Evaluating the
Senate
Background
Role of Upper houses in representative democracies is
controversial - Why?
• They not peoples’ houses
• The may veto the will of the majority
They are viewed as democratically obnoxious when they
block lower house bills (frustrating the will of the
majority) or irrelevant when they rubber stamp bills
SO WHY HAVE ONE??? Indeed, Britain’s upper house is
almost redundant, New Zealand never had one &
Queensland abolished their’s in the 1920’s.
Why We Have a Senate
Originally it was the Founding Fathers’ intention to
preserve the sovereignty of the States by having
a States’ House that could review Federal bills in
the interests of the States.
All States have equal representation – a feature
that makes for a constitutionally guaranteed
malapportionment for the Senate voting system
The Senate has never acted as a States’ House –
being from the beginning a “Party House”
The Senate 1901 -1949
During this period the Senate used the same electoral
system as the House. A win in a state meant winning all
6 seats – a win at the next election meant all 12 senate
seats
This resulted in a strongly pro or anti government Senate
majorities which meant a denial of minor party
representation
It was either a “rubber stamp” or a “hostile” Senate
This reduced its value as a House of Review
The Senate 1901 -1949
Thus Senate failed to live up to its design
intentions…
• It was quickly dominated by the parties
and thus failed to act as a States’ House
• Its role as a House of Review was limited
by the majoritarian electoral system
The Senate 1949 to the Present
The electoral reform to Senate voting in 1949 brought
Proportional Representation to the Senate
Under this system, a candidate needs a quota [(number of
valid votes / number of seats +1) + 1] – about 14.3% of
the vote in a normal election & 7.7% in a double
dissolution election , to win a seat. This is much easier
to achieve than the 50%+1 required under Preferential
Voting
Thus minor party candidates and independents have a
much higher chance of gaining seats in the Senate than
in the House – and creates the possibility that such
minors & independents may hold the balance of power
The Senate 1949 to the Present
The first party to benefit from Proportional Representation
was the Democratic Labor Party, which formed as a
result of a split in the ALP. However, it failed to make
effective use of its balance of power because it always
voted against the ALP
It took until 1981 for a minor party to emerge that adopted
the strategy of deliberately seeking the Senate balance
of power. That party was the Australian Democrats
formed under the motto “keep the bastards honest”
In 1980 the Liberal Government, under Fraser, lost control
of the Senate to the ALP and Democrats who, if they
voted together, could defeat a government bill
The Balance of Power Senate
Thus, the new voting system and the willingness of minor
parties to exploit it to gain a balance of power position
has resulted in a revival of the Senate as a House of
Review
Why? – because the government in the lower house must
negotiate with the party that holds the balance of power
in order for its bills to pass into law. Thus bills are
scrutinised and amended far more than in the past. This
is good for the legislative function of parliament
He balance of power has been held from 1981 to 2005 by
the Democrats, Greens and independents such a Brian
Harradine
The Senate’s Representative
Function
Strengths:
• Proportional Representation allows the
representation of minority views and interests in
parliament.
• It allows a more “mirror” form of representation.
There are more indigenous and ethnic member
Senators than MHRs
• It overcomes the “tyranny of the majority”
criticism of single member systems
The Senate’s Representative
Function
Weaknesses:
• The Constitutional requirement for equal representation
of the states means that the quota to win a Tasmanian
seat is less than 50 000 votes but to win a NSW seat
needs 500 000 votes – there is no “one vote one value”
in the Senate – and its not possible without a referendum
• Senators don’t have a distinct electorate. Each
electorate has 12 representatives – so who is actually
your representative? Senate candidates are preselected by the parties’ central committees with little
community input – so they’re often unknown to the
voters. In the House’s single member electorates the
local branch has an input in candidate selection
The Senate’s Debate Function
• The lack of executive dominance in the Senate
means that debate is more wide ranging –
because of the more diverse viewpoints, and
less regimented – there is no gag, guillotine etc
• The major parties are still highly disciplined but
minor party Senators (especially Democrats) are
less tied to the “party line”
• Independents are free agents
• Question Time is more effective and debate is
serious in the “non-government” time in the
agenda
The Senate’s Debate Function
The Senate’s committee system provides the
parliament’s best investigative and deliberative
venue
• All policy areas have a “Legislative Committee”
and a “Reference Committee”
• Legislative Committees scrutinise legislation –
fulfilling the “House of Review” function
• Reference Committees have a more general
investigative role. Matters are “referred” to
Reference Committees for investigation. In
these committees the chair person is always a
non-gov’t Senator & the Govt is in the minority
The Senate’s Debate Function
Senate Committees have all the powers of the Senate and
can…
• Force Government officials to give evidence – but not
opinions
• Seek public submissions and travel to investigate issues
• Subpoena witnesses and demand documents
Further, all proceedings, including witness statements etc,
are covered by privilege
By convention, Government responds to Reference
Committee reports within 3 months of tabling
The Senate’s Debate Function
Reference Committees are a link between
the community and the Senate and allow
the community to have its views aired in
parliament
Recent Reference Committees have
reported on petrol pricing, global warming
and refugee issues
Current Inquiries
Community Affairs References Committee
• Workplace exposure to toxic dust
Economics Legislation Committee
• Provision of the Trade Practices Amendment (National
Access Regime) Bill 2005
Economics References Committee
• Inquiry into the possible links between household debt,
demand for imported goods and Australia’s current
account deficit
Other Issues of the Senate
• Since 1975 it has been accepted that the Senate has a
“responsibility function” of sorts – although not as explicit
as the that of the House
• The Senate has evolved to replace the executive
dominated House as a defacto check on executive
power. The use of “Senate Investigations” – a form of
committee formed to scrutinise government action in an
area of concern (eg Children Overboard) is an example
• It is now generally accepted, since 1975, that the Senate
may “negotiate” money bills – thus giving it a lever of
power over the government that it did not traditionally
have
The New Senate