Evaluating the Senate

Background Role of Upper houses in representative democracies is controversial - Why? They not peoples’ houses The may veto the will of the majority They are viewed as democratically obnoxious when they block lower house bills (frustrating the will of the majority) or irrelevant when they rubber stamp bills SO WHY HAVE ONE??? Indeed, Britain’s upper house is almost redundant, New Zealand never had one & Queensland abolished their’s in the 1920’s.

Why We Have a Senate Originally it was the Founding Fathers’ intention to preserve the sovereignty of the States by having a States’ House that could review Federal bills in the interests of the States. All States have equal representation – a feature that makes for a constitutionally guaranteed malapportionment for the Senate voting system The Senate has never acted as a States’ House – being from the beginning a “Party House”

The Senate During this period the Senate used the same electoral system as the House. A win in a state meant winning all 6 seats – a win at the next election meant all 12 senate seats This resulted in a strongly pro or anti government Senate majorities which meant a denial of minor party representation It was either a “rubber stamp” or a “hostile” Senate This reduced its value as a House of Review

The Senate Thus Senate failed to live up to its design intentions… It was quickly dominated by the parties and thus failed to act as a States’ House Its role as a House of Review was limited by the majoritarian electoral system

The Senate 1949 to the Present The electoral reform to Senate voting in 1949 brought Proportional Representation to the Senate Under this system, a candidate needs a quota [(number of valid votes / number of seats +1) + 1] – about 14.3% of the vote in a normal election & 7.7% in a double dissolution election, to win a seat. This is much easier to achieve than the 50%+1 required under Preferential Voting Thus minor party candidates and independents have a much higher chance of gaining seats in the Senate than in the House – and creates the possibility that such minors & independents may hold the balance of power

The Senate 1949 to the Present The first party to benefit from Proportional Representation was the Democratic Labor Party, which formed as a result of a split in the ALP. However, it failed to make effective use of its balance of power because it always voted against the ALP It took until 1981 for a minor party to emerge that adopted the strategy of deliberately seeking the Senate balance of power. That party was the Australian Democrats formed under the motto “keep the bastards honest” In 1980 the Liberal Government, under Fraser, lost control of the Senate to the ALP and Democrats who, if they voted together, could defeat a government bill

The Balance of Power Senate Thus, the new voting system and the willingness of minor parties to exploit it to gain a balance of power position has resulted in a revival of the Senate as a House of Review Why? – because the government in the lower house must negotiate with the party that holds the balance of power in order for its bills to pass into law. Thus bills are scrutinised and amended far more than in the past. This is good for the legislative function of parliament He balance of power has been held from 1981 to 2005 by the Democrats, Greens and independents such a Brian Harradine

The Senate’s Representative Function Strengths: Proportional Representation allows the representation of minority views and interests in parliament. It allows a more “mirror” form of representation. There are more indigenous and ethnic member Senators than MHRs It overcomes the “tyranny of the majority” criticism of single member systems

The Senate’s Representative Function Weaknesses: The Constitutional requirement for equal representation of the states means that the quota to win a Tasmanian seat is less than votes but to win a NSW seat needs votes – there is no “one vote one value” in the Senate – and its not possible without a referendum Senators don’t have a distinct electorate. Each electorate has 12 representatives – so who is actually your representative? Senate candidates are pre- selected by the parties’ central committees with little community input – so they’re often unknown to the voters. In the House’s single member electorates the local branch has an input in candidate selection

The Senate’s Debate Function The lack of executive dominance in the Senate means that debate is more wide ranging – because of the more diverse viewpoints, and less regimented – there is no gag, guillotine etc The major parties are still highly disciplined but minor party Senators (especially Democrats) are less tied to the “party line” Independents are free agents Question Time is more effective and debate is serious in the “non-government” time in the agenda

The Senate’s Debate Function The Senate’s committee system provides the parliament’s best investigative and deliberative venue All policy areas have a “Legislative Committee” and a “Reference Committee” Legislative Committees scrutinise legislation – fulfilling the “House of Review” function Reference Committees have a more general investigative role. Matters are “referred” to Reference Committees for investigation. In these committees the chair person is always a non-gov’t Senator & the Govt is in the minority

The Senate’s Debate Function Senate Committees have all the powers of the Senate and can… Force Government officials to give evidence – but not opinions Seek public submissions and travel to investigate issues Subpoena witnesses and demand documents Further, all proceedings, including witness statements etc, are covered by privilege By convention, Government responds to Reference Committee reports within 3 months of tabling

The Senate’s Debate Function Reference Committees are a link between the community and the Senate and allow the community to have its views aired in parliament Recent Reference Committees have reported on petrol pricing, global warming and refugee issues

Current Inquiries Community Affairs References Committee Workplace exposure to toxic dust Economics Legislation Committee Provision of the Trade Practices Amendment (National Access Regime) Bill 2005 Economics References Committee Inquiry into the possible links between household debt, demand for imported goods and Australia’s current account deficit

Other Issues of the Senate Since 1975 it has been accepted that the Senate has a “responsibility function” of sorts – although not as explicit as the that of the House The Senate has evolved to replace the executive dominated House as a defacto check on executive power. The use of “Senate Investigations” – a form of committee formed to scrutinise government action in an area of concern (eg Children Overboard) is an example It is now generally accepted, since 1975, that the Senate may “negotiate” money bills – thus giving it a lever of power over the government that it did not traditionally have

The New Senate