
<li>consulting the independent HR body before terminating staff employment as a way of slowing down the process</li>
<li>establishing “employment principles” in the act. </li>
</ul>
<p>While these are useful changes, they do not include mandating practices such as probation, induction or performance review. They also do not require vacant positions to be advertised externally, which would bring more diversity into the parliamentary workplace. Nor does the review recommend that entitlement to employ staff be tied to compliance with professional practice as an employer. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491247/original/file-20221024-15-r9fw6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Reforming the recruitment and allocation of parliamentary staff were among the recommendations of the Jenkins report.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dan Himbrechts/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is currently great optimism about the implementation of the recommendations of the Jenkins report, as well as the work of the multi-party cross-chamber Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce and the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Parliamentary_Standards">Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards</a>. The changes involve an interlocking set of new rules and institutions. They require mechanisms for setting standards of behaviour, holding people to account for their conduct and professionalising the parliamentary workplace. </p>
<p>These changes are designed to address the problems of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault of staff revealed in the Jenkins report. The new institutional architecture is designed to try to prevent these forms of misconduct in the parliamentary workplace.</p>
<p>The review of the MOPS Act includes some thoughtful discussion. Its recommendations would be an improvement. But it does not go far enough in recommending changes to the problematic power imbalances exposed in the Jenkins report. </p>
<p>The review does not recommend any change to the anomalous power of the prime minister over all aspects of parliamentary staffing. Nor has it recommended parliamentarians be properly accountable as employers for professional practices in their offices.</p>
<p>The fact the PM’s own department conducted the MOPS review may explain why it does not recommend changes to the basic power structure in the act. This may be a lost opportunity for significant and sensible reform.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192184/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s widely acknowledged that the way parliamentary staffers are allocated is problematic – yet a recent review did not seize the opportunity to fix it.Maria Maley, Senior Lecturer in Politics, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National UniversityMarian Sawer, Emeritus Professor, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1913282022-09-25T12:38:37Z2022-09-25T12:38:37ZCrossbenchers seek assurances as anti-corruption bill is introduced this week<p>Crossbenchers have issued a list of demands on the anti-corruption commission and say they “won’t be rushed” to a vote, ahead of the much-anticipated legislation being introduced into parliament this week.</p>
<p>The government aims to have the commission – one of its signature election policies – approved by parliament by the end of the year. There will be a brief parliamentary inquiry.</p>
<p>It will go to caucus on Tuesday and be introduced by the Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus on Wednesday. Anthony Albanese aims to arrive back from the funeral of the former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe in time to be present for the introduction. </p>
<p>While Labor has the numbers in the lower house, it would need one additional vote beyond the Greens if the opposition opposed the legislation in the Senate. </p>
<p>What position the Coalition will adopt is not yet known. Opposition leader Peter Dutton last week reiterated his support for an anti-corruption commission and said the opposition would continue discussions with the government, while also warning about the risks of “show trials” and false allegations damaging people. </p>
<p>Opposition finance spokeswoman Jane Hume said on Sunday there were unanswered questions about the government’s model. “If you get an ICAC wrong it will actually deter good people from entering public life. That would be a disaster,” she told the ABC.</p>
<p>In their statement the 15 crossbenchers from both houses urge a range of features to ensure the body has sharp enough teeth and that there are adequate protections for it. </p>
<p>They want </p>
<ul>
<li><p>a whistleblower protection commissioner to safeguard those calling out corruption </p></li>
<li><p>statutory oversight mechanisms to protect the commission’s independence </p></li>
<li><p>budgetary protection, independence and funding transparency </p></li>
<li><p>the ability for “own-motion” investigations into so-called “grey corruption” (where the commission would be able to undertake inquiries into dubious Commonwealth processes such as discretionary grants programs) </p></li>
<li><p>funding for pro-integrity measures including prevention and education </p></li>
<li><p>jurisdiction over third parties who seek to improperly influence government decisions and funding. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>The signatories from the House of Representatives include Greens leader Adam Bandt, the six newly-elected teals, Bob Katter, Dai Le, Zali Steggall, Rebekha Sharkie, Andrew Wilkie and Helen Haines. </p>
<p>Haines, the member for Indi, has been a leading figure in the push for an integrity commission, bringing forward a private member’s bill during the last term. </p>
<p>Two senators signed the statement – Greens David Shoebridge and independent David Pocock. </p>
<p>While the bill will not contain the whistleblower protections, Dreyfus is expected to give an assurance in his speech that this will be addressed in separate legislation. </p>
<p>The crossbenchers said: “We have worked constructively with the government in consultations on the bill and intend to continue in that manner.</p>
<p>"We won’t delay the process for political games or point scoring, but won’t be rushed to vote in favour of a bill that doesn’t make the grade.</p>
<p>"We want to ensure the commission is properly set up to do the job it needs to do, and is given the supporting infrastructure necessary to ensure its success in the future.”</p>
<p>They said the points in their list had already been raised with the government. “They are not minor issues, but based on the lessons from integrity bodies in other states and territories, and from experts who have worked on these issues for many years.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191328/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While Labor has the numbers in the lower house, it would need one additional vote beyond the Greens if the opposition opposed the legislation in the Senate.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1835322022-05-22T01:54:21Z2022-05-22T01:54:21ZThe teals and Greens will turn up the heat on Labor’s climate policy. Here’s what to expect<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464617/original/file-20220522-13-jptm3d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C0%2C5551%2C3709&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Public concern over climate change was a clear factor in the election of Australia’s new Labor government. Incoming Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has committed to action on the issue, declaring on Saturday night: “Together we can take advantage of the opportunity for Australia to be a renewable energy superpower”.</p>
<p>Following Labor’s win, frontbencher Richard Marles said the new government would stick to the climate policies it took to the election. But it’s not yet clear if Labor can form a majority in the lower house, or will rely on support from the teal independents and Greens MPs – all of whom campaigned heavily for stronger climate action.</p>
<p>Independent Monique Ryan, a pro-climate teal MP projected to win Kooyong, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-22/kooyong-josh-frydenberg-monique-ryan-federal-election-2022/101088924">on Sunday</a> declared she would work with a minority Labor government if it went further on climate policy – including ramping up its 2030 emissions target. Other crossbenchers are likely to take a similar stance.</p>
<p>Labor’s climate and energy policies provide an important foundation for progress. But there are some sectors of the economy that still need far more focus. So what might the next parliament bring on climate action?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="group of people celebrating" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464619/original/file-20220522-25-td6a4l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Monique Ryan, centre, says she will pressure Labor to lift its 2030 emissions target if she wins Kooyong as expected.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">LUIS ASCUI/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/scott-morrison-defeated-labor-to-govern-in-minority-or-majority-183594">Scott Morrison defeated – Labor to govern in minority or majority</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Towards net-zero</h2>
<p>Saturday’s federal poll was the first where Australia had a national commitment to net-zero emissions. Whoever won government faced the task of normalising the target within government and across the economy, and accelerating rapid real-world emissions cuts.</p>
<p>Under the Morrison government, Australia pledged to reach net-zero by 2050. But <a href="https://www.climateworkscentre.org/resource/decarbonisation-futures-solutions-actions-and-benchmarks-for-a-net-zero-emissions-australia/">our research</a>, conducted with the CSIRO, has shown Australia could get there by 2035.</p>
<p>Such a target would be consistent with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. It would also unlock our competitive advantage in a net-zero world – one where we can be a major player in exporting green energy and other low-emissions commodities. </p>
<p>Labor’s <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/policies/powering-australia">Powering Australia</a> plan would reduce national greenhouse gas emissions by 43% by 2030, based on 2005 levels.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/scorched-dystopia-or-liveable-planet-heres-where-the-climate-policies-of-our-political-hopefuls-will-take-us-182513">Analysis</a> shows Labor’s proposed target, while far more ambitious than the previous government’s, is consistent with 2°C of global warming. This is not yet in line with the Paris Agreement goal for “well below” 2°C warming.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-narrow-labor-win-and-a-teal-bath-all-the-facts-and-figures-on-the-2022-election-183359">A narrow Labor win and a 'teal bath': all the facts and figures on the 2022 election</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In minority government, Labor would come under pressure from the crossbench to adopt a stronger 2030 goal. Incumbent Warringah independent Zali Steggall, for example, is calling for at least 60% emissions reduction by 2030, and the Greens want even more.</p>
<p>Greens and teal independents are aligned with Labor on legislating Australia’s net-zero emissions target and reinvigorating institutions such as the Climate Change Authority.</p>
<p>A climate change bill, which Steggall and others championed in the last parliament, is more comprehensive. It would <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-uk-has-a-national-climate-change-act-why-dont-we-115230">provide</a> legislated timeframes for action on climate change, and implement a process ensuring targets are in line with the science.</p>
<p>The teals are likely to support Labor’s plans to standardise company reporting on matters such as climate risk and emissions. The move brings Australia in line with international best practice and will bring substantial benefits. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="dog with election signs" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464618/original/file-20220522-26-h42g6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Warringah independent MP Zali Steggall introduced a climate change bill in the last parliament.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mark Baker/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So too will Labor’s commitment to net-zero emissions in the federal public service by 2030, which will stimulate demand for low-carbon goods and services.</p>
<p>A gap to be addressed by the Labor government is creating roadmaps to net-zero for sectors and key regions. These could be integrated into Labor’s proposed National Reconstruction Fund, and should be devised in collaboration with the states and industry, as well as communities and workers affected by the global shift to net-zero.</p>
<p>The electricity sector produces <a href="https://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/">about one-third of Australia’s emissions</a>. The teals and Labor both went to the election aiming for renewable energy to comprise 80% of the electricity mix by 2030, which is about the pace of change needed.</p>
<p>Two major new Labor policies will be the basis for this:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Rewiring the Nation: includes A$20 billion in new electricity transmission infrastructure. If designed sensibly, the investment will unlock further private investment</p></li>
<li><p>Powering the Regions: investment in ultra low-cost solar banks, community batteries and improving energy efficiency in existing industries.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Yet more must be done – for example, more planning and new energy market rules. These should ensure the future energy system is no bigger than it needs to be, and that zero-emissions energy by 2035 is produced at least cost.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-mr-morrison-minority-government-need-not-create-chaos-it-might-finally-drag-australia-to-a-responsible-climate-policy-181706">No, Mr Morrison. Minority government need not create 'chaos' – it might finally drag Australia to a responsible climate policy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Spotlight on industry</h2>
<p>The Greens and teals want to halve emissions from Australia’s industrial sector by 2030. Labor’s current plans for industry aren’t that specific – and a crossbench with the balance of power is likely to pressure Labor in this area.</p>
<p>Labor’s policies on industry emissions comprise two main building blocks:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>National Reconstruction Fund: $3 billion from the fund will aid industry’s low-carbon transition, including for manufacturing of green metals such as steel and aluminium</p></li>
<li><p>a revised “safeguard mechanism” requiring big polluters to reduce emissions.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Australia’s energy-intensive industries are already planning their response to shifting global markets. Labor must help these industries manage the change at the scale and pace required.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="two workers walk past furnace" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463540/original/file-20220517-20-f3d0sc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australia’s industry must cut its emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniel Munoz/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A broader transport plan</h2>
<p>In transport, Labor has proposed removing taxes and duties on lower-cost electric vehicles – making them cheaper – and adopting Australia’s first electric vehicle strategy.</p>
<p>The party has already committed to 75% of all new Commonwealth fleet cars being low- or no-emissions by 2025. The teals want 76% of all new vehicle sales to be electric by 2030. The Greens would also <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/greens-launch-6-1-billion-electric-vehicle-policy-in-new-election-pitch/">push</a> for a far stronger electric vehicle policy.</p>
<p>Labor will also take steps to establish high-speed rail on Australia’s east coast. But its transport policy essentially ends there. It could do more on public and active transport, as well as decarbonising freight and aviation.</p>
<p>A broader transport strategy – especially involving infrastructure planning and investment – would help the transport sector move towards net-zero.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="three men stand with electric vehicle" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464621/original/file-20220522-29403-b3x808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Labor has room to expand its electric vehicle targets.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Strip emissions from buildings</h2>
<p>Labor’s <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/policies/safer-and-more-affordable-housing">Housing Australia Future Fund</a> is rightly focused on building new social and affordable housing, but is silent on net-zero. All governments have agreed to a zero-carbon buildings trajectory - now it’s time the federal government worked proactively with the states to achieve this.</p>
<p>The forthcoming review of the National Construction Code is a chance to bring in higher energy performance standards for new buildings.</p>
<p>But existing homes and business premises also need attention. A package of funds and regulations to drive electrification and energy performance gains there would bring lower energy bills and better health outcomes to many Australians.</p>
<h2>A sustainable land sector</h2>
<p>Labor policies will support innovation in agriculture, including reducing methane emissions from livestock and other carbon farming opportunities. There will also be crossbench support for increased tree planting and soil carbon storage, as well as more spending on low-carbon agriculture practices and technologies. </p>
<p>Under Australia’s carbon credit scheme, landholders are granted carbon credits for activities such as retaining and growing vegetation. Serious <a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/news-and-events/news/australia%E2%80%99s-carbon-market-fraud-environment">questions</a> have been raised over the integrity of the scheme, and dealing with these issues should be a priority for the new government.</p>
<p>Many of Australia’s natural systems, such as rivers and other ecosystems, are <a href="https://www.climateworkscentre.org/news/land-use-futures-living-within-limits-report-investigates-environmental-planetary-boundaries-australia/">stressed or near failure</a>. The land sector both contributes to this alarming trend and can be part of the solution, and will be badly affected if the problems are not addressed.</p>
