Has the revolution begun…?

18 05 2016
julian cribb

Julian Cribb

Written by Julian Cribb, and originally published in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Election 2016 may herald the beginning of the end of party rule in Australian politics. Indeed, rather like Mikhail Gorbachev, Malcolm Turnbull might just have inadvertently pulled the trigger on the dissolution of the party system. It’s a big thought, after a century or more of the national interest being subordinated to vested interests, but there are signs that Australian electors are thoroughly jack of party politics and more than willing to try new things and new people.
It shows in the febrile oscillation of the opinion polls, the frequent switches of government and leader, the determination of voters to deny the major parties control in the Senate. It shows in the disgust of ordinary Australians at each new case of electoral corruption, secret dealing and rip-off by spendthrift MPs, who preach restraint while plundering the public purse.

It shows in our dismay at the ongoing deterioration in our education system – school, university and TAFE – the degradation of our scientific enterprise and healthcare system – which overall add up to an attrition in the nation’s skills, technologies, fitness for work and capacity for sustainable economic growth.

It shows in the complicity of the mainstream parties in the wrecking of the Australian landscape and oceans – from the Liverpool Plains, to the extinction of native species, to the now almost-unavoidable ruin of the Great Barrier Reef. As Euan Ritchie and Don Driscoll noted on The Conversation, the national biodiversity crisis does not rate priority policy from any of the major parties.

It shows in the Canute-like attempts of politicians across the spectrum to turn back the flood-tide of Australian opinion on issues such as domestic violence, marriage equality and assisted dying.

And it shows in the public revulsion at the engagement of the main political parties in endless, pointless, unwinnable wars, in their use of terrorism to justify greater surveillance and repression, and their inhuman treatment of people fleeing those wars.

The word ‘party’ is from the Latin, pars, partis – a part – the stem that gives rise to the term partial. And that is exactly what Australian political parties today have become – bodies partial to their own interests and those of a tiny minority of supporters. By definition, as well as by contemporary behaviour, they are no longer aligned with the national interest or the public good. And we are simply the mugs who let them get away with it, time and again – probably because we haven’t yet completely figured out there is another way.

Once upon a time, political vested interests were diluted by well-meaning people with a commitment to public service. No longer. A never-ending cycle of political pay hikes, rorting of public funds and parliamentary privileges, gold-plated pensions and ‘entitlements’, furnishes the proof that most of them are in it for what they can get. The driving ambition of Australian politics has become personal, rather than national, enrichment.

In 2014-15, according to the Australian Electoral Commission, the combined parties of Australia received over $170 million, mainly donations and mostly from private individuals and companies. As the public understands, it’s a fair bet most of that was donated in the expectation of some sort of special treatment or monetary advantage granted by the ruling party. In other words, an officially-sanctioned bribe. However, as the NSW ICAC continually discloses, these are but the first whiff of a large and festering corpus of hidden or less-visible rewards, abuses of office and, post-politics, the appointment of scores of former Ministers and MPs to juicy sinecures on corporate boards, where they peddle special influence for personal gain.

The hypocrisy of this system has recently been illumined in the LNP’s attempts to expose Labor’s connection to shonky union affairs in the Royal Commission, and the ALP’s counterbattery retort in the form of a proposed banking Royal Commission. The answer obvious to most Australians – a Federal Independent Commission Against Corruption – is one that none of the leading parties wishes, for obvious reasons, to countenance: it would expose glaring evidence that the entire party system is corrupt and rotten, root and branch.

The role of the fossil fuels and mining lobby in derailing climate policy in Australia is a further case of the preparedness of parties and their paymasters to sacrifice the national future, our grandchildren and the planet, to their own short-term interests. This alone demands a Royal Commission – or a Federal ICAC – if not substantial jail sentences, as any crime against humanity deserves.

Disenchantment with political parties has halved their membership in recent decades. Despite the secrecy, journalistic investigations suggest that the combined membership of all parties totals under 100,000. No party comes even close to the membership of, say, the Collingwood Football Club (76,000 – maybe it should run for office instead of trying to play football…). It is therefore likely that our leaders are being chosen for us by less than 0.4 per cent of the Australian population, a travesty of democracy (and in reality, by a microscopic handful of powerbrokers within this tiny minority). Not surprisingly an Australian National University study (2014) found that only 43 per cent of Australians believe it makes any difference who is in power.

