November 25, 2011
Opinion
EDITORIAL
THE resignation of the speaker of the federal Parliament, Harry Jenkins, appears to have caught MPs on both sides by surprise. Unexpected too, given the constant, head-banging aggression of this Parliament, was the warmth and sincerity of the applause he received from both sides of the chamber. Jenkins has been, as all sides acknowledge, an excellent speaker, one of the few in our history to have earned the respect of all his peers. His departure is a significant loss.
Though the debates in this Parliament have been close, raucous and bitter, Jenkins's management has been a genuine improvement on what, for the most part, went before. The Parliament has had some excellent speakers - some, but too few. It would be a great advance for politics and the status of the Parliament if Jenkins's impartiality could become an entrenched tradition. It may well do so during this term at least. Peter Slipper, who was elected Speaker yesterday, is a controversial figure. He is acceptable to Labor because he has fallen out with his party and lost preselection. Despite the venom he arouses in Coalition ranks, he has served Parliament as deputy speaker with similar impartiality.
The event may be a surprise but the politicking behind it is not. Jenkins told Parliament he had become impatient with the restrictions of the position. He wanted to participate in policy and parliamentary debate. That is reasonable and should be respected. It is unfortunate the speaker feels hampered as an elected representative.
But there is another motive, not of Jenkins's making. His departure for the backbench is as fine a manoeuvre as Machiavelli could have wished for. With Jenkins back in the Labor caucus and a Liberal elected to replace him, the numbers on the floor have shifted the government's way. It is no longer so beholden to the independents to keep its majority. In particular, Andrew Wilkie no longer holds the whip hand in negotiations over the poker machine legislation which has been causing the government pain. Wilkie's ultimatum - that the law must pass by early next year or he will withdraw his support for the government - may lose its potency. We say "may" because who knows what Wilkie's reaction will be to his loss of relevance, or what thrills and spills await Labor and Julia Gillard as their parliamentary high-wire act continues?
Whether he genuinely wanted to quit, Jenkins's resignation is possibly the most partisan act he has been responsible for as speaker. His legacy may be secure but the way he is leaving the post tarnishes it a little. Labor thinks it has pulled a swiftie on the opposition. Tony Abbott, by his angry reaction, thinks so too. He calls it unprecedented, and it is - almost. But Labor's tactic does recall Gough Whitlam's attempt in 1974 to shore up numbers in the Senate by appointing Vince Gair, the Democratic Labor Party senator, as ambassador to Ireland. Gillard will want her piece of cleverness to end better than the Gair Affair.
Coalition gets a world view
THE term maiden speech suggests the speaker is a newcomer. Arthur Sinodinos, who joined the Senate this month and gave his maiden speech on Wednesday, is nothing of the kind. Over two decades from the mid-1980s Sinodinos was a member of the Coalition's inner sanctum, perhaps John Howard's closest adviser, and acknowledged universally as one of the sharpest minds in politics.
His speech offers insights into Coalition thinking from one long familiar with it. Sinodinos is no market purist, though he favours full-scale development and a big Australia - the objective Kevin Rudd embraced and Julia Gillard stepped away from. Sinodinos rightly acknowledges the environmental challenges this race-for-growth approach presents, arguing that a richer economy is better able to meet them.
Somewhat surprisingly for a Liberal (at least one from this century), he hints at an interventionist approach to industry - policies that encourage smart manufacturing, and home-grown exploitation of Australian research successes, including in alternative energy. Of course, in the much larger Australian economy that Sinodinos advocates those objectives might be achieved without excessive government intervention. One of the best arguments for a bigger Australia is that a larger domestic market would make it easier for local start-ups to succeed, and fewer Australian ideas would have to look overseas for financial backing.
He is optimistic, too, about social cohesion being maintained alongside a large-scale immigration policy which rapid growth would require. A larger economy, he says, would allow new areas, particularly in the north of the country, to be more closely settled, and more global cities to be created. People the north, in other words - an old idea for which Sinodinos puts 21st century arguments.
Sinodinos sketches his ideas with a broad brush - it is a maiden speech, after all, not a budget. But he offers a synthesised view of the direction the country should take, into which he manages to fit the Coalition's present scattered policy fragments - no mean feat. The opposition's platform given coherence and shape is a welcome advance.