<p>Many farmers have shifted their practices in response to climate and environmental threats. But the new government should create a roadmap to place the land sector in a wider environmental context. This would ensure the sector seizes investment opportunities and plays its part in a sustainable future.</p>
<p>Such a plan would also help Australian agriculture shore up its share of global food exports in a world increasingly demanding low-emissions products.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="dog and two men round up sheep in dusty lot" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464428/original/file-20220520-19-gphdh0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Labor must draw up a low-carbon roadmap for the land sector.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A bigger, bolder vision is needed</h2>
<p>The new Labor government has three years to steer Australia in a world that expects – and badly needs – every nation to take rapid climate action across the economy.</p>
<p>Australians have voted for a parliament with a stronger climate action agenda. More will be needed beyond the headline measures. </p>
<p>The onus is on all Australians help shape and implement these changes and ensure the nation not just survives, but thrives in a warmer world.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-climate-politics-the-47th-parliament-must-be-a-contest-of-ideas-for-a-hotter-low-carbon-australia-182770">'A new climate politics': the 47th parliament must be a contest of ideas for a hotter, low-carbon Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183532/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anna Skarbek is CEO of Climateworks Centre which receives funding from philanthropy and project-specific financial support from a range of private and public entities including federal, state and local government and private sector organisations and international and local non-profit organisations. Climateworks Centre works within Monash University's Sustainable Development Institute. Anna is on the board of the Green Building Council of Australia, the Centre for New Energy Technologies and Sentient Impact Group. She is a member of the Blueprint Institute’s strategic advisory council and the Grattan Institute’s energy program reference panel.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anna Malos is part of Climateworks Centre which receives funding from philanthropy and project-specific financial support from a range of private and public entities including federal, state and local government and private sector organisations and international and local non-profit organisations. Climateworks Centre works within Monash University's Sustainable Development Institute.</span></em></p>Labor’s climate and energy policies provide an important foundation for progress. But the crossbenchers, whether they hold the balance of power or not, will demand far more.Anna Skarbek, CEO, Climateworks CentreAnna Malos, Australia - Country Lead, Climateworks CentreLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1822832022-05-05T19:56:56Z2022-05-05T19:56:56ZExplainer: what happens if the 2022 election results in a hung parliament?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461157/original/file-20220504-22-lp1ch7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>What happens if no party or coalition of parties wins a majority in the House of Representatives at the federal election? This is known as a “hung parliament”. </p>
<p>While it is unusual at the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/1011/HungParliaments">federal level</a>, it has happened more often at <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/at-a-glance-australias-minority-governments/6y8ms4wfc">state and territory level</a>, so there is lots of experience in dealing with them in Australia.</p>
<h2>The prime minister gets to choose what happens next</h2>
<p>An election does not terminate the existing government. It continues in office as a <a href="http://static.moadoph.gov.au/ophgovau/media/images/apmc/docs/63-Caretaker-role.pdf">caretaker government</a> until a new government is formed, so there is never a gap between governments. An inconclusive election does not mean no-one is in charge.</p>
<p>Contrary to popular belief, it is not up to the governor-general to “call upon” someone to form a new government after an election. This is because there is no vacancy in the office of prime minister until the prime minister resigns. </p>
<p>If the result of the election is unclear, or the results leave neither side with a majority so the balance of power will be held by independents and members of small parties (known as “crossbenchers”), then it is up to the prime minister to decide what to do next. </p>
<p>The prime minister could choose to:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>resign on behalf of the government, which is normally what occurs if it is clear that enough of the crossbenchers are going to support the other side</p></li>
<li><p>stay in office while negotiating with the crossbenchers to see who they will support (and resign if they choose the other side)</p></li>
<li><p>stay in office and face parliament to see whether the lower house votes no-confidence in the government (in which case the prime minister must, according to convention, resign) or whether the house is prepared to let the government stay in office as a minority government.</p></li>
</ul>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461158/original/file-20220504-17-1h4o65.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When the 2010 election resulted in a hung Parliament, Prime Minister Julia Gillard brokered agreements with the Greens and independents to support her minority government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is the governor-general’s role?</h2>
<p>The role of the governor-general is limited. If the prime minister resigns on behalf of the government, convention requires the governor-general to appoint as prime minister the person most likely to command the support of a majority of the lower house. </p>
<p>This will usually be the leader of the opposition. In rare circumstances, where there are competing claims about who commands the support of the lower house, the governor-general might have some discretion. However, if the issue was contentious, the governor-general would probably leave it to the House of Representatives to decide by voting on who holds its confidence.</p>
<p>In the extraordinary circumstance where a prime minister refused to resign, even though the lower house had voted no confidence in them or their government, the governor-general would be entitled to dismiss the prime minister and commission a new one to form a government. But this has not happened in Australia and is extremely unlikely ever to occur.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/could-the-2022-election-result-in-a-hung-parliament-history-shows-australians-have-nothing-to-fear-from-it-181484">Could the 2022 election result in a hung parliament? History shows Australians have nothing to fear from it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Is it necessary to get a ‘confidence and supply’ agreement with the crossbenchers?</h2>
<p>When there is a hung parliament, the focus is on whether enough of the crossbenchers will support one side or the other in government, by protecting it from a no-confidence vote and by passing its budget (known as “supply”). </p>
<p>Minority governments can be defeated on legislation and other motions in the lower house and continue in office, as long as they can get supply passed and do not lose the confidence of a majority of the lower house.</p>
<p>So where there is a hung parliament, both sides will ordinarily try to negotiate a “confidence and supply” agreement with enough crossbenchers to guarantee majority support on those two crucial matters. It is not necessary to have such an agreement, but it does help in providing stable government. It is also a good indicator to the governor-general of who commands the necessary support of the lower house. </p>
<p>That is why, despite comments that they won’t do “<a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/federal-election/no-deal-albanese-will-not-strike-a-deal-with-independents-to-win/news-story/6ec7345f03445ed0205698fc224ca5cb">any deals</a>”, it is likely that in the face of a hung parliament, both the prime minister and the opposition leader would try to negotiate confidence and supply agreements with enough crossbenchers to get majority support in the lower house.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461159/original/file-20220504-15-qyx4j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the event of a hung parliament, crossbenchers become extremely important.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In return for a promise of support on confidence and supply, the crossbenchers will usually impose some <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Pages/minority-governments-in-australia-1989-2009-acco.aspx">conditions</a>. They may require the government to promise to implement certain policies (for example, measures to deal with climate change) or establish greater accountability (such as an anti-corruption body). </p>
<p>They may seek reforms on how parliament operates and demand adequate funding for existing accountability bodies, such as the auditor-general. They may also make their agreement on confidence conditional on the government not engaging in any corrupt conduct.</p>
<p>There are no rules about how these negotiations take place or how long it takes before an agreement is reached. Prime Minister Julia Gillard took over two weeks to negotiate confidence and supply <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/documents/minority-governments-in-australia-texts-of-accor/Gillard2010MinorityGovt.pdf">agreements</a> with enough crossbenchers to form a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/sep/07/labor-julia-gillard-form-minority-government-australia">minority government</a>. But if close elections are challenged in the Court of Disputed Returns, it can take months to obtain certainty. In the meantime, the existing government continues in office as a <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-the-caretaker-government-conventions-16817">caretaker government</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-the-caretaker-government-conventions-16817">Explainer: what are the caretaker government conventions?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Does a hung parliament result in chaos?</h2>
<p>Hung parliaments can be <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/the-fabulous-fiftieth-nsw-parliament-and-other-minority-governments/">effective</a> or chaotic, or both, as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/looking-back-on-the-hung-parliament-16175">Gillard minority government</a> showed. Forcing a government to explain and justify every bill on its merits, and negotiate amendments to reach a reasonable consensus, is no bad thing. It can result in significant improvements to government policy and legislation. A hung parliament can be a moderating force that knocks the ideological edges off policies and pushes them into the centre ground, where they have broad acceptance.</p>
<p>On the other hand, a hung parliament can result in governments failing to take hard, but necessary, measures that are in the country’s long-term interests. It can also result in horse-trading of support for bills and unfair favouritism directed towards projects in the electorates of the crossbenchers.</p>
<p>Whether a hung parliament ends up with policy paralysis and horse-trading on the one hand or major improvements in accountability and policy on the other, depends on the quality of both the government and the crossbenchers and their commitment to the public interest over self interest. </p>
<p>So when it comes to voting, it is wise to look beyond party or independent labels to the quality and commitment of the candidate you choose – because it may turn out to be very important.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182283/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Twomey has received funding from the Australian Research Council and occasionally does consultancy work for governments, parliaments and inter-governmental bodies.</span></em></p>When no party can immediately form a majority government, the negotiations begin – and the role of the crossbenchers becomes extremely important.Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1031692018-09-13T08:47:02Z2018-09-13T08:47:02ZPolitics Podcast: Cathy McGowan and Rebekha Sharkie on the role of community candidates<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236162/original/file-20180913-177962-e2n5ik.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>Independent Cathy McGowan and the Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie share more in common than just sitting on the crossbench. The members for Indi and Mayo respectively have dug in to retain their seats, and they believe there is “a mood” in the community for alternative candidates. </p>
<p>McGowan and Sharkie have given the government their confidence until the Wentworth byelection - after which they will consult with their electorates. They think Kerryn Phelps would have “an excellent chance” of winning the byelection if she runs as an independent. Sharkie said “I would certainly be keen to support her in any capacity and that just might be phone calls just to give her some support”.</p>
<p>Even a few weeks after the leadership spill, Sharkie said “there is still a lot of grieving in Mayo for the loss of Malcolm Turnbull”. The feeling in Indi was “very similar”, McGowan said, “except there was another level” - the loss of an energy policy. </p>
<p>On the Liberal’s problems with unity and women, McGowan said “it’s not just the bullying it’s how they work together as a team. In making themselves into a much better party they might open themselves to greater diversity and to better systems and practices for managing conflict.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103169/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>McGowan and Sharkie have given the government their confidence until the Wentworth byelection - after which they will consult with their electorates.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1002722018-07-19T11:04:07Z2018-07-19T11:04:07ZGrattan on Friday: Disillusioned voters find it easy to embrace a crossbencher like Rebekha Sharkie<p>More than two decades ago Alexander Downer stood aside as opposition leader for John Howard, paving the way for the 1996 Coalition election win. This week Howard was in Mayo, his former foreign minister’s one-time South Australian seat, campaigning for Downer’s daughter Georgina.</p>
<p>When the Super Saturday byelections were called, the Liberals thought they had a good chance to pick up Mayo, lost in 2016 to Rebekha Sharkie, from the Nick Xenophon Team (now Centre Alliance).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/leaders-seek-underdog-status-in-byelection-battle-to-be-top-dog-100370">Leaders seek underdog status in byelection battle to be top dog</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Sharkie resigned in the citizenship crisis. The Liberals initially believed Downer was an ideal candidate, despite her living in Melbourne. But soon polling suggested another story - Sharkie <a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-makes-company-tax-fight-all-about-malcolm-turnbulls-money-98838">was leading</a> Downer 62-38% in polls last month.</p>
<p>Some Liberals talk about a <a href="https://www.afr.com/news/libs-hope-for-twostep-strategy-to-win-back-mayo-20180715-h12q2c">two-stage assault</a> on the seat, arguing that if Downer doesn’t win this time, she’ll be well set up for next year’s election.</p>
<p>Well, not if you look at the history. If Sharkie can hold off the Liberals on July 28, she should be in a strong position for the general election.</p>
<p>It’s very hard for a crossbencher to get into the House of Representatives. But when they do, these small players can be difficult to blast out.</p>
<p>Andrew Wilkie won the Tasmanian seat of Denison from Labor in 2010, and retained it in 2013 and 2016. Cathy McGowan wrested Indi (Victoria) from Liberal frontbencher Sophie Mirabella in 2013, to be easily re-elected in 2016.</p>
<p>The late Peter Andren held Calare (NSW) from 1996 until he stepped down before the 2007 election. He had taken the seat from Labor; subsequently it has been in Nationals’ hands.</p>
<p>Tony Windsor grabbed New England from the Nationals in 2001 and won three subsequent elections, retiring before the 2013 election. He almost certainly would have lost if he had contested then, but that was because of special circumstances – although from a conservative electorate, he’d sided with the Gillard government in the hung parliament. Windsor failed in a bid to oust Barnaby Joyce from the seat in 2016.</p>
<p>It was a similar story with Rob Oakeshott, who won the Nationals seat of Lyne (NSW) at a 2008 byelection, retained it in 2010, then backed the Labor government. He didn’t contest in 2013 (he too appeared headed for defeat), but he drastically reduced the Nationals’ margin in Cowper in 2016.</p>
<p>Bob Katter was elected as a National in 1993 but quit the party in 2001, comfortably winning several elections as an independent. In 2011 he launched the Katter’s Australian Party; his victory was tight in 2013 but easier in 2016.</p>
<p>The Greens Adam Bandt has a stranglehold on the seat of Melbourne.</p>
<p>Crossbenchers who are successful in House of Representative seats seem to forge a special bond with their communities. In this time of massive disillusionment with politics and distrust of politicians, they are often seen by their constituents as a different sort of beast, as “our” person, less tainted than those from the big parties.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/video-michelle-grattan-on-the-mayo-byelection-and-crossbenchers-in-the-parliament-100325">VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the Mayo byelection and crossbenchers in the parliament</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This came through in University of Canberra’s Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis (IGPA) <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-indi-project-mcgowan-lacks-clout-mirabella-is-embarrassing-say-local-soft-voters-60220">research</a> before the 2016 election in Indi, where voters were full of praise for McGowan, although with the caveat that her independent status meant she lacked power.</p>
<p>It’s only when a parliament is “hung” or nearly so, that lower house crossbenchers gain serious clout.</p>