Given all this, one enchanting possibility in the coming election is that Turnbull’s gamble to rid himself of the cross-benches might just backfire horribly – as disgusted voters decide to punish both he and the equally disappointing and compromised Shorten. It’s not the sort of thing that shows up in opinion polls, which are interpreted chiefly by the media’s need for short, simplistic two-horse-race stories. Neither the parties nor the media display much grasp of the emerging multi-spectral character of Australian politics, in which hung parliaments, complex alliances of minor parties and negotiation with a multiplying throng of independents form the central dynamic. A Scandinavian political scene, rather than the one we’re accustomed to.

It only takes one thing for this to happen. For a majority of voters to rip up their party how-to-vote cards, ignore the deluge of deceptive advertising and soon-to-be-broken promises, and put their mark next to the name of the most decent, well-intentioned Australian standing in their electorate. The one with a track record for honesty, trustworthiness, integrity, hard work and commitment to the future. The exact antithesis of the usual party hack.

Of such small things are political revolutions made.
Julian Cribb is a Canberra-based author and science writer.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/is-this-the-end-of-party-rule-20160502-gokc1m.html#ixzz48y8o1THi
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook




7 responses

18 05 2016

Couldn’t agree more. We are governed by thoroughly indecent individuals.

18 05 2016

He says we haven’t figured out another way [beyond the party system] However we can work within it as long as certain facts were observed and acted upon. Take economics, the facts are not recognised today about macroeconomics, and instead the parties use a false dialogue which they have made suit their political agenda. There are several false “laws”, First is the fact that taxation is not used for federal spending.[the central bank spends new money into existence]. Another is that future generations will never be liable for our current debts. We pay our debts today for costs today. The federal government can never bankrupt itself [unless deliberately] in spending its own money. Social security is NOT broken and can be easily fully funded. ETC.

The point is that using economics to steer the economy away from equitable outcomes for the society is a bastard political act. It would not work if economics was understood throughout the society.

19 05 2016


I am quite convinced that economics was invented to make astrology look more respectable.

Economists find it difficult to accurately state what happened yesterday, let alone accurately predict what will happen one week in the future, and yet they claim economics to be a science.

19 05 2016

After all that, all he can suggest is ripping up the’how to vote’ card but still play the rigged game. My vote eventually ends up on the Lib or Lab side regardless who I actually voted for. Do I really know any of those people on the form? No. It’s a corrupt system and even if you’re sick of it, you still participate, it’ll continue on and on. That’s how it’s set up to work. You’re kidding yourself if you think you can vote out the ‘bad’, because they’re ALL rotten to the core, and the system is set up to protect them and make you think it’s everyone else’s fault for voting for the wrong party. Division and deception, every election cycle, nothing will change. None of the candidates deserve our vote. Stop playing the rigged game, and then you have a chance for meaningful change.

19 05 2016


There is one way, although it would take over half of the voters to make it work, and before that happens the collapse will have occurred.

That way is for each electorate to vote the local member out this election and the subsequent two elections. I know that we would loose a couple of good people but the politicians would know in no uncertain way that it is the voters who put them in power, not their rich mates and big business.

The thought makes me feel better even though I realize it will never happen.

20 05 2016

Asking the sheeple to think? They just won’t. They follow the ticket exactly, never stopping to skip their party candidate that they really hate. They hate the party their preferences go to, but the give them anyway. They think the whole lot stink, but they do not vote informal. They know another party occupies the part of the political spectrum they grew up with and believe in, but they just cannot change.

If their party ran on a platform of handing out the Kool Aide, they would still vote for them.

As much as I do not like Malcolm, I do like his changes to the electoral system. At least it gives some scope to think, some incentive. Actually doing thinking, won’t happen.

21 05 2016
Blue Peter

“Has the revolution begun?” YES it is called terrorism for the moment.
Look up the “protestant reformation and Martin Luther 95 theses” 27
lead to the Dutch Revolt, lead to Republic of England. lead to Magna Carta
Your government is circumvented by some party of men, law by law.
Politics today
MANIPULATION of the many for the BENEFIT of the FEW.
otherwise known as
Make this pledge
Or to continue from George Orwell

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s