Page 3186 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 23 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
But I think that it is important to note that, just as there are disagreements in the community, it is right and proper that there should be disagreements in this place. The challenge is, of course, how we actually conduct ourselves in this process. It is vital, I believe, for a good democracy to have an opposition and to have a good, functioning opposition that holds the government to account and ensures that the government does not become complacent. Whilst it may appear to be unsightly to some in the community when you have vigorous debates, just like a court has two sides and that battle will hopefully bring out the best outcome, that is, in effect, what we in this place are striving to achieve as well. By having a contest of ideas, hopefully the best idea will win out. But that is dependent upon people being open to actually engaging in that debate.
Further to this, whilst there are many frustrating features of Hare-Clark, one benefit is that we are meant to be a more representative chamber than if we had single-member electorates. As such, if we are going to be a representative chamber, then it is right and proper, I think, that there are disagreements in this place as well, just as there are disagreements in the community.
One hundred and three thousand people voted for the Labor Party, 89,000 people voted for the Liberal Party. Therefore it stands to reason that those people, those 89,000 people who voted for the Liberals, should have a strong voice in this place as well. That is what we are striving to do. It would not be fair and it would not be representative if we simply signed up to the government in all that they do. Having debates and disagreements is not a bad thing. The challenge is how we conduct ourselves in that process.
Today’s motion is specifically about participation in the budget process or, more precisely, beyond the budget process. I believe it is about how money is spent. There is a slight distinction there. We have got to be careful that we do not talk just about the budget process. We should be talking about the outcomes, not just the process. The process is important but the process should not be made irrelevant unless it is followed through. Whilst that might be a little semantic or a little pedantic, I think it is an important distinction.
Whilst having panels and sample groups is one way forward, as highlighted in 4(a)(iv) in Ms Le Couteur’s motion, I think there are other ways that we should also consider as well. When you have panels that are meant to be representative, it is fraught. We in effect have a 25-member panel in this place and it is fraught. We do the best we can, we try to be representative but there are always going to be people who disagree with what happens here. That is going to be exactly the same for any other panel. Whether it is called a citizens jury, whether it is called an opinion poll, whether it is called a participatory budgeting sample or panel, they are always going to be fraught.
Ultimately the information will get fed into decision-makers who will hopefully produce better decisions but there still have to be decision-makers who take on board what has happened and are therefore able to actually cast judgement.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video