<p>IGPA has conducted four focus groups in Mayo this week. The 39 participants, covering all age groups, were “soft” voters, currently unaligned or rethinking their position from the last election.</p>
<p>Sharp messages emerge in the <a href="http://www.thepolicyspace.com.au/2018/19/255-a-tale-of-two-mayos-community-perspectives-on-the-2018-mayo-by-election">report</a> by IGPA director Mark Evans and Max Halupka.</p>
<p>Sharkie is seen as having performed well, as visible and approachable, engaging and caring. She’s viewed as part of Mayo (“she bleeds Mayo”; “she works, acts and lives in Mayo and has Mayo in her heart”). The dual citizenship issue isn’t held against her.</p>
<p>Downer, despite her family background, is regarded as an outsider; “entitled”, “privileged”, “snobby”, “stuck up” are adjectives used about her. Not one participant argued in support of her. In contrast, her father was seen as “Mayo through and through”.</p>
<p>Evans and Halupka conclude: “Sharkie and Downer are perceived to represent two very different Mayos. Downer represents old ‘blue ribbon’ Mayo (as did the disgraced [former Liberal member] Jamie Briggs), home to the Adelaide elite and Sharkie represents new Mayo which is reflected with changing community demographics which include households from a much broader range of income groups including young families who are looking for active community minded representation.”</p>
<p>These Mayo voters disdain the behaviour of federal politicians and “adversarial politics”; they are appalled by the Leyonhjelm affair; they want cross-party co-operation on key matters, especially energy, growth and the environment, which are issues they’re concerned about.</p>
<p>They trust Sharkie; they don’t trust ministers or Bill Shorten. They want conviction politicians and politics. “Turnbull is viewed to be performing better but is still perceived to be lacking conviction; Shorten is purely viewed as a ‘negative politician’ or ‘spoiler’,” Evans and Halupka say.</p>
<p>While there is no statistical significance in these focus group numbers, the trend is notable. “All of the Labor voters last time are moving to either [Sharkie] or the Greens candidate [Major Sumner]. And half the Liberal voters are moving to her.</p>
<p>"On the basis of this tiny sample Labor is collapsing and Shorten is performing very badly across all cohorts particularly amongst former Labor voters.</p>
<p>"Sharkie’s supporters believe that her independence from party is an absolute virtue.” (“I like her because she’s not associated with the big parties and she’s local and cares,” said one participant.)</p>
<p>It should be added that Labor, with no chance in this seat, is mainly interested in boosting Sharkie’s vote via preferences. It is giving Mayo perfunctory attention – its overwhelming focus is on defending its very marginal seats of Longman (Queensland) and Braddon (Tasmania).</p>
<p>In campaigning, Sharkie is getting support from other crossbenchers, with McGowan, Wilkie, and even Katter pitching in. She’s raised $65,000 in micro donations, and recruited more than 800 volunteers.</p>
<p>Given that communities bond with their crossbencher MPs, it becomes a challenge for the major parties to decide the best way to campaign against them.</p>
<p>In particular, will the heavily negative campaign the Liberals are now running against Sharkie eat into her support in these late days, or will people just see this as picking on someone they like?</p>
<p>The conventional wisdom is that negative campaigning works. But trying to knock out an opponent who’s seen as something of a local champion can be a tough ask, as the Liberals are finding.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100272/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s very hard for a crossbencher to get into the House of Representatives. But when they do, these small players can be difficult to blast out.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/938572018-03-23T04:48:41Z2018-03-23T04:48:41ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on musical chairs in the Senate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211670/original/file-20180323-54875-baxsx9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mathias Cormann congratulates new Senate arrival Amanda Stoker, who replaces George Brandis.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5jzgUAfq37E?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics. They discuss the fallout from Super Saturday – Labor’s win in the Batman byelection against the Greens, and the Liberals’ victory over the longstanding Labor government in South Australia. They also talk about the government’s negotiations with the changed composition in the Senate to pass their tax cuts for big companies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93857/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraPaddy Nixon, Vice-Chancellor and President, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/859942017-10-23T04:58:48Z2017-10-23T04:58:48ZSenate crossbenchers take the first steps on lobbying reform – now to ensure it succeeds<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191288/original/file-20171022-13961-1w88rqr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Jacqui Lambie has released a policy on lobbying that has become the starting point for negotiations on the issue.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The suite of codes, statements and laws governing lobbying are failing Australian voters. Yet, for decades, the two major parties have been unwilling to meaningfully improve them.</p>
<p>But, having recognised the seriousness of the problems with lobbying and corruption in Australia, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/crossbench-senators-consider-throwing-a-spanner-in-lobbying-revolving-door-20171013-gz0pk4.html">the Senate crossbenchers</a> – along with <a href="http://www.cathymcgowan.com.au/time_to_restore_trust_support_for_lobbyist_reforms">lower house independents</a> – have finally begun the process of deciding how lobbying reform should occur.</p>
<p>Into this space, the Jacqui Lambie Network has released <a href="https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/lambienetwork/pages/41/attachments/original/1508277821/Cleaning_Up_Canberra.pdf?1508277821">a policy</a> that has become the <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/australias-unrestricted-political-lobbyists-20171018-gz3ajg">starting point for negotiations</a> on one of Australia’s most important policy challenges.</p>
<h2>A ‘federal ICAC’?</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bill-shorten-throws-support-behind-federal-icac-following-sussan-ley-scandal-20170116-gts397.html">Labor</a> and the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=5e2f2fa5-2d64-411f-b6a3-798c4a8867c5&subId=412992">trade unions</a> have signalled a willingness to tackle lobbying at some point. However, there are meaningful obstacles to the crossbench’s current plan.</p>
<p>Given its control of the lower house, the Coalition would need to be brought on side for legislation to pass anytime soon. However, citing Australia’s performance on Transparency International’s corruption index, Attorney-General George Brandis <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=f8267077-982e-4a53-b1cf-fdd1346f541f&subId=412861">is against</a> a federal regulator to police anti-corruption. </p>
<p>Similarly, the Institute of Public Affairs – a Liberal Party ideological ally – rejects the idea because such an agency <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=99716645-081d-4037-992f-82c7df9cfb28&subId=412814">might abuse its power</a>.</p>
<p>However, the crossbench has been more impressed by New South Wales’ <a href="https://www.icac.nsw.gov.au">Independent Commission Against Corruption</a> (ICAC), where the true “abuses of power” have been those <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/eddie-obeid-loses-appeal-over-misconduct-conviction-20170912-gyg9wd.html">uncovered by the commission</a>.</p>
<h2>Enter the crossbench</h2>
<p>Given the resistance from the Coalition, hope for changes to lobbying laws currently rest with the Senate crossbench and the lower house independents. They are negotiating a unified policy based on Lambie’s proposal.</p>
<p>The policy acknowledges that new lobbying laws need to be legislated; have meaningful enforcement provisions (including the possibility of fines or imprisonment for serious offences; and have an independent regulator to oversee them. </p>
<p>Having an independent regulator is critical. As it stands, when a minister leaves office, their eligibility to work as a lobbyist, and whether they have breached any lobbying regulations, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/sep/27/ian-macfarlane-says-he-cleared-new-mining-industry-job-with-pms-office">is determined by</a> those who directly work with – or for – the prime minister.</p>
<p>The problems of the revolving door <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolving-door-why-politicians-become-lobbyists-and-lobbyists-become-politicians-64237">are significant, and growing</a>. It is now commonplace for former ministers to go on to work for companies directly related to their former portfolios – be it on their boards or as lobbyists. </p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading: <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolving-door-why-politicians-become-lobbyists-and-lobbyists-become-politicians-64237">The revolving door: why politicians become lobbyists, and lobbyists become politicians</a></strong></em></p>
<hr>
<p>This creates a clear conflict of interest for those ministers when they are in power. Their decisions while in power have the potential to affect the possibility of a job when they leave office. It also allows them far greater access to, and creates conflicts of interest for, the government decision-makers they meet. These are people they often worked with, for, or above.</p>
<p>As a result, Lambie’s plan would ban ministers and senior public servants from taking up lobbying positions within five years of leaving office. This is increased from the current, poorly-enforced 18-month ban.</p>
<p>This move would bring Australia’s prohibition on post-separation employment in line with <a href="https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/eic/site/012.nsf/eng/h_00008.html">Canada</a> and the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/executive-order-ethics-commitments-executive-branch-appointees">US</a>. Extending the exemption period of post-separation employment, and having an independent regulator to oversee it, would mean the potential for the aforementioned conflicts of interest and advantageous access are reduced.</p>
<p>Beyond the revolving door provisions, Lambie’s plan centres around the ideal of “levelling the playing field” for interest groups. This in turn is based on the problems that arise when some get <a href="http://transparencyinternational.eu.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Lobbying_web.pdf">better access than others</a>. </p>
<p>As such, Lambie’s plan borrows <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-lobbying-laws-are-inadequate-but-other-countries-are-getting-it-right-78550">heavily from the overseas examples</a>. It calls for more transparency in lobbying, incentives to join a register of lobbyists, and expanding the definition of “lobbyists” to include those who operate in-house (Australia’s register currently only captures third-party lobbyists).</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading: <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-lobbying-laws-are-inadequate-but-other-countries-are-getting-it-right-78550">Australia’s lobbying laws are inadequate, but other countries are getting it right</a></strong></em></p>
<hr>
<p>These goals may be in-part fulfilled by changing the access rules to the highly desired “orange passes” of Parliament House. Under Lambie’s plan, lobbyists are given incentives to join the register for better access to parliamentary offices. </p>
<p>This is an interesting idea, and is focused more on reward than punishment. If coupled with other monitoring conditions, it may improve the transparency of lobbying in Canberra – if only by increasing the likelihood that lobbyists will join the register.</p>
<p>The orange pass concept would be augmented by an expansion of the definition of “lobbyist” to include those who directly represent their organisation, regardless of what it does. This would mean the professional representatives of unions and not-for-profit organisations are treated the same as those from corporations.</p>
<h2>At stake: our democracy</h2>
<p>Ideally, a representative democracy supports “good lobbying”, where individuals and groups present their ideas, needs and wants on a level playing field. But the status quo in Australia acts to undermine this ideal.</p>
<p>While its benefits are clear, democracy is a fragile system. Its strength is fundamentally reliant on institutional and legal supports, as well as an engaged and informed electorate.</p>
<p>This is where “bad lobbying” presents a significant threat: it uses weak laws and institutions to create an unfair playing field for a few to the detriment of the many, and undermines trust in the system. </p>
<p>In turn, the electorate becomes cynical and disengaged. Democracy collapses when bad lobbying takes hold, and Australia’s bad lobbying has been steadily getting worse – and more pervasive.</p>
<p>In that critical sense, giving Australia’s lobbying laws teeth, and a sizeable regulatory jaw to occasionally brandish them, is a major step in the right direction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85994/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>George Rennie has played an unpaid advisory role to Senator Lambie's office on its lobbying policy. He is otherwise politically unaffiliated.</span></em></p>Giving Australia’s lobbying laws teeth, and a sizeable regulatory jaw to occasionally brandish them, is a major step in the right direction.George Rennie, Lecturer in American Politics and Lobbying Strategies, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/682322016-11-04T03:26:30Z2016-11-04T03:26:30ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the Senate crossbench<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KjUWvF4zD8U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The departure of up to two crossbench senators and the uncertainty over who might replace them has provided the government with fresh obstacles in their efforts to pass legislation. </p>
<p>Michelle Grattan and University of Canberra deputy vice-chancellor (education) Nick Klomp discuss how Bob Day’s resignation and the legal problems confronting One Nation’s Rod Culleton will impact the numbers in the Senate. </p>
<p>“It means that we have one less senator because Bob Day is gone. It’s not clear whether the One Nation senator is going to vote on bills - or not vote on bills. He’s given signals both ways and there’s also the complication that the government is clearly having a lot of trouble with its negotiations on the industrial legislation which it’s particularly anxious to get through,” Grattan says.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68232/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The departure of up to two crossbench senators and the uncertainty over who might replace them is giving the government fresh obstacles in their efforts to pass legislation.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraNicholas Klomp, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Education, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/644332016-08-25T10:59:43Z2016-08-25T10:59:43ZPolitics podcast: Derryn Hinch on becoming a senator<p>Incoming Victorian senator Derryn Hinch has the potential to be an ally or an enemy to the government’s agenda. Describing his political philosophy, Hinch says he isn’t in the Senate “just to be opposition”. </p>
<p>“If I was in America I’d be a Democrat. I’m conservative on some issues. Very conservative. And that’s over law-and-order issues and I’ve campaigned on those over the years. If I’m a socialist about anything it’s about medicine and hospitals … Socially I’m fairly lower-case liberal,” he says. </p>
<p>In the early days of the new parliament, Hinch plans to try to lift the restrictions on press in the Senate, where current rules prevent senators from being photographed unless they are speaking on their feet. </p>
<p>“I just think this is wrong, we should streamline it, bring it up-to-date. This is a public house … So those restrictions should be lifted. Standing orders should be changed,” he says. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Music credit: “Definition” by Ketsa, Free Music Archive</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64433/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Incoming Victorian senator Derryn Hinch has the potential to be an ally or an enemy to the government's agenda.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/622162016-08-04T23:57:38Z2016-08-04T23:57:38ZExplainer: who’s who on the new Senate crossbench?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/133181/original/image-20160804-473-1bgqe9v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Like the proverbial phoenix, One Nation has again risen in Australian politics.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dan Peled</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The 2016 federal election has finally come to an end, with the Australian Electoral Commission declaring who will sit in the <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/SenateStatePage-20499-NSW.htm">next Senate</a>. The results suggest the Turnbull government will have to master the art of negotiation if it is to implement its policies.</p>
<h2>New system, new Senate</h2>
<p>As this was a <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-what-does-it-mean-that-were-having-a-double-dissolution-election-56671">double-dissolution election</a>, the quota for election was halved, making it easier for candidates to win Senate seats.</p>
<p>The Senate is made up of 76 seats (12 from each state and two from each territory). The government must gain the support of at least 39 senators to pass its legislation.</p>
<p>The Coalition has 30 seats; Labor holds 26; there will be nine Greens. There are now 11 other crossbench senators from six different parties. The Turnbull government will therefore need the support of at least nine non-Green votes from the crossbench if Labor and the Greens oppose its legislation.</p>
<p>The 2016 election used a <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">new system of voting</a> for the Senate. The group voting ticket (GVT) was abolished, and voters were able to more directly send their preferences to their favoured candidates. This had a significant impact on the re-emergence of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation.</p>
