Note: This page contains links to PDF files. For more
information, see the web page on Accessing files.
Is There Life after Parliament? Reflections of a Former
Senator
19 June 2009
|
View the transcript as a PDF file - (PDF
69KB)
When I was asked to give this lecture I realised it would be
almost …to the day…. just ten years since I left the
Senate in June 1999.
During those years many changes have occurred in Australian
politics ……new governments and policies, new ideas and
technology, However for all that has changed it is remarkable how
many debates remain the same. As I read news reports I often have a
sense of déjà vu…Didn’t I contribute to this
call for policy reform one, two or more decades ago?
Recently I addressed a group of young women unionists actively
campaigning for universal access to paid maternity leave. In
preparing my speech I sighed and recalled the detail of so many
campaigns that women of my generation had run for the last forty
years. I wondered why we had been so patient, so tolerant of those
various economic arguments that insisted that Australia could not
afford policies that have long been in place in other OECD
countries. At last it seems our voices have been heard!
One of the questions facing those of us who have been involved
in public policy debate over several decades is how can we pass on
that historic knowledge of past practice ? It is very depressing to
watch another generation simply reinvent the
wheel….and make the same mistakes that resulted in policy
change a decade ago!! On one hand it is essential to leave younger
people to bring forward fresh ideas for new circumstances, but it
is also important to incorporate the lessons learned from the
past.
In the 1960s when working with a welfare organisation I was
given food vouchers to help Aboriginal families eat better quality
food. At the time I was highly embarrassed to accompany women and
small children to the shop where a censorious shopkeeper dictated
which food could be purchased. In those years I often bought
a packet of sweet biscuits, icecream or lollies that were denied
under the voucher scheme. Forty years on I am appalled that modern
policy makers have re introduced this updated version of
paternalism to quarantine part of the pension to be spent
appropriately. I wonder how this policy requirement
would work here in the national capital if a proportion of
public sector salaries were quarantined to protect people from
making unhealthy decisions! Or is it only the poor who need
guidance?
This lecture gives me the chance to reflect on the direction I
have taken in the last ten years and also to comment on the
role former parliamentarians have in Australian communities
and beyond.
When I left the Senate I had some clear plans about how I was
going to move back into private life. I had a part time position at
the University of Queensland and was continuing some of my
international work with both the Commonwealth and the United
Nations. I was also packing up after thirty years in the tropics to
move back to Tasmania.
However I was unprepared for the shock of realising just how
divorced many Australians are from their democracy. I had forgotten
what it was lke to be on the outside looking in to the political
world of decision making. I began to realise just how much
information I had personally absorbed about government and its
influence on the community. Yet I was dismayed to learn how
little people understood about their democracy
As a nation we pride ourselves on our long standing system of
governance yet we are less committed to communicating just how this
system functions and how citizens can actively participate in this
process.
I found that after years of closely monitoring and debating
public policy I now lived in a world where it was almost
irrelevant! Many people are either disinterested or distrusting of
the political process while others have totally unrealistic
expectations of how quickly reform could be achieved. It seems many
Australians are either dismissive of the political process or
totally mystified about how the system actually works and how they
can contribute to debate.
As a former teacher I have always been interested in the link
between education and active citizenship. While in parliament I
used to visit schools to introduce children of all ages to the
basics of democracy. Instead of lecturing on the facts and figures,
I learned to transform the classroom into “Question
Time” complete with volunteer ministers and opposition
members. This method was popular because the children chose local
topics and identified issues of direct relevance to them…the
environment; road safety, health, food, sport and music were always
on the agenda.
In my post parliamentary life I worked in East Timor, Fiji and
Africa where I extended this model to give women an understanding
of decision making at local, national and international level. In
Dili I worked on a pre election education campaign as women
prepared for their first experience of the democratic process
whether as voters, workers or candidates. We role played a range of
situations including how women candidates might respond to
pressures from family, church and male colleagues.
In Africa I worked with women from around the Commonwealth as we
planned to feminise the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting
and in Fiji women from around the South Pacific developed their own
system of government complete with a Women’s Cabinet in which
I played the role of the token male!!!
Back in Australia I focussed on young people in schools and
university encouraging them to get involved and be less cynical
about the political process
In 1999 I organised in the Queensland Parliament a Youth
Reconciliation Parliament where fifty teenagers were selected from
around the state on the basis of their submitted speeches to
participate in this memorable event. Listening to their insights
into Australian race relations I could not but wish that their
views were echoed in the corridors of power in Canberra at the
time. Their knowledge, wisdom and passion put many of us to shame
as they reached out for real solutions to historic failure
As preparations were underway to mark the Centenary of
Federation in 2001. I wondered how relevant many Australians would
see this democratic landmark. How could local communities be
engaged in such a remote event?
