Independent Paul Osborne has registered a new political party called the Osborne Independent Group. Its main platform is to reform the system of self-government to put an end to the “”ridiculous, knee-jerk opposition” tactics that go with the two-party system. He wants a system to reflect Canberra’s unique position as a city state.
His move comes after the convener of the Save Our City Coalition, Jacqui Rees, announced her candidature for the Assembly, also citing a reform of the system as a major platform. Ms Rees said the review announced recently by the Liberal Party was a pre-election stunt and pointed to the unfulfilled promise of the Liberal Party to reform self-government made in the 1995 election campaign. She rightly pointed out that it was important to get all players involved in any reform process and that the Government’s review had been pushed without first consulting the assembly.
The Labor Party refuses to take part in the review. Opposition Leader Wayne Berry has pointed out that the Hare-Clark system has only had one election and needs a time to settle down.
In this term Chief Minister Kate Carnell has called for a reform to make self-government a bit more like a town council.
Of course, improvements could be made to the system of government in the ACT, but it is a mistake to blame short-comings in government upon the system of government; most of the short-coming can be blamed upon the quality of those elected. There would be short-comings no matter what system was in place.
It is also a mistake to blame the winding back of the funding of governmental functions in Canberra upon self-government itself, the system of self-government or the quality of the people elected. The federal parliament wound back that funding and it would have made no difference whether the ACT were ruled directly by a federal minister; run by a town council; had a single-member electorate system; or the present system.
The reform of self-government should be put into perspective. It is important, but not as important as getting quality candidates and policies. A disquieting thing about Mr Osborne’s position is that his new party is to campaign on the single issue of self-government reform. One can only hope that that still would leave the party’s candidates to develop a full range of policies individually. Even so, it would be an odd sort of party.
Other declared minority parties and independents like Ms Rees, Michael Moore, the Greens and the Democrats have promised a full range of policies.
There is an unnerving precedent to having candidates running under a change or abolish self-government banner.
A town council would not be much cheaper because the costs of governance (the Assembly and Executive) are a tiny fraction of the ACT Budget. It is not the money they spend on themselves that counts, but how they spend it on others. And they can spend it whether a town council or a state-type parliament.
If we are to be a town-council it would mean the federal government taking back at least education and health. It would also mean a federal minister having overall control, as the Minister for Local Government does in the states. In any event town councils in NSW do not have a very good record on competency or corruption.
And majority government from single-member constituencies does not have the checks and balances against abuse, complacency and arrogance.
The Hare-Clark system which has twice approved overwhelmingly by referendum provides for significant minority representation to prevent abuse by the majority without the expense of an upper house. This is combined by an active committee system which gives the Canberra population a direct pipeline into decision making.
Some non-structural changes may be worthwhile. In the meantime, voters should study candidates carefully.