<p>In 1998, when the then-nascent party enjoyed relatively high levels of support, the major parties preferenced One Nation last. But, as the Senate had changed its voting system, One Nation in 2016 was no longer dependent on preference deals to the same extent and now returns to the federal parliament.</p>
<p>So, who’s who on the new Senate crossbench? And what role will they play in the 45th parliament?</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-177" class="tc-infographic" height="800" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/177/e290adbeb68398ff8b685c33a03f302d82a9e384/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>The Greens</h2>
<p>The Greens lost one seat but continue to hold the largest bloc on the crossbench, with nine seats. The government may pass its legislation if it can get the Greens’ support.</p>
<p>This will be a challenge, however. The Greens will continue to advance a policy agenda that covers broad conservation and socially progressive aims.</p>
<p>While such views appear to be shared to some extent with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, there may be flashpoints on social policy in particular. This may depend on how much influence the Coalition’s conservative element has on proposed legislation.</p>
<p>The Greens may be a very important ally to the government, but they will not be supporting legislation that conflicts with their agenda.</p>
<p>Then again, the Greens will face some challenges of their own. Losing one seat and associated parliamentary resources means the party will be focusing on preparing to consolidate and expand in the Senate at the next election.</p>
<h2>The Nick Xenophon Team</h2>
<p>A big winner of this election is Nick Xenophon and his new political party, which claimed three Senate seats.</p>
<p>The Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) has a mix of protectionist economic and socially progressive policies. Part of its appeal has been its focus on enhancing government accountability and promoting manufacturing in Australia.</p>
<p>While Xenophon himself has been vocal on these topics, as well as his long-term concern about predatory gambling, the challenge will now be to make a legislative impact in these areas. If voters get a sense that his party has been unable to fulfil its promises, they may choose to give their votes to someone else next time.</p>
<h2>The Jacqui Lambie Network</h2>
<p>Jacqui Lambie, who was elected in 2013 as a Palmer United Party candidate in Tasmania, also created a new party and will be returning to the Senate.</p>
<p>Presenting herself as a strong advocate for her state, Lambie built a high public profile by positioning herself as an anti-establishment figure. </p>
<p>Concerns about protecting jobs and the provision of government services dominated her campaign, as did <a href="http://lambienetwork.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LAMBIE-NETWORK-POLICY.pdf">her opposition to sharia law</a> supposedly being imposed in Australia.</p>
<h2>Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party</h2>
<p>Derryn Hinch will be in the Senate representing Victoria. He has a high public profile as a controversial journalist and will advocate for reforms to a suite of law-and-order issues.</p>
<p>Hinch has for many years called for a public register of convicted sex offenders. His party also seeks to reform matters concerning sentencing and parole, as well as domestic violence.</p>
<p>The party is also in favour of voluntary euthanasia. This spread of policies will allow Hinch to transcend any sense of rigid party politics in the Senate.</p>
<h2>Pauline Hanson’s One Nation</h2>
<p>Like the proverbial phoenix, One Nation has risen again in Australian politics.</p>
<p>Pauline Hanson, who became a prominent figure when she was first elected to the lower house in 1996, will lead her reinvigorated party back into the Senate after winning the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/results/senate/#sqld">third-highest primary vote</a> in Queensland after the Liberal National Party and the Labor Party.</p>
<p>Presenting herself as an anti-establishment figure, Hanson won support from some sections of the electorate for her concerns about race and migration. She also promotes a broadly protectionist suite of economic policies.</p>
<p>The One Nation party of 2016 has also expressed greater concern about religion and climate change than it did in the 1990s.</p>
<p>The party <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-10/timeline-rise-of-pauline-hanson-one-nation/7583230">famously imploded</a> when it had just one senator from 1998 to 2004. Hanson’s challenge will be to keep a cohesive group together and avoid recreating past disunity.</p>
<p>Hanson has already flagged that her party’s senators are free to vote against the party when they see fit, making negotiations for the government even more complicated. It will not be able to count on the party to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/final-senate-make-up-confirmed-with-11-crossbenchers/7689788">vote as a bloc</a>.</p>
<h2>The returnees</h2>
<p>Bob Day will return to the Senate representing Family First. His party advances socially conservative policies, including a desire to ensure <a href="http://www.sa-familyfirst.org.au/marriage/">same-sex marriage</a> does not become a reality in Australia. </p>
<p>Maintaining the idea that a nuclear family is best, as well as opposing liberal social policies, will be at the core of Family First’s focus.</p>
<p>Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm will return to pursue policies that limit government power. As a libertarian, Leyonhjelm will oscillate from being friend and foe for the government. His <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/18/david-leyonhjelm-is-neither-a-champion-nor-a-villain-hes-a-libertarian">reported opposition</a> to some government services may be in line with the Coalition’s. But his support for legalising same-sex marriage will be troublesome for some in the government.</p>
<h2>The Turnbull government and the new Senate</h2>
<p>The double-dissolution election has injected into the Senate a wider range of parties and policy demands than before. The government will need to have strong working relationships with the crossbench to have any chance of getting their support.</p>
<p>Policy that is seen to be ideologically driven will have little prospect of passing. Major reforms will need much careful negotiation and an acceptance that compromise will be inevitable.</p>
<p>The composition of the Senate means the government’s team, especially Senate leader George Brandis, will have to work extremely hard to negotiate their way through the disparate policy demands.</p>
<p>Turnbull, vaunted as a <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/chris-kenny/election-2016-malcolm-turnbulls-qa-appearance-his-best-campaign-performance/news-story/5a6c92ea277f494b8aeb6647396381b8">great communicator</a>, will also have to be a consistent top performer if his government’s policies are to get through the Senate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62216/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Senate results suggest the Turnbull government will have to master the art of negotiation if it is to implement its policies.Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/635522016-08-04T12:17:55Z2016-08-04T12:17:55ZGrattan on Friday: Twenty years on, the Perils of Pauline haunt another Liberal leader<p>The election for the Senate hasn’t ended well. To have four senators from One Nation in the upper house is worse than unfortunate.</p>
<p>If Malcolm Turnbull had not called a double dissolution, but settled for a normal half-Senate election, Pauline Hanson would probably have been elected but not with three other One Nation candidates.</p>
<p>The potential sway of the Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) received much attention before the election but it has secured one less Senate place than Hanson’s group, which emerged as the big winners when the final Senate results were announced on Thursday.</p>
<p>The Senate outcome is Coalition 30, Labor 26, Greens nine, One Nation four, NXT three, Liberal Democrat one, Family First one, Jacqui Lambie, and Derryn Hinch. The number of non-Green crossbenchers is 11, compared with the eight previously, with the government requiring nine to pass bills opposed by Labor and the Greens.</p>
<p>Turnbull has absorbed the lesson that the Abbott government did not master – the need to try to strike meaningful relationships with the crossbenchers from the start.</p>
<p>When he became leader Turnbull reached out to the then crossbench but there was not adequate follow-through – that was the senators’ story, anyway.</p>
<p>Now a good deal of preparation is being done. Turnbull has been in touch with a number of the crossbench senators, including meeting Hanson. David Bold, until recently in change of Turnbull’s media team, has a fresh assignment. He’ll head a new group of three or four within the Prime Minister’s Office that will liaise with the crossbench and the government backbench. </p>
<p>Bold’s own focus will be on the crossbench senators who will determine how much of the contested parts of the Coalition’s program gets through.</p>
<p>Government Senate leader George Brandis predicts the new crossbench could be “somewhat easier to deal with” than its predecessor. Certainly it will not receive quite the provocation that one did – we won’t be seeing another budget like 2014’s.</p>
<p>Immediately after the election, it was thought the government would have no hope of getting passed the industrial relations bills used to trigger the double dissolution – these would resurrect the Australian Building and Construction Commission and toughen union governance.</p>
<p>Now it is expected the numbers are there for them to get through a joint sitting. But they may even pass the Senate, with some amendments, making the joint sitting unnecessary.</p>
<p>The government judges the new non-Green crossbenchers as being, overall, more conservative-leaning than the last lot; it also thinks things will be simpler when there are two blocs.</p>
<p>There’s precedent for the very occasional deal with the Greens. But when Labor and the Greens team up to oppose legislation, the Coalition will need support from NXT and One Nation senators. </p>
<p>If each bloc stays together and both blocs back a measure, the Coalition requires two more votes. Family First’s Bob Day is sympathetic, and Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm – though presently angry at Liberal attacks on his party – should often be winnable.</p>
<p>Then there’s Hinch. In one of those exquisite twists of politics, Hinch’s adviser is Glenn Druery, famous as the “preference whisperer”. It was Druery’s “whispering” that wrangled the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party’s Ricky Muir a seat at the 2013 election. </p>
<p>The government and Greens combined to bring in a new voting system to thwart the “whisperer”, although its effect of squeezing minor players was offset by having a double dissolution. Druery says his advice to Hinch is: “work with the government where possible, but don’t do anything for free”.</p>
<p>The Senate situation clearly delivers a great deal of power to Xenophon and Hanson, both of them populist and protectionist, though in other ways hugely different.</p>
<p>Xenophon is the experienced negotiator and networker, used to the subtleties of the Senate game. In policy terms he is especially concerned about the embattled manufacturing sector. </p>
<p>He is also focused on his home state of South Australia – this will be reinforced by his team (there is a fourth in the lower house) all being elected from that state. Unlike Hanson with senators from three states, Xenophon – despite his earlier aspirations – wasn’t able to plant a national footprint at the election.</p>
<p>Hanson in this new setting is an unknown quantity. Parliament gives her a platform but also, for the first time, the opportunity for a seat at the table.</p>
<p>Her comments suggest she has been chuffed by the government going out of its way to show a pleasant face to her. “He was very gracious,” she said after a meeting with Turnbull, especially, no doubt, as “I did most of the talking”.</p>
<p>When she entered parliament as member for Oxley in 1996, recently disendorsed by the Liberal Party, Hanson became an extraordinarily powerful disruptive force in Australian politics, with severe fallout for John Howard.</p>
<p>This time, will she remain the outsider, using parliament as a soap box, or will she seek to be more of the insider in that place of complex dynamics, the Senate?</p>
<p>And how will Labor handle her? The ALP finds the Hansonites extremely distasteful politically, but it can hardly ignore a bloc of four. Someone in Labor will eventually have to put the kettle on, literally or figuratively. If they don’t, the ALP will be handing the government a useful break.</p>
<p>Hanson has got the jackpot at the election but she faces her own nightmare. This party is slack on unity and discipline and big on individuals with strongly held opinions, including some divisive, offensive and downright wacky ones.</p>
<p>While ultimately Hanson’s power depends on her being able to deliver a bloc, in fact the Hansonites are likely to split on particular votes. The One Nation team could end up the same way as the Palmer United Party, which saw two of its three senators become independents.</p>
<p>Thanks to Turnbull, the Hansonites, together and individually, are set to be a signature story of this parliament.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-211" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/211/e986084e62ac97aa73fbb1a44f93029ce782668a/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/ce8vs-6175ee?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/ce8vs-6175ee?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63552/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The election for the Senate hasn’t ended well. To have four senators from One Nation in the upper house is worse than unfortunate.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/621162016-07-11T02:18:13Z2016-07-11T02:18:13ZExplainer: who are the independents and minor parties in the lower house?<p>Five crossbench members of the House of Representatives will take their seats in the 45th parliament when it convenes in coming weeks.</p>
<p>Joining veteran Queensland politician Bob Katter are third-term independent member of parliament (MP) Andrew Wilkie, the Greens’ Adam Bandt, and the returning independent MP for Indi, Cathy McGowan. This seasoned group will be joined by a first-time MP for the Nick Xenophon Team, Rebekha Sharkie.</p>
<p>After a slim victory, how the Coalition works with the crossbench MPs will prove important to the success and stability of the Turnbull government.</p>
<h2>Bob Katter (Katter’s Australian Party) – member for Kennedy</h2>
<p>Katter has a long and colourful history in politics. A former National Party member for the state seat of Flinders, he served as a minister in Queensland’s Bjelke-Petersen government from 1983 to 1989. </p>
<p>Katter entered federal parliament in 1993 as a National Party MP. He resigned in 2001 to become an independent, citing an <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2001/s326098.htm">irreconcilable ideological difference</a> on the Coalition’s economic direction. </p>
<p>Now he is set to commence his 23rd year and ninth term in federal parliament as head of Katter’s Australian Party (KAP). He formed KAP in 2011 as a response to a weakness he saw among independent MPs: the inability to affect change for their constituencies. </p>
<p>Katter is known for his erratic and often eccentric style. He favours an interventionist and protectionist approach in support of agriculture and rural industry. He believes in statehood for Northern Queensland and is a fierce supporter of the union movement.</p>
<p>In lending his qualified support <a href="http://www.afr.com/news/politics/election/election-2016-bob-katter-sides-with-malcolm-turnbull-20160707-gq0n3z">to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull</a> should the Coalition require his vote, Katter indicated he would be mindful of issues such as support for live cattle exports and going ahead with the Hell’s Gate dam to help boost jobs in the state’s north.</p>
<p>A challenge for Katter in this new parliament may well be reconciling his support for greater protectionism and the union movement with the Liberal Party’s focused economic liberalism. </p>
<h2>Andrew Wilkie – member for Denison</h2>
<p>Wilkie has <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-wins-more-crossbench-support-as-governments-numbers-still-to-be-finalised-62225">given Malcolm Turnbull his assurance</a> that he will back the government on supply and confidence. But he <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election2016-independent-andrew-wilkie-rules-out-deals/7565626">wants to maintain his independence</a>) as a representative of his electorate.</p>
<p>Wilkie has won the former safe Labor seat of Denison in Tasmania with an increased margin at each election since 2010. </p>
<p>A former Army officer and manager with contractor Raytheon Australia, Wilkie joined the public service as a senior strategic analyst in the Office of National Assessments in 2001. </p>
<p>In 2003 he <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/s804540.htm">famously resigned</a> in opposition to the Howard government’s participation in the Iraq War. <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/30/1054177726543.html">He argued</a> the intelligence leading to Australia’s involvement was predicated on a lie. </p>
<p>Wilkie has been a member of the Liberals and Greens, running for the latter in 2004 and 2007. Neither was a good fit. </p>
<p>Running as an independent in 2010, he stood on an anti-gambling platform and railed against the parlous state of mental health services – issues he still champions. He also threw his support behind Labor to help secure Julia Gillard minority government.</p>
<p>In recent years, Wilkie has been highly critical of the live export trade, Australia’s failure to legalise same-sex marriage, and the treatment of asylum seekers. </p>
<p>The challenge for the government will be working with Wilkie on a case-by-case basis, particularly on these issues and others concerning his electorate.</p>
<h2>Adam Bandt (Greens) – member for Melbourne</h2>
<p>Bandt was first elected to parliament in 2010, winning the previously safe Labor seat of Melbourne. </p>
<p>A lawyer by profession, Bandt has had a strong interest in human rights and social justice issues in both his legal and political careers. His PhD examined governments’ suspension of human rights.</p>
