Prime Minister John Howard has been in the Parliament for 27 years. He knows better than anyone that the House of Representatives has been dominated by the two major parties for more than 70 years. Few independents ever get elected. At present at the House contains just one Member who was elected as an independent and one other member who was elected as a Labor Member and resigned from the party to become an independent. Mr Howard knows better than most that virtually every vote taken in the House of Representatives is taken with each of the major parties holding to a particular position and against which they will brook no dissent. He knows also that the major issues facing Australia today that are debated in the House are ones of broad national concern – – things like education, health, tax, the environment and interest rates.
It was perplexing then to hear him at the weekend talking about the Aston by-election scheduled for July 14th. He did not suggest that the electors of Aston should vote for the Coalition candidate because the Coalition offered the best program for Australia nationally. rather, he treated us, at the Coalition’s official launch of the Aston campaign, to an analysis which had more relevance to 18th century Britain than to modern Australian political reality.
He said, “More and more people in Australia … are looking to have representatives who resonate and connect with their local communities. They are becoming increasingly impatient with political parties and political movements who believe they can move candidates around as though they were pieces on a chessboard. They want somebody who comes out of the district, they want somebody who feels for a district, and they want somebody who can represent that district in the national parliament.”
As it happens, the Liberals have a candidate, Chris Pearce, who is a local man. But so what? Does Mr Howard, or anyone else, imagine for a moment that, if elected, Mr Pearce would really be able to represent the people of Aston in the national parliament. He will vote in national parliament as the party whip tells him to vote. He will vote with his Coalition colleagues whatever his personal feelings on any matter and despite any genuine it local interest that conflicts with the Coalition’s party policy on what ever matter is being voted upon. And it is the same for the Labor Party.
Mr Howard may be right about voter desires for more concern about local matters, but he is being naive or disingenuous when he tells people that someone pre-selected into our two-party system has any chance of dealing with issues according to local concerns. At best the concern for localism translates into reality at local council level. Even at state level issues are decided according to party position rather than the local MP’s interpretation of the views of the people in the electorate he or she represents.
Small wonder people get disillusioned with the political process when that they are dished up this sort of twaddle. Why not honestly admit that in the national parliament Members are elected on the basis of their party affiliation and that issues are determined according to collective party will? At the weekend’s launch, Mr Howard sounded more as if he were launching a campaign for independent Peter Andren than that for a candidate tied to the Liberal Party.
Mr Howard is certainly right about people’s disillusion with the two-party system, but it is precisely the sort of reality-free .drivel that he spouted at the weekend that adds to this disillusion.