Upper House loss good for the rulers, not for the people

Legislative Council on cusp of losing role holding our leaders to account, says Reg Watson

POLITICAL parties have come to dominate what was once an independent Legislative Council, the Upper House of the Tasmanian Parliament.

The House has 15 members. Now eight are party members. More and more, parties are selecting candidates for the Upper House, and with the political machine behind them an independent rarely has the resources to effectively compete.

What does it matter? The problem is showing itself already and it will be detrimental for the electors.

The Legislative Council’s heritage goes back a long way. Independence from NSW for Van Diemen’s Land was proclaimed in 1825, and the next year the Legislative Council was formed to administer the colony. There were six members, all nominated. In 1854 it was enlarged to 33, mostly nominated, but new members were elected by restricted voting.

In 1856, the colony, now called Tasmania, received responsible government and a bicameral parliament was established, made up of the Lower House (House of Assembly) and Upper House. The first Speaker of the Upper House was Sir Richard Dry.

Whereas the right to vote in Legislative Council elections was previously restricted to the property classes, in 1969 full adult franchise began.

Voting systems, length of time served, and boundaries differ for the houses, but so is the purpose, and that difference is vital to good government.

Tasmania’s Upper House has been unique in Australia in that it has had a long tradition of independent members. In past years it has been seen as a comfortable institution for members of the establishment, acting more like a men’s club. Opponents have criticised it as archaic.

The role it plays, however, is most important. One reason is to ensure the Lower House, which is dominated by Labor and Liberal and some Greens, is held in check.

The Legislative Council can be very powerful, able to block supply and call elections. For this and other reasons, it is often the bane of the Lower House. Often legislation from the Lower House, which must be passed by the Upper House for it to become law, is not only poorly worded, but may not be in the interest of Tasmanians. Therefore it is a house of review. Legislation from the Lower House can be sent back, delayed or even rejected. By nature the Upper House has been a deliberately conservative house, so there can be a check and review.

Some decades ago, I was advised to interview the late William (Bill) Hodgman, who was a member of the Upper House from 1971 to 1983 and a former president of the House. He pointed out the Legislative Council was not only a house of review, but also a legislative house, being able to introduce its own legislation.

There are regular calls for its abolishment. Recently, former premier Michael Field