<p>In the 45th parliament, the Greens indicated they would focus on Medicare, subsidised dental care, the formation of a national body to protect the environment, and the end of offshore detention of asylum seekers.</p>
<p>It is also likely that Bandt will revisit issues he raised in the past for which he might find crossbench support. These include reforming politicians’ entitlements and political donations, and the need for a national anti-corruption body.</p>
<p>A Coalition government will continue to find working with Bandt and the Greens a challenge. Ideologically they are poles apart on issues from school funding and the environment to unions.</p>
<p>Bandt has stated that while the Greens <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/adam-bandt-says-greens-would-be-open-to-laborgreens-coalition-ahead-of-election-20160509-goq96g.html">would not be averse</a> to entering a coalition arrangement with Labor, they would <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/election-2016:-adam-bandt/7575916">not support a Liberal-National Coalition</a> government. </p>
<p>In the House of Representatives, Bandt could add weight to the sizeable Labor opposition.</p>
<h2>Cathy McGowan – member for Indi</h2>
<p>McGowan was re-elected for a second term in 2016. She <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-20499-218.htm">increased her margin</a> in the former long-term Liberal-held safe seat against Sophie Mirabella. </p>
<p>McGowan is a former Liberal Party member and electorate staff member for Ewen Cameron, a previous Indi MP. She has worked as a teacher in rural Victoria, a public servant, a consultant on issues affecting rural communities, an academic, researcher and company director. </p>
<p>McGowan’s strong local presence and deep understanding of local issues have seen her speak out on economic disadvantage, rural employment, improving infrastructure, telecommunications, renewable energy and transport. </p>
<p>While her <a href="http://www.cathymcgowan.com.au/parliament">voting record indicates</a> she has strongly supported the Coalition government’s policy agenda, her focus has been very much on the needs of Indi.</p>
<p>Since the election, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election-2016-independent-mcgowan-rejects-speaker-talk/7565478">McGowan has said</a> she would work productively with the Coalition and would <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-wins-more-crossbench-support-as-governments-numbers-still-to-be-finalised-62225">back the government on supply an confidence</a>. She has also highlighted her positive working relationship with Turnbull. </p>
<p>The government will face fewer challenges working with McGowan than some of the other independents and minors, but she will clearly put her electorate’s needs first, and is likely to favour the National Party’s regional agenda.</p>
<h2>Rebekha Sharkie (Nick Xenophon Team) – member for Mayo</h2>
<p>Sharkie is the political novice on the crossbench. The newly elected member for the South Australian seat of Mayo is also the first House of Representatives member of the newly formed Nick Xenophon Team (NXT). She is not, however, completely new to politics. </p>
<p>While coming from an administrative, conveyancing and small-business background, Sharkie has tertiary qualifications in politics and experience working for MPs. She worked with state Liberal MP and party leader Isobel Redmond and, for a brief time before resigning, with the man she unseated, Jamie Briggs. </p>
<p>During the election campaign, Sharkie drew attention to issues in her electorate, including youth employment, transport and access to medical services. She wants to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/30/there-is-a-bitter-battle-in-mayo-that-is-much-bigger-than-jamie/">focus on a range of issues</a>.</p>
<p>Her party leader Nick Xenophon has had discussions with Turnbull about issues of concern to NXT in the forthcoming parliament, including free-trade agreements (FTAs) and the future of the Arrium steelworks. The party believes FTAs are not in Australia’s national interest and wants to see them reviewed at the very least. </p>
<p>Sharkie tripped up on the issue of FTAs on the campaign trail and it’s unclear whether her inexperience and potentially loose party discipline will see NXT fracture like the Palmer United Party. Xenophon is, however, a more experienced leader and is more likely to hold the team together</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62116/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After a slim victory, how the Coalition works with the crossbench MPs will prove important to the success and stability of the Turnbull government.Tracee McPate, Manager, Strategic Programs and Outreach, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith UniversityRobyn Hollander, Associate Professor School of Government and International Relations, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/621102016-07-06T11:56:40Z2016-07-06T11:56:40ZBarnaby Joyce gives some protection on Turnbull’s vulnerable right flank<p>Within the Coalition the only cheer is among the Nationals who, if some late counting goes their way, could actually gain one in their numbers at an election where the government has lost a swag of seats. At worst the junior partner, with 21 seats in total in the last parliament, would probably be only one down.</p>
<p>The Nationals haven’t wasted any time pointing to their success, which they attribute to running a very grassroots campaign.</p>
<p>For the future, both leader Barnaby Joyce and party president Larry Anthony declare the Nationals will be more assertive in a new Coalition government, assuming that’s the election outcome.</p>
<p>The Coalition has strengthened its position in the latest counting, with the ABC computer on Wednesday giving it 72 seats, Labor 66, with five independents and seven seats still in doubt. ABC election analyst Antony Green allocates an extra seat to the Coalition. It needs 76 to reach majority government.</p>
<p>Joyce was at Malcolm Turnbull’s side at Tuesday’s news conference. You can view them as the odd couple, or as yin and yang – the urban sophisticate, epitome of the high-tech world, and the stump politician who, while Sydney-educated and an accountant, comes across as an authentic voice from regional Australia.</p>
<p>When Turnbull was opposition leader, the two didn’t get on. These days they are comfortable in each other’s company and, especially now, a good fit despite – or because of – their policy and political divergence.</p>
<p>Joyce is a populist, Turnbull anything but. Turnbull is socially progressive, Joyce conservative, for example an opponent of same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>For Turnbull, Joyce provides some protection on his vulnerable right flank, as the Liberal conservatives try to cut him down to size.</p>
<p>Since he took over as Nationals leader earlier this year Joyce has played a tight team game. In the election, he held off a challenge for his own seat from former independent MP Tony Windsor, while campaigning elsewhere. There was the odd glitch, but not amounting to much.</p>
<p>The Nationals have regenerated in recent years, with retirements and new people arriving, and Joyce is set on growing the party and its leverage. The election result provides a big opportunity.</p>
<p>Depending on the final numbers split within the Coalition, the Nationals under the set formula almost certainly would be entitled to another junior minister. According to some sources, a best-case scenario could see them entitled to a fifth cabinet spot as well, depending on the size of Turnbull’s cabinet.</p>
<p>It is understood Joyce, who has flirted with taking the infrastructure portfolio, would be more likely to stick with his present job of agriculture.</p>
<p>There are a couple of reasons.</p>
<p>In the campaign the government announced a Regional Investment Corporation to oversee some A$4.5 billion of drought and water infrastructure loans provided to state governments and farmers. This is not new money, but funds presently borrowed by the Commonwealth and sent to the states, which administer them. Under the plan, this administration would be done by the federal government.</p>
<p>The fund, dubbed “Barnaby’s bank”, would come within the agriculture portfolio and Joyce is anxious to be the one to bed it down.</p>
<p>Another reason for not taking on a new ministry is that Joyce would expect to have a considerable role negotiating with crossbenchers. This would be particularly so if the Coalition were a minority government. Who else would be well-placed to deal on an ongoing basis with the vociferous ex-National, Bob Katter?</p>
<p>In case he needs him, Turnbull will meet Katter in Brisbane on Thursday. On Wednesday he met Nick Xenophon in Sydney – the Nick Xenophon Team will have one lower house seat.</p>
<p>Even in a majority Coalition government, a lot of work would have to be done with the Senate crossbenchers. Joyce has a long history with Xenophon, who’ll have an upper house mini-bloc – the two were close when Joyce was a Queensland senator.</p>
<p>When Turnbull became prime minister, then-Nationals leader Warren Truss included in the Coalition agreement a number of policy items – among them, maintenance of existing policies on climate change and the reference of same-sex marriage to a plebiscite. The desire for formal policy commitments reflected the Nationals’ distrust of Turnbull – eyes would be on whether Joyce sought to formalise a policy deal this time.</p>
<p>Given a new shine from the election, the Nationals would be well placed to boost their influence in Turnbull’s government. But the party’s clout within the Coalition, going back into its Country Party days, has waxed and waned largely according to the personal strength and savviness of its leading figures. That will be the real test of Joyce.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/26bqd-60b409?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/26bqd-60b409?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62110/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Within the Coalition the only cheer is among the Nationals who could actually gain one in their numbers at an election where the government has lost a swag of seats.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/620162016-07-04T12:56:51Z2016-07-04T12:56:51ZThis parliament – hung or unhung – will bring us another continuous election campaign<p>The irony of stridently warning people against voting for minor players and then, all charm, ringing those players when you personally might need their votes may be lost on Malcolm Turnbull. After all, a politician’s skillset includes being able to stand on your head without going red in the face.</p>
<p>As he waits impatiently for the results in the ten outstanding seats, Turnbull doesn’t know whether, if he survives in government, he’d have the slimmest majority (76 of 150 seats) in the House of Representatives, or be coping with a hung parliament. His calls indicate he is planning for the latter while desperately hoping for the former.</p>
<p>Turnbull bunkered down on Monday but Bill Shorten returned to the still-warm campaign trail in western Sydney to flaunt his unexpectedly extensive gains.</p>
<p>There remains a chance he could form a minority Labor government, though it is considered an outside one. Shorten’s call for Turnbull to quit the leadership signalled that a precarious Coalition government would face an energised, aggressive opposition.</p>
<p>Labor’s Anthony Albanese, who confirmed on Monday night he wouldn’t make a leadership run in the automatic spill that comes if Labor remains in opposition, predicted Australians would likely be back at the polls “well before” the end of the three-year term.</p>
<p>What has become in recent years Australia’s continuous election campaign will just intensify after Saturday’s vote.</p>
<p>If Turnbull is to go into minority government he would either have to strike crossbench deals or at least obtain enough backing on the central matters of supply and confidence to allow him to govern.</p>
<p>The lower house crossbenchers will be independents Cathy McGowan and Andrew Wilkie, Bob Katter of Katter’s Australian Party, the Greens’ Adam Bandt, and the Nick Xenophon Team’s (NXT) Rebekha Sharkie. By Monday Turnbull had called all but Bandt. Possibly the crossbench number could be larger – the NXT candidate is in a close race for the South Australia seat of Grey, held by the Liberals.</p>
<p>Wilkie and McGowan shy away from the idea of formal deals with either side. Xenophon is more pragmatic, while the Greens would be eager to power-share with Labor (but the ALP says never ever).</p>
<p>In considering his position, Xenophon would evaluate what he could extract for his policy agenda, as well as considering the question of stability.</p>
<p>Would a minority government be the horror Turnbull painted before the election? Those who argue it wouldn’t point out such governments operate satisfactorily abroad and at state level, and note the Gillard government passed much significant legislation. They observe that having to negotiate on legislation can make for improvements.</p>
<p>But remember a minority Turnbull government would face double jeopardy. Its problems would not be just in the lower house. The Coalition would have an obstacle course in the Senate whether in minority or majority government. Albanese argues the Senate would be easier for a Labor government.</p>
<p>In retrospect, calling a double dissolution, with its small quota for getting elected, was a disastrous decision by Turnbull. The old Senate crossbench was difficult enough – the new one is potentially more so. Among the crossbenchers will be three from NXT and, on ABC election analyst Antony Green’s reckoning, three from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation.</p>
<p>Turnbull, who preaches the values of an inclusive society, has inadvertently not only facilitated the re-entry to parliament of a woman who stands for the very opposite, but likely enabled her to get a significant Senate bloc.</p>
<p>While the Hansonites and NXT are vastly dissimilar in many ways, they are both populist on economic issues, tapping into and articulating community fears about the fallout from market economics and globalisation. This works against the prospect of getting significant economic reforms through the parliament.</p>
<p>A minority government would be especially hostage to having to provide costly benefits. Xenophon is already making more help for Arrium Steel a core demand. </p>
<p>The Western Australian government is complaining it won’t have any chance of a greater slice of the GST revenue because the federal government will have to do a deal with Xenophon, “a South Australian protectionist”, whose state is a beneficiary under the existing distribution.</p>
<p>A well-functioning political system requires checks and balances. In the years when the Howard government controlled the Senate, the mechanisms for scrutiny of administration were lessened, and legislation could be just rammed through. This came back to bite the government when WorkChoices was passed without its harsh edges rubbed off. But if the roadblocks make things unworkable, a government can do little. </p>
<p>Of course the right balance is in the beholder’s eye. The Liberals condemned the Senate’s refusal to pass controversial 2014 budget measures; many voters were relieved.</p>
<p>Whether he has to work in minority government or with the finest of margins, Turnbull – if confirmed in power – will face the toughest period of his political life.</p>
<p>In a hung parliament he would need to have regular “face time” with lower house crossbenchers (Julia Gillard was very good at this). The kettle should always be on. Whether the parliament was hung or not, crossbench senators would require attention by the leader. But Malcolm and Pauline, over tea?</p>
<p>The personal touch is vital – crossbenchers who have power want a prime minister to acknowledge it, including in small ways. They are sensitive to slights and react badly to neglect. Tony Abbott failed to give crossbench senators enough attention, to his cost. Not all this work can be delegated.</p>
<p>At the same time, it would be vital for Turnbull to set limits. If a leader is willing to negotiate virtually everything away, it’s almost as bad as refusing to give anything.</p>
<p>A prime minister has the ultimate whiphand – calling an election. In a hung parliament the crossbench can withdraw support and force the government to the polls. The stakes are extraordinarily high all round.</p>
<p>Turnbull gave the Senate crossbenchers an ultimatum: pass the industrial relations legislation or face the people. They called his bluff and it didn’t end well, for him or those of them who lost their seats. The legislation is no nearer being passed after the double dissolution – the government doesn’t have the numbers to get it through a joint sitting.</p>
<p>Facing a hung parliament Turnbull would be juggling a bunch of crossbenchers while trying to cope with the critics in his own party, who will become more emboldened and strident. Members of the right, seeing him wounded, will want to get their way at every opportunity. They too would have to be stared down on occasion. Turnbull already has had to trade away much of his political persona – go much further and he becomes a hollow man.</p>
<p>Is Turnbull up to what he will face if his government survives? One senior colleague believes so. “I think it will be the making of him. He’ll become more conciliatory.” Other people doubt his temperament for it.</p>
<p>But Turnbull would have one big reason to try to make it work. His political reputation, at this moment, is trashed. He wouldn’t want that to be the way he goes down in Australian prime ministerial history.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62016/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The irony of stridently warning people against voting for minor players and then, all charm, ringing those players when you personally might need their votes may be lost on Malcolm Turnbull.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/619682016-07-03T06:44:51Z2016-07-03T06:44:51ZTurnbull stands solid against returning Abbott to frontbench<p>Malcolm Turnbull has slapped down the prospect of Tony Abbott returning to the ministry, as both he and Bill Shorten talk to crossbenchers who could determine their fate in a hung parliament.</p>
<p>“I am not proposing to bring back any particular individuals,” Turnbull told a news conference when asked about the pressure to put Abbott on the frontbench.</p>
<p>His hard line will further anger conservatives in his party, who are already starting to flex their muscles after the election debacle. The push for Abbott’s post-election return began during the campaign. But the belief in Turnbull quarters is that Abbott is toxic in the electorate.</p>
<p>Abbott kept his comments on Sunday careful, though they were pointed. Asked whether he would have won if he had been leader, he said: “I just won’t speculate on that. That is for people to reflect upon.”</p>