My answer came in the form of 26 youth parliaments to be held in
each Tasmanian local government area. At the time only a few
councils seriously engaged with young people and I wanted to bring
young people into a project that combined understanding of the
democratic process with the reality of life in local communities. I
talked with Councils about each sponsoring a May Youth Parliament
in their chambers to coincide with the celebrations in
Melbourne.
It was not an easy task and timing changed in different areas of
the state. However I was greatly assisted by the Tasmanian Speaker
of the Legislative Assembly who agreed to invite representatives of
each Youth Parliament to a special Session of the Tasmanian
Parliament later that year. This encouraged all councils to
get involved so by October each council had two youth
representatives who travelled to Hobart for the grand occasion when
four teenagers, elected by their peers from each geographic region
of the state addressed the Tasmanian Parliament.
Standing orders had been suspended only once before on the
occasion of a formal parliamentary apology when Aboriginal elders
had addressed the parliament. Government and Opposition members
listened for an hour as student speakers outlined their concerns
for the future. In a follow up ceremony 52 representatives from
around the state presented then Premier Jim Bacon with their
submissions and each received a formal response detailing
government policy.
This model is probably unique and its impact translated into
many more Tasmanians being aware and interested in the Centenary of
Federation because it involved their young people talking about
local issues and being proactive in presenting them to the
government.
Once I became focussed on this linkage between the democratic
process and active citizenship. I could see so many
opportunities to engage my students and local communities in better
understanding of their place in local democracy.
In my human rights classes we role played United Nations forums
and tribunals and to coincide with the Commonwealth Heads of
Government Meeting held a model CHOGM which was an open forum
attended by a number of senior school students. Tertiary
students planned the event and adopted a country to represent. Some
dressed up for the occasion which included a colourful parade and
opening ceremony.
During this period I was President of the United Nations
Association of Australia at a time when Australia’s
reputation was under lose scrutiny for its arbitrary detention
policies. I encouraged many refugee advocates to put forward the
traumatic experience of detainees and under the UNAA banner three
reports were presented to the United Nations Human Rights
Commission in Geneva over the period 2002-2004.
I well remember the reaction of delegates from many nations who
did not understand why a country like Australia could not manage to
accommodate comparatively small numbers of asylum seekers without
resorting to punitive policies in isolated desert camps. One year a
group of students accompanied me to Geneva where they spoke to
delegates and learned first hand just how damaging the arbitrary
detention of asylum seekers was to Australia’s international
reputation as a responsible global citizen.
In 2004 I accepted a position in Tasmania with National
Disability Services, Australia’s peak organisation
representing disability service providers. My role was to work with
non government disability service providers and the state
government to ensure that people with disabilities were able to
exercise their rights as citizens.
I worked in a small office with limited resources and high
expectations of what needed to change in getting a fair go for
Tasmanians with disabilities.
Having grown up in Tasmania a very small and friendly state I knew
many people now in influential positions… As a youngster I
had played beach cricket with the Governor, had a teenage date with
a prominent member of the Liberal Opposition. and knew most members
of the Labor Government by their first names.
I was not sure this local knowledge would necessarily assist me
but it was certainly a good start in finding my way around a system
very much in need of reform.
The situation at state level suggested that many reforms associated
with federal government initiatives in the 1980s and 90s had
started to be taken for granted without the specific injection of
resources or updating of policy locally.
While Tasmania was the first state to close its mental
institution and offer intellectually disabled people the
opportunity to live in the community, there had been limited
thought given to the impact this would have on available revenue.
Dollars saved in closing the institution went back into
consolidated revenue and could not be traced for use in new service
provision. Waiting lists continued to grow and service providers
were under considerable pressure to respond in situations of
continual crisis management. In the last twelve months Tasmania has
moved towards a new model of reform and integrated disability
access planning across all government departments.
Many of the strategies I have used to assist bring about these
changes have been adapted from my experience in the Senate. I
focussed on budgetary decisions including attending the annual
Budget lock up, attending Estimates and preparing Disability Impact
Statements on the State Budget. One year we even challenged funding
processes by appealing to the Auditor General, a decision which was
not well received but was essential in trying to track just how the
disability dollar was spent to increase the availability of
services for people so in need. . At the same time I was working to
build a tri partisan network of support in the parliament to put
disability rights firmly on the political agenda.
Many Australians assume that their former elected
representatives fade into their communities and have no specific
responsibility once they leave public life. But is this true?
Should we exile those who have so contributed to a period of public
policy debate as no longer having an ongoing role to contribute
aspects of their knowledge and experience?
