Imagining representative democracy

The upside would be a legislature which actually legislates - where members and senators debate, discuss, negotiate and compromise.

Yes, I thought this was a pipedream too, until I saw them actually doing it, on RU486.

OK, enough pipedreams, and on to practicalities. Why doesn’t this happen already?

Well, the first reason is authority. It takes a long time to become prime minister. Our current prime minister - a treasurer under Fraser, twice opposition leader, and once an election loser - waited a prodigiously long time. The last thing he wants, having eventually won office, is to have his own backbench vet his legislation - except, of course, this already happens in the party room and the parties’ backbench committees.

Last year’s backbench revolt over refugee detention, for instance, spilled into the public arena and made for some headlines, but hardly threatened the government. Would it have mattered if government MPs had been able to express their views in the parliament itself?

The second reason is ambition. The prime minister hands out ministerial positions, so any backbencher who hopes to climb the greasy pole had better just show up for divisions and stay out of the headlines. Rebels, on the other hand, not only fail to make the ministerial grade - their pre-selections are put in doubt. But these devastating consequences for relatively obscure acts of “disloyalty” are really linked to the third reason for the current state of affairs - habit.

Because floor crossing, or members criticising their own party position, is so rare, it becomes newsworthy. Honestly, was Barnaby Joyce’s floor crossing last year newsworthy for any reason other than the rarity of the event? The legislation was hardly worthy of blanket media coverage. Far more important bills receive far less media attention.

Did his action have any serious or long term implications for the government? Not that one could see, even a few short months later.

So why all the fuss?  Because it was rare. And, while the habit of blind party obedience remains intact, floor crossing will remain rare and therefore newsworthy.

One gets the sense, though, that it wouldn’t take much to kick the habit. If there was a series of floor-crossings on relatively minor bills, would the second be as newsworthy? Or the fifth? And would the tenth even be reported?

The message for backbenchers, then, is simple. True parliamentary democracy is there for the making and taking. Those who commented in their RU486 speeches on their pride in such a sincere, honest debate can have as much more as they dare to take.