As the ACT Legislative Assembly enters an election year, the Liberal Party will miss the dynamism of Kate Carnell. Even if some of her electoral appeal has worn off. Mrs Carnell’s replacement in the Assembly was decided this week on a count-back of Mrs Carnell’s 1998 vote. The winner was Liberal Jacqui Burke. The lack of depth in the Liberal line-up was made clear when Chief Minister Gary Humphries preferred to have a four-member ministry rather than risk giving back-bencher Harold Hird or the newcomer Mrs Burke a ministry, however junior, and increasing it to five, as it was when Mrs Carnell was in the Assembly.
Mr Hird at least will get some relief from his load of committee work. The Assembly has prohibited ministers from serving on committees. Hitherto if the Liberals wanted representation on a committee only Mr Hird or Speaker Greg Cornwell were available.
Now Mrs Burke will be able to sit on committees.
Committee work is the unsung success of the Legislative Assembly, and indeed of self-government generally. Committee enable members of the community a great say in the government of the territory. They expose MLAs to a range of views and help MLAs understand issues. It is unfortunate that whichever party is in government will find it difficult to furnish both a ministry and committee representation. It is no solution to suggest that Ministers could also serve on committees. In a small jurisdiction like the ACT, they have their work cut out as it is, frequently having to deal with several portfolio areas. Moreover, it is not good practice to blur the lines between the Executive and the Legislature. Committee work is inherently a legislative function and forms a critical part of the questioning of the Executive, particularly the Estimates and Public Accounts Committees.
The solution must lie in more members, or more radically for the Chief Minister to be able to select Ministers from outside the Assembly altogether. The former has been greeted with derision by voters, but that is a knee-jerk reaction. Unfortunately, it has led to MLAs treating the question with utmost caution. That is probably needless. Though the idea is greeted with horror, the issue is not a vote-changing one, besides it would be neutralised as an election issue if all parties agreed to it. They should get on with it. The departure and replacement of Kate Carnell this week has highlighted the difficulty of having such a small Assembly.
Machinery of Government aside, just the population increases since the first self-government Assembly met in 1989, would warrant an increase from 17 to 21.
The other possibility of enabling the Chief Minister to select non-Assembly Members as Ministers is the American approach. It widens the skill and experience base from which the Chief Minister can choose, but would this mean that the Chief Minister should be elected separately, Canberra-wide? It is too great a departure from Australian political tradition to be considered when a simpler solution is at hand.
It seems the Government and Assembly will not deal with the question in this election year, which is a shame. But perhaps the experience of an Assembly with less capacity than the past two years will tip the argument in favour of an expansion, at least outside the group of people totally alienated by the political process.
The other thing highlighted by Mrs Burke’s elevation is the importance of voters in taking care about the way they order their preferences at voting time. One never knows when the ballots might be taken out again for another round.