Former prime ministers continue to have access to an office,
staff and travel and it is assumed they will continue to contribute
to public debate based on their experience as leaders. Some state
premiers and former ministers take on paid or voluntary positions
which enable them to focus on specific areas of public policy. Some
former parliamentarians use their contacts and knowledge of the
political process to become lobbyists while others look for
positions of influence on public and private sector boards of
management. Increasingly a number of former parliamentarians are
offered positions in academia. Some move to the international arena
and some take on new challenges that bear no resemblance to their
former careers in public policy. A few write their memoirs or
contribute to public debate through lecturing and writing.
Should the Australian community have any specific expectations
of their former elected representatives? Is it reasonable to
expect that the public investment in the democratic process may
extend beyond those years when individuals are paid to actually
represent the Australian people?
These days parliamentary life may only occupy a small proportion
of working life.
The average age of sitting parliamentarians is much lower than in
the days when mainly men wee elected in middle age and retired late
in life. Today’s parliamentarians are younger and may have
two or three careers ahead of them when they depart the political
stage. Parliamentary superannuation even under the new guidelines
is generous.
Those who are defeated in election are often disadvantaged in
the workplace because they are seen as no longer having the
influence they once enjoyed. This is especially true if there is a
change of government. Australian parliamentarians are by
definition “party animals” so their partisan loyalties
may not necessarily assist in finding a new career.
Those who retire from parliament by choice may already have lined
up new careers taking advantage of in house contacts and
opportunities. Others may specifically choose positions in
the corporate sector where their political insights may be of
particular value. Should there be any limits to taking the
knowledge and benefits of parliamentary experience into the market
place to be sold off to the highest bidder?
It is a standard refrain of many parliamentarians that they have
“retired to spend more time with their families” But I
have never heard anyone declare they intend to spend more time with
their community!
Yet elected representatives have learnt so much about their
community and have spent a great deal of time working to enhance
community life. How can this experience be utilised when an
individual returns to life as a private citizen?
When I was leaving the Senate in 1999 I did wonder how I would
adjust to a very different lifestyle. I had been in public life for
twenty years and expected to actively participate in a range of
current social debates. I was used to being asked my opinion and
commenting in the media. I expected to be invited to numerous
official functions as I had become an expert at cutting ribbons and
unveiling plaques! I had detailed itineraries planned months in
advance and was used to travelling across the continent and
overseas .I could make impromptu speeches on almost any topic and
kept an anecdote book to lighten some of the prepared speeches that
I had to deliver! How would I respond to a quieter life in regional
Tasmania? Would I suffer from the condition Gareth Evans described
when we the Government became Opposition in 1996….that is the
Relevance Deprivation Syndrome?
My first challenge in leaving the Senate was to keep in check my
partisan view of political issues. After spending all those
years asserting the philosophy and policies of the Australian Labor
Party I found myself lecturing students at the University of
Queensland where knew I had a responsibility to present a
balanced perspective and encourage open debate. I was teaching
human rights and international politics so thought I would not
necessarily stray into Australian politics. However I soon found
myself praising the Howard Government’s initiatives In East
Timor and explaining my own party’s failure over twenty years
to protect the East Timorese.
Working in a university after life in parliament highlighted the
gulf that exists between these two institutions. When as a
parliamentarian I was involved in public policy development there
was limited referral to those whose focussed research may have
enhanced practical policy implementation. Yet within academia
itself I found there was equal disinterest or misunderstanding
about the challenges that parliamentarians face in finding
solutions to complex issues. Too many academics appear to be
so narrowly focussed on specific area of research that they are
unable to contribute to public debate, but equally too many
parliamentarian adopt such a generic view of the world that they
fail to draw on the expertise available in our tertiary
institutions. There should be a more proactive way to encourage a
more realistic exchange that would be a great benefit to the
community.
In each of my post parliamentary roles I have been very aware
and appreciative of the lessons I learned as a Senator and a
Minister. I have seen first hand how government and the parliament
function. I know the systems and processes and how to work at
local, state, national and international levels. I understand the
intricacies of lobbying effectively and how to use the media to get
issues onto the political agenda. Anyone elected to the parliament
acquires this knowledge but it is not until we leave that we
realise just how valuable it is. And certainly senators are
particularly advantaged in having sat through many hours of Senate
Estimates Hearings when we learn so much about government and the
interdepartmental processes (or lack of them) I also found the
Senate Estimates processes especially educational in understanding
the tensions between political and bureaucratic priorities.
My experience working in various communities has convinced
me that we cannot boast about our status as an effective democracy
until we succeed in engaging more citizens in its processes. This
is especially important for young people and less advantaged
citizens. All parliamentarians are concerned to create better
understanding of our democratic institutions. Perhaps some may
choose to take on that additional challenge when they leave the
parliament well equipped to enhance the level of understanding of
Australia’s democracy.
Margaret Reynolds