<p>He said there were “a lot of people who have got much to reflect upon as a result of what has happened”.</p>
<p>“It is not for me to start trying to sum up a long and difficult campaign,” he said. </p>
<p>“All we can do today is take stock, think, reflect, rather than just come out with a whole lot of snap judgements. I certainly won’t come out with snap judgements.”</p>
<p>Conservative senator Cory Bernardi said the election had been “a disaster for the Liberal Party. It shows that treating our base with contempt or dismissing their concerns in favour of Labor-lite policy has very real consequences.</p>
<p>"The conservative revolution will either begin within the Liberal Party in an attempt to save it, or will manifest itself outside the Liberal Party,” Bernardi said. There had been a small taste of the latter on Saturday, he said. </p>
<p>Turnbull continued to say he was “quietly confident” the Coalition would reach a majority in its own right. Turnbull said the postal and other votes still to be counted were likely to favour the Coalition.</p>
<p>Despite Turnbull’s prediction, a hung parliament is equally likely, with about a dozen seats in doubt.</p>
<p>Turnbull and Shorten confirmed they had spoken to some of the lower house crossbenchers, as each leader is anxious to open lines of communication in the event of a hung parliament.</p>
<p>Turnbull spoke to independents Andrew Wilkie and Cathy McGowan and to Nick Xenophon, leader of the Nick Xenophon Team (NXT). The NXT has won three Senate seats in South Australia and one lower house seat.</p>
<p>Xenophon said a hung parliament was “increasingly likely”, but would not say which side his team would favour. “We will support the side that can form a stable government and that can listen to us in respect of key concerns which we think reflect the wishes of middle Australia.”</p>
<p>The NXT is also in the hunt for the SA Liberal seat of Grey which Xenophon described as being on a “knife-edge”.</p>
<p>Shorten dismissed speculation in Labor circles that he could face a leadership challenge from Anthony Albanese. The leadership is automatically open after a defeat. “For myself, I have never been more certain of my leadership,” he said.</p>
<p>Both leaders played down the possibility of another election. </p>
<p>Saying he had spoken to some crossbenchers, Shorten said: “They want to be constructive, they don’t want Australia rushing back to the polls, I certainly don’t. I think we owe it to the Australian people to make the decision of the Australian people work.”</p>
<p>Turnbull said: “We are committed to ensuring that the parliament, as elected, will work effectively and constructively for the Australian people.”</p>
<p>Turnbull sought to reassure people ahead of the hiatus before a definite result is known.</p>
<p>“While the count will take a number of days, probably until the end of next week, I can promise all Australians that we will dedicate our efforts to ensuring that the state of the new parliament is resolved without division or rancour. The expectation is on all of us, especially me as prime minister, to get on with the job.”</p>
<p>When the count was completed the Coalition would work constructively “to ensure that we have a strong majority government and we will work across the crossbenchers as well, if we need to do so”, Turnbull said.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61968/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Malcolm Turnbull has slapped down the prospect of Tony Abbott returning to the ministry, as both he and Bill Shorten talk to crossbenchers who could determine their fate in a hung parliament.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/607982016-06-09T11:34:37Z2016-06-09T11:34:37ZGrattan on Friday: In Conversation with Nick Xenophon<p>The Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) is to this election what the Palmer United Party (PUP) was to the 2013 one. It is potentially the next big new thing in the Senate.</p>
<p>PUP in 2013 won three Senate seats – in Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia – and one in the House of Representatives. NXT, on current polling, is set for at least three South Australian senators, including Xenophon himself, who has been in federal parliament since 2008.</p>
<p>Xenophon says NXT has a “fighting chance” of Senate wins elsewhere “given some national polls showing support between 3-5%”, although ABC election analyst Antony Green doubts this. But Green gives it “a good chance” in the SA House of Representatives Liberal seat of Mayo.</p>
<p>On the basis of its likely SA Senate numbers alone, NXT – like PUP before it – would have a significant slice of the balance of power in the upper house.</p>
<p>PUP’s seats were gained thanks in very large part to Clive Palmer’s money, which financed a massive advertising blitz. PUP surfed on the disillusionment of many voters with the major parties.</p>
<p>NXT is a product of the extraordinary personal popularity of Xenophon, who in the 2013 election – a normal half-Senate poll – won nearly two Senate quotas.</p>
<p>NXT is also tapping into the discontent in the electorate, which is at a high point. This week’s Newspoll showed 15% support for “others” – the category covering parties other than the Coalition, Labor and the Greens, as well as independents.</p>
<p>In SA, hit hard by the decline of manufacturing, Xenophon’s protectionist and populist platform resonates strongly. He is pitching as a man of the centre who could negotiate with a Coalition or Labor government. He describes his platform as “not ideological” – rather, it is “about solving problems”.</p>
<p>He will not say which side NXT would opt for if it were a player in a hung parliament – which could only happen if it had representation in the lower house.</p>
<p>In an interview with The Conversation, Xenophon rejects the proposition this refusal is a cop out, with several defences. “We haven’t seen all the policies of the major parties,” he says, and “[you’d] need to take into account who the other crossbench members of the lower house would be”. He argues it would be necessary to talk with the major parties to determine their attitude on key issues. </p>
<p>Finally, he insists there’s only a 0.0001% chance of a hung parliament. Xenophon expects a Coalition win even if Bill Shorten received a majority of the popular vote.</p>
<p>The Liberals hope a re-elected Turnbull government would find NXT reasonable to deal with in the Senate. Xenophon says: “I want to be pragmatic and constructive with whomever forms government.” But he indicates he’d extract his pound of flesh. He’d use his clout to stand up for manufacturing, such as fighting for the embattled Arrium steelworks in Whyalla.</p>
<p>He has given support to the Coalition’s proposed company tax cut only up to a A$10 million turnover threshold. He’d seek to block legislation to implement the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. John Howard this week drew a parallel between Xenophon and Pauline Hanson on trade, which Xenophon rejected as mudslinging.</p>
<p>When the question of a government having a mandate for its program is put to him, Xenophon counters by pointing to the Senate’s mandate. He says the upper house is there for the states and as “a bulwark against excesses of executive power”.</p>
<p>He notes a key difference with the United States where “they, it seems, have this incessant deadlock”. In Australia, “if worst comes to worst, and I’m hoping it won’t be the case, there is a deadlock provision that can be dealt with in terms of a double dissolution”. </p>
<p>He immediately realises the political danger in that comment – the voters wouldn’t want another double-dissolution election – and stresses the rarity of double dissolutions. Even so, his answer continues to nag at him after the interview.</p>
<p>PUP fell apart very quickly because Palmer was an impossible leader and his senators a disparate set of individuals with little in common. Xenophon is confident the same wouldn’t happen to NXT – although when he was in the SA parliament and a running mate was elected late in the piece, the relationship didn’t end well. He points out he’s long known and worked with the two SA candidates expected to be elected to the Senate – one just missed out getting in last time.</p>
<p>In Mayo, located in the picturesque Adelaide Hills, the luck has fallen NXT’s way. Incumbent MP Jamie Briggs had to resign from the ministry late last year over an incident in a Hong Kong bar involving a female public servant. NXT candidate Rebekha Sharkie is a former staffer of Briggs. When the Hong Kong matter came out she recalled from her time in his office that “there were things said that were misogynist in nature”.</p>
<p>Mayo has gone down to the line before, when in 1998 it nearly fell to Democrat candidate, singer John Schumann. A ReachTEL poll done in mid-May had the Liberals on 39.6%, NXT at 23.5%, Labor 18.3% and Greens 10.7%. Whatever happens in the end NXT has Liberals nervous about the seat. The Xenophon forces have even put Industry Minister Christopher Pyne under pressure in Sturt, though he is expected to be safe.</p>
<p>Xenophon spent two days in Mayo this week. On Wednesday, as he set out for the second day, he looked tired and stressed. He’s normally fairly harried but the strain of carrying a party on his shoulders is obvious.</p>
<p>At a meeting of about 40 in Lobethal, one of the many German-settled towns in SA, his reservations about the TPP went down well with his audience. He told a questioner who asked about preferences that NXT would run an open ticket in Mayo. His well-used joke that when NXT was renamed sometime in the future he’d really like to call it the “at least we’re not as bad as the others party” prompted the laugh it was inviting.</p>
<p>Xenophon is anxious to claim that NXT is not all about him. He says adopting a new, less personal name before the election would have been all too hard in terms of recognition, and expensive. But of course the party IS all about him. If he did not enjoy such personal popularity it would not exist, let alone be emerging as a likely significant player in the new Senate.</p>
<p>It is one of those parties almost certain to be a relatively short-term phenomenon in the Australian political firmament. On the balance of probabilities even if all goes well, it would be unlikely to survive much beyond the political career of its founder. The question is what it will do and can achieve while it lasts.</p>
<p><em>Below is an edited transcript of The Conversation’s interview with Nick Xenophon recorded in his Adelaide office on Wednesday, June 8.</em></p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/h7i43-6003b1?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/h7i43-6003b1?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe>
<p><strong>Michelle Grattan</strong>: Nick Xenophon, how many seats do you think you can win in the Senate? And do you think you’ve got a chance of a house seat?</p>
<p><strong>Nick Xenophon</strong>: I can only tell you what the polls are saying, and the polls are saying voter support’s at around 20% in South Australia. Let’s see what happens between now and election day because I expect there will be a massive onslaught by the major parties. </p>
<p>When the major parties are talking about preferencing each other ahead of my team, which is a party firmly in the political centre, that would obviously affect our chances. But, at this stage, if you believe the polls, three Senate seats in South Australia and a fighting chance in the other states, given some national polls which show support between 3% and 5%.</p>
<p>And in the lower house, again, I know of one poll in Mayo, another in Sturt, which shows us coming second to the Coalition’s sitting members. So, you’d have to think that there would be a chance there, particularly in Mayo, where there does seem to be quite a strong level of support for Rebekha Sharkie.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Newspoll is showing a very high level of voter support for so-called “others” – that is, those other than the Coalition, Labor, and the Greens. Why do you think this is so?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Because I think people are fed up with the cosy Coles-Woolies duopoly of the major parties; that they feel it is a case of Tweedledum and Tweedledee; that after seeing the so-called leaders’ debate a couple of Sundays ago, it almost felt like the Seinfeld election – an election about not much at all. </p>
<p>And, I think that there is a real hunger to fill that vacuum, where it seems politicians have learnt their lines by rote in terms of the major parties, and there just doesn’t seem to be that connectiveness to the concerns of Australians – particularly on issues such as gambling, on jobs, on free-trade agreements and on issues of government accountability.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Just absolutely in a nutshell, how would you summarise your platform?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> A platform from the political centre that is not ideological, that is about solving problems; where the three core principles, I think, are also a litmus test about good government in this country: in terms of predatory gambling, whether it’s pokies or online, about Australian-made and Australian jobs, which brings in the role that successive Australian government have played in not negotiating free-trade agreements well, and about government transparency and accountability. </p>
<p>The fact that senator Conroy’s office was raided two-and-a-half/three weeks ago indicates that neither parties are willing to take on those official secrets provisions in the Crimes Act that really stymie material that’s in the public interest reaching the public without fear of people going to jail.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Do you think that the last Senate was dysfunctional?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> No, the last Senate was a Senate that had to be considered also in the context of the Abbott government’s policies. The 2014 budget was a shocker. It was full of broken promises. It wasn’t a budget that was so much about a mandate, it was about a reverse mandate. There was never a mandate to do what they wanted to do to Medicare, to young job-seekers, to universities. </p>
<p>But, people forget that the crossbench did support the government in terms of policies in respect of abolishing the carbon tax, abolishing the mining tax, dealing with border protection issues in a way that would make sure that the people-smuggling trade wouldn’t start up again. And also Direct Action as an alternative mechanism to deal with carbon pollution. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You look like you’ll have a fair share of the balance of power in a new Senate. How aggressively are you willing to use that share of the balance of power? And do you accept that a government does have a mandate for its main programs?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well I’m not an aggressive person, but I will be forthright and I’ve been upfront in terms of my priorities. I do not want Australian manufacturing to wither and die – which is really one of the issues that this election needs to be about. </p>
<p>I want to do everything I can to make sure that the Arrium Steelworks in Whyalla, the last remaining major manufacturer of structural steel in this country, thrives and prospers – that it gets out of administration and becomes a strongly viable facility. Without structural steel in this country, you actually lose all the steel-fabrication businesses. In terms of the second part of your question …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> On mandates …</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> On mandates. Well, governments have a mandate to introduce legislation. The Senate has a mandate to scrutinise that legislation and I don’t say that flippantly. I say that in the context that there are many hundreds of thousands of Australians that vote differently between the lower house and the upper house because under our Constitution, under our system of government, the Senate is there to represent the states. It’s also there under its proportional representation system to be a bulwark against excesses of executive power.</p>
<p><strong>MG</strong> But, nevertheless, the overwhelming number of voters are voting for the government compared to voting for the crossbenchers. So shouldn’t the government’s mandate override the Senate’s mandate?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, not if you’re campaigning on something completely contrary. </p>
<p>I mean, if South Australians are voting for me, and other Australians are voting for the [Nick Xenophon] Team to do something about predatory gambling, about Australian-made and Australians jobs, about government accountability and transparency, we’ve got an obligation to our supporters. </p>
<p>So, the great thing about the Australian political system compared to the US – where they seem to have this incessant deadlock because their system of government is quite different, even though our Senate has been modelled, to a large extent, on the US Senate – is that, if worst comes to worst, and I’m hoping it won’t be the case, there is a deadlock provision that can be dealt with in terms of a double dissolution. </p>
<p>Now, I don’t expect that that will happen again. I think that double dissolutions need to be something that happen very, very rarely in our system and this is our first double dissolution for over a generation. So I think I would not be doing my job for the people that support me and my team unless we stood up for what we believe in and have campaigned on.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> I don’t think people voting for you would want you to bring on another double dissolution.</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Absolutely not, absolutely not, and I’m just making that clear. But I’m saying that I think the government … we have that check and balance in the system. </p>
<p>I supported the ABCC [Australian Building and Construction Commission] legislation going through to a second reading vote – unlike most of my crossbench colleagues, and unlike the majority of the Senate. I want to be pragmatic and constructive with whomever forms government.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now, you’ve criticised aspects of free-trade agreements. Would you try to alter or stop legislation for the TPP [Trans-Pacific Partnership] when it comes up?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Look, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is something that neither the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump, nor the presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, want. </p>
