New integrity issues for independents and minority governments

Abstract

There is always a need for new measures of public accountability and integrity, not so much because current systems are lacking, but because new challenges constantly arise. One such challenge is emerging as parliamentary systems within Westminster-influenced jurisdictions are becoming more accustomed to minority parties and/or independents playing a significant role in government. This is particularly potent in the current Australian context where a minority parliament has resulted in a situation where the changing vote of any parliamentarian could change the outcome of legislation. This situation raises new questions and presents new opportunities for the development of enhanced measures to support ethical action and decision-making for all parliamentarians. More specifically, the anticipated creation of an Australian Commissioner of Parliamentary Integrity, with a brief to provide advice on ethical issues for parliamentarians, provides such an opportunity. This article draws on recent literature to put forward an expanded model of ‘parliamentary integrity’, as well as acknowledging the need for greater practical utility of concepts in this field by exploring a range of challenges that face independents and single-member parties. It suggests that the new Commissioner's role might be grounded in a notion of parliamentary integrity as the service of the public good, rather than the simple avoidance of coercion, corruption or crime. In doing so, the article identifies not only an opportunity to respond to the current political landscape in Australia but also to set a new standard for integrity and accountability in Westminster systems.

Keywords:

• integrity
• independents
• minority government
• coalition

Notes

1. The Australian (or Commonwealth) parliament was established as part of the Australian federal compact in 1901. It consists of a Westminster-style lower house (the House of Representatives) and a US-style state-based upper house (the Senate).

In the House of Representatives, single members are elected by constituency. Following the 2010 Australian Federal Election, the House of Representatives consists of 72 Labor, 72 Liberal-National Coalition, one Australian Green, one Western Australian National and four Independent parliamentarians. The Labor Party formed minority government with one Australian Green and three independents to provide a working majority.

In the Senate, members are directly elected to represent their state with each state forming a multi-member electorate. This differs from other upper houses, like the Canadian Senate and British House of Lords, where most members are de facto appointees of the executive. In 1948, the Australian Senate shifted to a model of proportional representation. The Australian Constitution provides for 12 Senators from each of the six states and two Senators from each of the two territories. As of July 2011, the Australian Senate will comprise 31 Labor, 34 Coalition, nine Australian Greens, one Democratic Labor and one Independent Senator.

2. Since 1974 over 18% of the vote at UK General Elections has been won by third parties and since 1992 the Liberal Democrats party has consistently won more than 17% of the vote. While 2010 saw them win 57 seats with 23% of the vote, this was a decline in seats from the 2005 General Election where they won 22% which translated into 63 seats (Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/election2010/results/).

3. Since 1977 there has only been one three-year period where a major party has simultaneously held a majority in the Senate and a majority in the House of Representatives. In all but one Australian parliament since 1961 there has been at least one independent member in the Senate.

4. Minority government in the British context has occurred where one of the major parties has governed without a majority, but with a commitment from non-opposition members not to support moves to bring down the government. There have been only three examples of minority government in the UK over the last century. The first two, in 1905 and 1974, were short term arrangements to ensure stability while preparations were made for a General Election. The other occasion was in 1996 when the majority held by the Major government had evaporated through defections and by-elections over a number of years, but this again was soon resolved at the 1997 General Election.

5. At the 2010 UK General Election, the Conservative Party won over 300 seats and Labour won approximately 250, while the Liberal Democrats were able to secure 57 seats due the concentrated distribution of their 23% of the vote. The absence of a clear majority by either major party enabled the Liberal Democrats to enter negotiations to form coalition government. The remaining successful candidates (including independents, Greens and unionists) comprised 6% of the vote, but only represented 28 seats and did not have the numbers to negotiate to ensure majority to either party in the House of Commons (Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/election2010/results/).

6. Between 15 and 20 per cent of Australians have supported non-major parties in the Senate since the late 1980s.The Australian Democrats held between seven and nine of the 76 seats between 1984 and 2004. At the 2010 Australian Federal Election, the Australian Greens were also able to secure a total of nine Senate seats, which ensures them the balance of power in that house from July 2011.

7. The Liberal and National (formerly the Country Party) parties have been in coalition in some form since 1922. This long-standing coalition predominately operates as a single party, with the Liberal Party dominating its membership and policy.