When to crack the party whip

First, we would likely see a higher quality of debate. At the moment, people who disagree with a proposal argue it out in the party room. However few in the public hear of this debate, let alone get to see it. So what we often end up with is set piece debates for public consumption, with people trotting out criticisms of the other side of politics, instead of arguments in favour of the bill in the house.

Would it be harder for parties to impose discipline? Maybe, but maybe not. By giving MP’s more flexibility on some issues it provides an outlet for party dissidents. And it means the leader can expect full discipline on “three line” votes.

Given Australia’s tradition of high party discipline on both sides of the House, this system may seem unrealistic. However one party moving to this system would see very significant pressure from the back bench for the other party to follow suit.

Few countries in the world have the rigid system of party political discipline that Australia has. Politicians in America, for example, would refuse to serve in such a system.

A dose of cross party ill discipline could be just the shot in the arm that Australian democracy needs.