<p>When both major parties in the US say they will not support the TPP, then why are we going down this path? I am not against free-trade agreements, but I am against trade agreements that are negotiated badly that are not in the national interest.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So you would try – just assuming that that legislation did come up; that it somehow did get through in America – you would try to stop it here?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, I couldn’t support it based on its current provisions. I think they have been negotiated badly. They’ve been negotiated in secrecy. </p>
<p>We need to look at the American system where the Congress, where the Senate has a role, before these agreements are finalised. These agreements are presented to the Parliament of Australia, to be effectively rubber-stamped. That’s not a good system.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Just to be absolutely clear – if you are able to, you would stop it?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Yes.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now, John Howard this week suggested there were some parallels between you and Pauline Hanson. Now I know you pushed this off and you said: “thanks John, for the publicity”. But what is your substantive answer to that allegation?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, Michelle, my difficulty is that I don’t want to give Pauline Hanson any oxygen and I’ll try to keep my answer short. I reject her attitudes on migration, on race, on religion. I think that they are incredibly destructive. </p>
<p>I support well-negotiated free-trade agreements that are in our national interests. I believe that what Ms Hanson is proposing is not a solution to our nation’s problems and that her views on migration, on race, on religion, and particularly on Islam, are quite repugnant. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Everyone agrees that you’ll get two more senators in from South Australia, as well as yourself. So can you just tell us briefly who are these people who will be coming in?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Stirling Griff is someone that I’ve known for the best part of 20 years, when he was head of the Retail Association of South Australia. He was in fact the only business leader that came out and supported me opposing privatisation of electricity assets because it wasn’t well-thought-out. It was in direct breach of a government promise by the then-Olsen Liberal government. </p>
<p>We’ve got to know each other very well over the years. He has my full trust and support. He is a terrific bloke to work with. He’s bunkered down as the campaign director doing the same sort of ridiculous hours that I’m doing at the moment. And I really want him to get elected because he just missed out last time because of preference deals that the major parties and minor parties cobbled together, which saw Family First elected on Labor Party preferences. </p>
<p>So, a party to the right of the Liberal Party was elected on Labor Party preferences, which I thought was a spiteful decision made by the Labor Party to reduce the influence of what I stand for. </p>
<p>Skye Kakoschke-Moore, she’s number three on the ticket. She has worked as my senior advisor for a number of years. She actually put her hand up without me knowing. She went through a process to apply, to be a candidate, as did many other people around the country and in the state. And she went through it with flying colours. </p>
<p>I worked with Skye closely for the best part or over five years. She is well-respected by both sides of politics that have worked with her. She has a great grasp of policy detail and she will be a terrific addition to the Senate as well.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Even though you know these people well, do you think that there’s any danger that the team could, over the longer term, fragment in the way we saw the Palmer United team fragment?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> No, for a whole range of reasons. </p>
<p>First, the structure of the party is different. I believe the way it has been operated has been very consultative. It is a very cohesive structure. </p>
<p>The other thing is that there’s this attack on me that it is personality-based politics. Well, I said on the first day when the team was launched [that] it was called the Nick Xenophon Team, because to call it something else would have cost a fortune to re-badge the group – a fortune that we don’t have. </p>
<p>And, after this election, assuming there are others that join me in the federal parliament, I want to change the name to something else.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> To what?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, Michelle, I’ve speculated publicly that I like the name “at least we’re not as bad as the others’ party”, but I don’t know if I’ll get the numbers on that. I think we will change it to something else. The Michelle Grattan Movement appeals to me but I don’t think we’ll get that through either. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But, look, it is a personality-based party. How can you possibly claim anything else?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> No, it’s because people know me, and there are people that are running that …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And you are a very good vote-winner.</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> You call me a vote-magnet. I’ve never heard that before, so I think I should be flattered, but …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But you can’t deny that this party is around personality and if you quit politics in two years, five years – there wouldn’t be a party.</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> You know the great consumer advocated Ralph Nader once said the function of genuine leadership is to create more leaders, not more followers. And what I’m trying to do is to have like-minded people, people from the political centre, that actually are passionate about Australia’s future, that want to find non-ideological solutions to the nation’s problems, to step up and come forward, as they have, to get elected to the parliament, which I hope will happen after the next election, and to make an ongoing contribution.</p>
<p>This is much bigger than just me. And that’s why you’ll see the group – the party – morphing into something else after this election – and that’s a good thing. So, that seems to debunk this personality-cult politics, which is both bemusing and disappointing. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> If you got a lower house seat and if there were a hung parliament, you’ve said you’d negotiate with both sides. You won’t say which side that you would favour supporting to be in government. Isn’t that a bit of a cop-out though? Aren’t you just trying to avoid saying to voters, “well I would go with the Libs or I would go with Labor”?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> It’s not a cop-out at all. How can it be a cop-out if we haven’t seen all the policies of the major parties, if it is a hypothetical …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But we have seen the policies, we will have seen the policies …</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, they’re still rolling them out. And in the highly unlikely event of a hung parliament, you need to take into account who the other crossbench members of the lower house would be. </p>
<p>It would be necessary to sit down and talk to the major parties to see what their attitudes would be on a number of key issues, and for me to indicate which side I favour – and I genuinely don’t favour either – would be a very silly thing to do in terms of a negotiating position. </p>
<p>I would almost be like some of the trade negotiators for some of our free-trade deals which I don’t think were negotiated very well.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> At a personal level, what sort of relationship do you have with Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, I’ve known Malcolm Turnbull longer than I’ve known Bill Shorten. I had a fair bit to do with Malcolm Turnbull as opposition leader when we worked on an alternative emissions trading scheme through Frontier Economics, which I thought was a very good exercise – [it] got done quite well. [I] respect Malcolm. He’s very charming and affable. </p>
<p>Bill Shorten – I’ve had a bit to do with, when he as a minister in the Gillard government. And we get on fine. It’s a case of not being able to spend much time with either leader because we’re all busy. </p>
<p>But the relationship with both men is, I think, very constructive and cordial. I like both of them at a personal level. I’m willing to work with either of them, but I still think that it is a 0.0001% chance that there will be a hung parliament.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Are you saying that partly because you know that people would be a bit more wary of voting for your party if they thought that that was making it more likely that there will be a hung parliament?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> No, I’m saying it because I cannot see how the Coalition with 90 seats out of 150 in the lower house, in the House of Representatives, is going to lose anything more than seven to 10 seats.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> So, you think they’ll win?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Yes, I do. I think Bill Shorten will make some inroads. I think he’s been campaigning quite well – but as is Malcolm Turnbull.</p>
<p>And I think we may have a 1998 situation where the Coalition loses some skin and loses a number of seats and that the ALP might even win the popular vote. They might get 51% of the popular vote but still fall a fair degree short of the number of seats they need.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now finally, you came in on a platform of fighting gambling. And now you stand on the brink of having a great deal of power in the Senate. And yet, you haven’t been able to deliver on that fundamental original platform. Why is that? And do you think you could deliver in the next term?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, it’ll be on my tombstone: “here rests the no-pokies guy”. It’ll always be at the core of what I do because gambling policy is a litmus test of good government. The fact that governments, particularly state governments, are willing to sacrifice their citizens for gambling taxes when we’ve got the highest level of gambling losses per capita in the world is very telling.</p>
<p>And the pernicious influence of the gambling lobby, which I understand is now making big donations to the major parties that attempt to thwart me and the Greens, is interesting. </p>
<p>So, the simple answer is that I’ve continued to be an advocate for those who have gambling problems. That’s behind-the-scenes work that people don’t see. I’ll continue to agitate for this. But I believe that with other like-minded people joining me, we will be able to achieve so much. At the moment, I’m one voice out of 226 …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Well, you did have Andrew Wilkie …</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> And I want to make that clear. Andrew Wilkie, the Greens, other crossbenchers have been absolutely terrific on this issue, but if there’s more …</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But nothing much has been achieved?</p>
<p><strong>NX:</strong> Well, in a democracy, you never give up to change bad legislation, to bring about legislative reforms that will be in the public interest. So, I’m not giving up. Much to the chagrin of those in the gambling lobby, I’ll continue at this even if I wasn’t in the parliament. I’ll continue to be an agitator on this issue.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Nick Xenophon, thanks very much for talking with The Conversation today.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60798/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Nick Xenophon Team is to this election what the Palmer United Party was to the 2013 one. It is potentially the ‘next big new thing’ in the Senate.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/605272016-06-05T12:34:50Z2016-06-05T12:34:50ZMajor parties have a lot to answer for in the drift to minor players<p>For those who might feel this election campaign will never end, it is worth revisiting why the voters are enduring eight weeks rather than the normal five.</p>
<p>Calling a double dissolution – the specific circumstances of which made this length of campaign necessary – was all about minimising pesky crossbenchers in the Senate.</p>
<p>The blocked industrial relations legislation was the formal reason. But the motive was to get a more amenable upper house, though the Coalition was never going to win a majority there. In this quest, the government changed the Senate voting rules, to boost the chance of holding out “micro” players.</p>
<p>But it has all got rather messy.</p>
<p>In a double dissolution, as distinct from an election for half the Senate, the quota is small enough to open the gate for “micros” even under the new voting system.</p>
<p>And public disillusionment with the major parties is such that the trend for people to support minor players, including the Greens, shows no prospect of abating. </p>
<p>The latest Newspoll has only “other parties and independents” increasing their support in the past fortnight. </p>
<p>One sign of the disillusionment is the high level of support for the Nick Xenophon Team in South Australia. Xenophon, an absolute vote magnet, appears likely to get at least three senators including himself, which would be a substantial slice of the non-Green Senate crossbench.</p>
<p>Goodness knows who else will comprise that crossbench, which ABC election analyst Antony Green predicts could be about the same size – but with a different composition – as in the last parliament when it was eight.</p>
<p>If the government is returned it would regard the Xenophon Team as potentially easier to deal with than some of the previous crossbenchers. But this could be quite complicated in practice. Xenophon is running a very populist agenda which he would presumably try hard to deliver on. Also, being leader of a group is rather different from his previous role of acting as an individual senator.</p>
<p>While Xenophon is not another Clive Palmer, the fragmentation of the Palmer United Party shows what can happen in a disparate group.</p>
<p>The government is deeply worried about Xenophon’s pulling power in South Australia, including in the lower house seat of Mayo, held by former minister Jamie Briggs who had to quit the ministry after an incident abroad involving a public servant. The Liberal jitters come despite the billions of dollars the government has promised to the state.</p>
<p>As the polls stay more or less level, the talk of a possible hung parliament inevitably increases.</p>
<p>On Saturday, Turnbull, campaigning in Adelaide, made a strong appeal for people not to use their vote to protest.</p>
<p>“A vote for anyone other than my Coalition team is a vote for chaos. It is a vote for returning to the Gillard days, the Green-Labor-independent alliance.</p>
<p>"Every single vote for Nick Xenophon, the independents or Greens or Labor brings us closer to Bill Shorten and the Greens running Australia.</p>
<p>"So now is not the time for a protest vote or a wasted vote; it is time to use your vote carefully, to prevent the chaos of a hung parliament – a hung parliament that would bring government and our economic transition to a grinding halt, costing your jobs and your future.”</p>
<p>A hung parliament is only a possibility. A Senate that would be difficult for a re-elected Turnbull government is a probability if not a certainty. The question is how difficult. </p>
<p>If Turnbull is re-elected but the new Senate is not an improvement for the Coalition over the old one, the double dissolution will have achieved little, notwithstanding that the government would be able – presuming it had a majority of the whole parliament – to get the industrial relations legislation through a joint sitting.</p>
<p>Whatever the precise composition of the Senate a re-elected Coalition would have to find a way of working with it more effectively than happened during the last term. This would be the challenge of “winning the peace”, as one government man puts it.</p>
<p>There is another, more difficult and longer-term challenge to which both Coalition and Labor should turn their minds after this election. </p>
<p>One reason – not the only one – that people are registering protest votes is that they are so alienated from the whole political process. They are protesting not just against a specific government – a traditional reason for a protest vote – but against how politics operates. And this has a lot to do with how the Coalition and Labor have conducted themselves over a long period. </p>
<p>If the major parties want to stem the drift to a larger protest vote, they need to treat the voters and the democratic process with more respect and a lot less cynicism.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/xg876-5fd09a?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/xg876-5fd09a?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/88dj6-5fd20e?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/88dj6-5fd20e?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60527/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
For those who might feel this election campaign will never end, it is worth revisiting why the voters are enduring eight weeks rather than the normal five. Calling a double dissolution – the specific circumstances…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/580112016-04-18T14:08:18Z2016-04-18T14:08:18ZTurnbull looks like a sprinter but is in a marathon<p>When the politicians arrived in Canberra for their special parliamentary session, it was obvious everyone wanted to do what was necessary for a July 2 election, and do it quickly.</p>
<p>Instead of taking weeks to consider the industrial relations legislation, the Senate by dinnertime Monday had given the government its second double-dissolution trigger, by rejecting the resurrection of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC).</p>
<p>Then the legislation to scrap the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, which the government only introduced on Monday morning, passed both houses in the day.</p>
<p>Government and opposition have been priming for weeks for the July 2 double dissolution. The pivotal crossbenchers, who held the election in their hands, had variously decided a double dissolution was in their interests or resigned themselves to the political oblivion it will bring.</p>
