The Senate is now deadlocked over the GST. Indeed, it is likely to be deadlocked on many issues until July 1 next year.
The deadlock was completed when the Government decided after the election that it would accept the vote of the former Labor senator turned independent, Mal Colston.
As things stand in the Senate of 76 seats, the Government has 37. With Senator Colston, it has 38, exactly half the seats. Under Senate rules, a tied vote results in any motion or legislation being rejected. Labor has 29 seats, the Democrats seven, the Greens two and Independent Senator Brian Harradine make up the remaining 38 seats. If they vote together they, too, form half the seats and can block any motion or legislation.
On the GST, the Senate, at least for now, has aligned along those two even blocks. This week a move by Labor for an inquiry into the GST was blocked by the Government and Senator Colston. But though they have the power to block, they do not have the power to initiate action or pass legislation.
In short, to get legislation through, the Government needs in addition to Senator Colston, the vote of Senator Harradine, or the Democrats, or the Greens or Labor.
On the GST, Senator Harradine is demanding an inquiry, as are the Democrats. Labor is indifferent to an inquiry because it is opposed to a GST altogether. The Democrats are opposed to a GST on food and some other items and an inquiry is unlikely to change that.
Ultimately it means the Government must compromise with Senator Harradine and/or the Democrats.
The danger of dealing only with Senator Harradine is that the inquiry that he wants might take until beyond July 1 when the composition of the Senate gets worse for the Government as the new senators elected at the last election take their seats.
In the new Senate the Democrats will have nine senators and can form a majority to initiate or block by siding with either the Government or the Labor Opposition. It will in effect sideline Senator Harradine, the remaining Green senator (Bob Brown) and the One Nation senator (Heather Hill). Senator Colston was not re-election.
The Government might hope it can craft a GST majority by agreeing to whatever inquiry Senator Harradine wants and then getting his vote for a GST in perhaps a slightly watered down form or with some sweeteners, perhaps a toffee apple of some kind for Tasmania. That path is fraught with risk. Even if the inquiry finished before July 1, there is no predicting what Senator Harradine might do.
The Government may as well face the post-July 1 reality now and engage in serious negotiation with the Democrats over the GST and, for that matter, other important legislative items such as Telstra and unfair dismissals.
The price of accepting Senator Colston’s vote might well be a high one for some very short-term gain. Sure, the Government has for now avoided an inquiry on Labor’s term, but ultimately it must have one. But on key economic and industrial legislation, the Government is likely to find Senator Harradine, who has a union and Labor background, no less likely to give ground than the Democrats, so the Colston vote as an initiator remains worthless. The morality of accepting his vote is also questionable. Its excuse that a Labor MP, Carmen Lawrence, also faces charges would carry more weight if it had not taken the moral high ground before the election saying it would not accept his vote because of the charges he faces on travel expenses. At present it looks like very flexible morality.
The other element is that Senator Colston was elected as a Labor senator. If he retired ill or died, either of which is a possibility given his state of health, he would be replaced, under constitutional requirements, by a Labor appointee. Senator Colston was elected under a party banner without which he would be nowhere in a sense that cannot be said of a Member of the House of Representatives which has a different voting system which highlights individuals to a greater degree than in the Senate.