Rex Jory: SA’s Upper House is ignoring the Liberals’ mandate voted at the state election

SOUTH Australia’s Upper House is an undisciplined rabble, an impediment to democracy, writes Rex Jory. It doesn’t seem to care how the majority of people voted.

• Treasurer promises new shop trading laws by early July
• Retailers launch campaign against shopping hours deregulation in SA
• Malinauskas declares expanded Sunday morning shopping ‘dead’

THE Legislative Council — South Australia’s Upper House or House of Review — is in danger of quietly shutting itself down. It has become an impediment to democracy.

The 22-member Legislative Council, made up of the major parties and a grouping of minor parties and independents, is an undisciplined rabble.

The political convention of a government outlining a program of reforms and seeking a mandate at an election is being trashed.

Because of the complex voting system in the Council, it is almost impossible for any government to win absolute voting control, even if it wins a handsome majority in the House of Assembly.

Members then blithely ignore what was once regarded as the will of the people and vote according to their personal or party prejudices.

The situation is the same at federal level where the Senate, also a fragmented grouping of major parties, minor parties and independents, has the power to ignore clearly-stated government policies and dismember the government’s legislative program.

It would be constitutionally difficult to abolish the Senate, but the security of the Legislative Council is far less certain. The Labor Party platform calls for the abolition of the Legislative Council.

Traditionally the Liberals have been strong supporters of the Council and a bicameral Parliamentary system.

But even some Liberals are now muttering about the merit of the Council. Is it a safety net for democracy — a debating chamber where a second set of members can review and amend flawed legislation — or a time-wasting impediment? Is it any longer a chamber of checks and balances, or has it become a political Trojan horse, an encumbrance to democracy and the smooth operation of government?

Members of the Council will argue that they have every right to vote according to their individual or party consciences and beliefs.

But at both federal and state level people are getting tired of the elected government — of whatever colour — being sabotaged by either the Senate or the Legislative Council.

Former Labor prime minister Paul Keating in 1989 described the Senate as an “unrepresentative swill”.

That tag sits comfortably with the current Legislative Council.

A contemporary example of the Council’s potential abuse of power is the Liberal Government’s plan to liberalise shopping hours. Eighteen months before the March State election, the Liberals announced plans to deregulate shop trading hours.

It campaigned heavily on the issue and won a clear majority in both seats and the number of voters. According to political convention the government should have a right to have its legislation passed. To the victor goes the spoils.

If it ultimately proves unpopular, unworkable or even damaging the government will then be held accountable by the people at the next election. But the new parliamentary morality decrees that the Legislative Council can do what it likes. Never mind the mandate, never mind how the majority of people voted.

Which poses the question — why hold elections if the Government is held hostage by a small number of Legislative Councillors who arrogantly decide they know what’s right for the people.

Of the 1,048,713 people who voted in the March election, 398,182 picked Liberal and only 343,896 chose Labor, yet eight Labor members plus four independents or minor party members in the Legislative Council can trample on the rights and wishes of the majority. Does this dirty dozen think they know best?

With a lot of people that doesn’t wash. It’s sheer arrogance. Many Liberal voters were probably attracted by specific policies like shopping hours and payroll tax changes.

Labor was comprehensively voted out, yet new Opposition Leader — and former Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association head — Peter Malinauskas is opposed to any meaningful relaxation of shop trading hours. The reforms will almost certainly be killed off.

Is that what the people really wanted?

If there is a groundswell of public anger, and demands for the abolition of the Legislative Council, members will only have themselves to blame.