<p>With the government’s support uncomfortably low and in danger of further erosion without a circuit-breaker, Malcolm Turnbull has every interest in getting to the polls ASAP. After the build-up, it would have been awkward if the Senate had capitulated and the election had had to be rescheduled some months on.</p>
<p>Labor, with the numbers to defeat the ABCC bill, had the motive not to delay. It didn’t want many days of well-aired debate about union bad behaviour.</p>
<p>As it was, Labor embarrassed itself on Monday, thanks to the extraordinary attack by its deputy Senate leader Stephen Conroy on Governor-General Peter Cosgrove.</p>
<p>Conroy’s comparison of Cosgrove’s proroguing the parliament with John Kerr’s sacking of Gough Whitlam was absurd as well as offensive. Cosgrove acted, as he properly should have, on the advice of his prime minister, and Turnbull’s advice to him was perfectly in order under the Constitution. Kerr defied and deceived his prime minister.</p>
<p>We will remember 2016 as the endless election campaign.</p>
<p>We’ve been in a faux campaign for nearly a month – ever since Turnbull gave the Senate the ultimatum to pass the industrial relations bills or face the people.</p>
<p>A double dissolution was thought from the start to be Turnbull’s preference. Some crossbenchers say the government wasn’t serious about negotiating on the ABCC legislation, although certain demands were out of the ballpark even if the government had been receptive.</p>
<p>While we are now sure of the election’s date and nature, we’re still a while from its formal calling. That will follow budget week – probably on the weekend of May 7-8.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the government is going hell for leather not only to get the budget finalised but to deal with outstanding items including whatever it intends to say about the submarine contract, so vital to South Australian seats.</p>
<p>Budgets are always important but seldom quite as crucial as the one that Treasurer Scott Morrison will deliver on May 3.</p>
<p>It would sour the start of the formal campaign if it were off-key, got a thumbs-down from the media, and the public reacted negatively.</p>
<p>This week’s Newspoll indicated voters want an economically cautious budget. Asked what the priority of the next government should be, 39% said reduce spending to pay down debt, 26% said reduce spending to cut taxes, while 23% said increase spending on government programs.</p>
<p>But what people say when talking in a poll and how they react to specific measures can be quite different.</p>
<p>The government needs its budget to be seen as both responsible and robust. It has to satisfy the fiscal imperatives – and the rating agency Moody’s delivered a sharp warning about the dangers of debt last week. It should not be a do-nothing budget. Among other areas, eyes will be on tax, where initial sweeping ambitions have shrunk muchly.</p>
<p>With polling showing Turnbull has disappointed the hopes and expectations of many voters, he and his team can’t afford to do so again on May 3. No pressure, Scott Morrison, but you are headed into the test of your political life.</p>
<p>Despite the polls, most observers see Turnbull as favourite to win the election. But Shorten enters the coming weeks very well placed – an extraordinary turnaround given his earlier position.</p>
<p>Labor has been strategic and bold. It has not just released a body of policy but been willing to take risks with it. Ultimate judgements about those risks – especially whether it has gone too far on negative gearing – must wait.</p>
<p>But most significantly, Labor has been able to nail what has emerged as Turnbull’s vulnerability – his failure so far to articulate clearly what he stands for, to set out a course and hold to it. The opposition has developed a narrative about Turnbull’s lack of narrative.</p>
<p>The length and the unusual nature of this campaign, with its stages – pre-budget, then from budget to formal announcement, followed by the campaign proper – will require extreme stamina and steadiness from both Turnbull and Shorten. It will be hard to find enough content to fill all those weeks. Without sufficient content, there is the danger, especially for Turnbull, of wandering into quicksand.</p>
<p>It is not just the leaders’ standing as they go into a campaign that’s important. How the campaign evolves week by week can be decisive. Given Turnbull’s tendency to a discursive style, one would think a short sharp sprint might be safest. Instead he has to run a marathon.</p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/xdwwc-5e609a?from=yiiadmin" data-link="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/xdwwc-5e609a?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58011/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
When the politicians arrived in Canberra for their special parliamentary session, it was obvious everyone wanted to do what was necessary for a July 2 election, and do it quickly. Instead of taking weeks…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/578052016-04-14T20:48:15Z2016-04-14T20:48:15ZGrattan on Friday: Turnbull sees even a difficult new Senate as an opportunity for a fresh start<p>Malcolm Turnbull says bluntly that he expects the coming special Senate sitting to reject the industrial legislation. Labor’s Penny Wong indicates the opposition won’t be playing silly buggers by trying to delay the bills.</p>
<p>As parliamentarians prepare to return to Canberra next week, both sides just want to get to the double dissolution now regarded as virtually certain.</p>
<p>Employment Minister Michaelia Cash, with carriage of the legislation, has been catapulted centre stage just months after she was one of the three women promoted to cabinet when Turnbull became leader.</p>
<p>Experienced in industrial law from her solicitor days, Cash was in the small group at the Lodge the night Turnbull finalised his strategy to have parliament recalled, with the threat of a double dissolution if the Senate refused to pass the industrial relations bills.</p>
<p>One government source says Cash has “surprised on the upside” in her performance in the Turnbull ranks.</p>
<p>The bills at the centre of the double-dissolution play resurrect the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) and toughen trade union governance.</p>
<p>But recently added to the agenda for the special parliamentary session – though not relevant to the double dissolution – is the government’s move to scrap the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, following a new pay decision that small operators say would send many of them out of business.</p>
<p>This is also in Cash’s bailiwick. The government initially intended to put the ruling on hold until early next year, while promising that if re-elected it would abolish the tribunal. But then, sensing it could get the Senate numbers, it decided to push ahead at once with abolition. This adds to its anti union, pro small business election narrative.</p>
<p>While it is fairly confident it has the needed support, the government is also adopting a belt-and-braces approach by putting forward the delay option too.</p>
<p>It’s a different story with the industrial relations bills. Although the Registered Organisations legislation is already a double-dissolution trigger, it would not be beyond the bounds of possibility that the required six crossbenchers could be persuaded to support it with some compromises. But it is nearly impossible to see the coming weeks bringing a deal on the ABCC.</p>
<p>Anyway, the government has no incentive. The momentum is now so strong for a July 2 double dissolution that it would be quite awkward if the industrial legislation were passed, forcing Turnbull to back off and re-gear for a later normal election. In these circumstances extra time might harm rather than help him.</p>
<p>Yet the benefits of a double dissolution for Turnbull in terms of the Senate are debatable. ABC election analyst Antony Green calculates that, even with the recently reformed voting system, there is a strong prospect a re-elected Turnbull government would face <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/04/the-turnbull-governments-senate-position-would-be-little-better-after-a-double-dissolution.html">another potentially difficult upper house</a>.</p>
<p>“There are serious questions whether a double dissolution would be of any benefit to the government’s Senate position,” Green wrote. “A double dissolution is unlikely to deliver the Coalition more Senate seats than it currently holds. The government would still need the support of up to half a dozen crossbench senators to pass legislation.”</p>
<p>But the government takes the view that a new Senate, regardless of its crossbench component, would present a fresh start. It sees the present upper house as the “Abbott” Senate, afflicted by the former prime minister’s broken promises and fractured relationships. Turnbull could argue to a new Senate that his re-elected government had a mandate, and launch a charm offensive.</p>
<p>Cash is in the fortunate position that whatever happens to the industrial relations legislation, she won’t look bad.</p>
<p>If, contrary to all indications, the crossbench senators caved, it would be a victory for which she as negotiator would be able to claim some credit. If, as expected, they don’t, the government moves on to the double dissolution considered all along to be Turnbull’s preferred position.</p>
<p>Turnbull on Wednesday anticipated the industrial relations bills’ defeat: “every indication we have is that they will be rejected”. The Senate had voted against the ABCC once, and the Registered Organisations bill three times, he said. “So if the past is any guide to future performance then you would expect it wouldn’t be passed.”</p>
<p>Wong, Labor’s Senate leader, on Thursday confirmed Labor will not try to prevent the bills being considered, as some had speculated. “We will deal with these bills. We won’t be delaying,” she said. “If Malcolm Turnbull wants a double-dissolution election, we’re ready for an election.”</p>
<p>Turnbull’s tactic of the special sitting is not risk-free for him. The Coalition is limiting the dangers presented by multiple Question Times by having the lower house sit only two days next week and not at all the following one.</p>
<p>But Labor already has a boxful of ammunition for the lower house Question Times on Monday and Tuesday. The government is on the back foot in resisting a royal commission into the banks’ bad behaviour. More serious is this week’s assessment from Moody’s credit rating agency, ominously highlighting the debt issue – “a credit negative for Australia” – and contesting Treasurer Scott Morrison’s repeated insistence there is not a revenue problem.</p>
<p>Meanwhile at week’s end the hyperactive Cash was in Townsville, to deal with another issue on her crowded plate – the fallout for workers of the collapse of Clive Palmer’s Queensland Nickel.</p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/xdwwc-5e609a?from=yiiadmin" data-link="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/xdwwc-5e609a?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57805/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Malcolm Turnbull says bluntly that he expects the coming special Senate sitting to reject the industrial relations legislation. Labor’s Penny Wong indicates the opposition won’t try to delay the bills.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/576002016-04-11T14:09:53Z2016-04-11T14:09:53ZPalmer’s antics over Four Corners reinforce the message about how he operates<p>In his typical blustering manner, Clive Palmer, having refused every attempt to persuade him to participate in Monday’s ABC Four Corners – an expose of his controversial business affairs and overbearing political style – then demanded to appear live on the program.</p>
<p>Ahead of the airing both Palmer and Four Corners took to social media – in his case to complain, in its case to explain.</p>
<p>Palmer knew the program only did pre-recorded interviews. His outburst was just his latest attempt at bluff and bombast. But he did score an invitation to appear on Lateline immediately following Four Corners.</p>
<p>The Palmer story is one of the most remarkable in recent federal politics.</p>
<p>In the space of months in 2013 he built his Palmer United Party (PUP) from nothing. It won a Senate seat in each of Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia, as well as his own House of Representatives Queensland seat of Fairfax. A negotiated alliance also promised to bring Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party senator Ricky Muir into Palmer’s orbit.</p>
<p>Palmer’s electoral surge came from the combination of a huge spend on blitzkrieg advertising, and a larger-than-life personality who was a magnet for the media. Although he had been around politics all his life, Palmer was seen as the colourful, outspoken, frequently outrageous outsider.</p>
<p>When the new Senate commenced in July 2014, PUP had a commanding position within the eight-strong non-Green crossbench. It quickly made its voice felt in opposition to key measures from the 2014 Hockey budget. In October 2014 Palmer did a deal with the government to support its Direct Action climate policy in which the quid pro quo was the preservation of the Climate Change Authority.</p>
<p>But as suddenly as Palmer’s political empire appeared, it fell away. Jacqui Lambie and Glenn Lazarus became independents, in November 2014 and March 2015 respectively. The Muir alliance came to nothing. Only WA’s Dio Wang remains a PUP senator. Palmer, if he stands there again, will lose Fairfax. He is now seen in political terms as a joke or worse.</p>
<p>It’s little wonder Palmer wanted to create a diversion around Monday’s Four Corners, which documented his activities reaching back to the 1980s, with interviews that portrayed a man who has used and abused, courted and trashed, many of those he has dealt with in business and politics.</p>
<p>The most recent, and rawest, episode in his tumultuous business career is the collapse of Queensland Nickel, with the sacking of hundreds of workers. Palmer’s attempt to distance himself from responsibility, and the fact that more than A$20 million had been donated to PUP have increased the anger and rancour of former workers.</p>
<p>Four Corners said Palmer approved purchases worth millions of dollars while he was not a listed director of the company. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission is investigating whether he was a “shadow director” – someone who has the same obligations as a formal director. </p>
<p>The administrators’ report into Queensland Nickel is imminent.</p>
<p>Palmer told Lateline that he was not acting as a shadow director. He said Queensland Nickel was manager of a joint venture made up of two companies of which he owned 100%, and he was on the six-person joint venture management committee that approved expenditures. “We are talking about buying things over $500. We are not talking about the running of the company,” he said.</p>
<p>Despite his early insistence that he was retiring from business when he entered politics, Palmer never did so. And anyway, the controversies from his earlier business past would inevitably continue to dog him, put under a brighter spotlight when he became a national political figure.</p>
<p>Palmer brought his capricious business style to his political operations.</p>
<p>Lazarus told Four Corners that Palmer would “rant and rave”, berating and yelling, which amounted to “a form of bullying”. “It was Clive’s way or the highway.”</p>
<p>He treated his tyro senators as vassals. Dealing with personalities like Lambie and Lazarus, this was always likely to end in tears.</p>
<p>Politically, the disintegration of Palmer’s power is a tale of overreach containing the seeds of its own destruction.</p>
<p>But, though PUP may be a busted flush now, its spectacular rise is a salutary story about the way that enough money and publicity can make an extraordinarily potent political cocktail, at least for a while.</p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/7nrs8-5e34b0?from=yiiadmin" data-link="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/7nrs8-5e34b0?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57600/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
In his typical blustering manner, Clive Palmer, having refused every attempt to persuade him to participate in Monday’s ABC Four Corners – an expose of his controversial business affairs and overbearing…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/574842016-04-08T03:28:30Z2016-04-08T03:28:30ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on a royal commission into the banks<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WCUCSp6cYlI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Labor nosed ahead of the government in the latest Newspoll but Michelle Grattan tells Stephen Parker this won’t necessarily translate into an election loss for the Coalition.</p>
<p>The prospect of a double dissolution firmed as some of the Senate crossbenchers signalled their unwillingness to compromise on the government’s industrial relations legislation. </p>
<p>Against this backdrop, Malcolm Turnbull took a strong stand against ethical lapses in the banking sector, while Labor stood to announce a royal commission.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57484/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As Labor nosed ahead of the government in the latest Newspoll, Michelle Grattan tells Stephen Parker this won’t necessarily translate into an election loss for the Coalition.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraStephen Parker, Vice-Chancellor, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/573572016-04-06T08:11:45Z2016-04-06T08:11:45ZPolitics podcast: Glenn Lazarus on the government’s industrial relations legislation<p>Senators will return to Canberra later this month with the expectation that they will give final consideration to the government’s industrial relations legislation – unless they decide to refuse to consider it. Glenn Lazarus, whose approval the government may need if the bills are to have any hope of passing, tells Michelle Grattan he will not be bullied or blackmailed into giving his support. </p>
<p>Lazarus says that when he asked Malcolm Turnbull to turn the Australian Building and Construction Commission into a national corruption watchdog for all industries, the prime minister gave him a blank look. </p>
<p>The former Palmer United Party (PUP) senator also says that he has become a better politician as a result of leaving PUP and that no ministers had visited his office before his decision to walk away from the party.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57357/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Senators will return to Canberra later this month with the expectation that they will give final consideration to the government's industrial relations legislation.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.