“After three years of a government where even the full cabinet wasn’t let in on policy debates, the prospect of ideas being debated with independents in the lower house and with the Greens in the Senate is tantalising.”
- Lenore Taylor, At Last Everyone Might Get a Say, Sydney Morning Herald, 23 August 2010

As Australia awaits the outcome of the closest election in its history, commentators are waxing enthusiastically over the implications of a hung parliament on our nation’s decision making. The optimists are predicting a radically reformed parliament and strengthening of our democracy. With neither party holding a majority of seats, the federal parliament can no longer act as a rubber stamp for policies cooked up undemocratically by a handful of senior party members. Rather, the government will have to work harder in presenting its case and be more receptive to alternative views. On the down side, a higher degree of debate, scrutiny and negotiating could equally mean that we get very little done at all.

Nonetheless, from the perspective of Tibet, Saturday’s result gives a number of grounds for hope. In recent years Tibet has been wholly dependent on minority voices in the parliament. Support has come from the Greens, independents and a handful of mavericks in each of the two main parties. Sadly our small but very active parliamentary group faced considerable barriers over the last term of government. Unnerved by a run of diplomatic crises, the government has trod an increasingly cautious path with China. To make matters worse, the opposition, rather than challenging the Government to speak up over human rights and Tibet, has advocated a yet more cautious approach, regularly accusing the Government of jeopardising the Australia-China economic relationship by pushing too hard on sensitive issues. While the Greens in particular worked admirably to encourage real action from the Rudd government, a succession of modest practical initiatives failed to win the approval of either of the main parties.

Whether we see a Gillard or Abbott government, some things are now certain. The Greens, unequivocally the most active Tibet supporters in Canberra, have doubled their numbers to 10, including nine Senators and one member of the House of Representatives. With a voice in both houses, the Greens will have many more opportunities to bring Tibet into relevant debates. When the new Senators take their seats in July 2011, the Greens will hold the balance of power.

As Bob Brown has said, while having the balance of power “isn’t a magic wand”, it will mean that the Greens are in “a powerful position to make legislation better, introduce new ideas to the Parliament and push both sides of politics to deliver smarter, more constructive and progressive outcomes”.

Just as important is the “golden opportunity” being touted by the three independents for Australian politics to be driven less along rigid party lines and more by the concerns of constituents. Support for Tibet beyond the Greens, independent Senator Nick Xenophon and a small number of Labor and Coalition MPs including Michael Danby, Peter Slipper, Melissa Parke and Kelvin Thompson, has been hampered by binding caucus decisions. Even the growing number of Tibet sympathisers in the Labor and Coalition ranks were forced to vote against stronger action on Tibet, lest they jeopardize their political future.

Tibet supporter and Independent Senator Nick Xenophon is among those suggesting that a hung parliament provides a special opportunity to improve the practice of politics in Australia. He has described the current situation as a “one-in-a-100-year opportunity to actually get it right, to make the Parliament work in the way it’s meant to, to reinvigorate democracy”.

Under pressure from the Greens, the government has already agreed to a parliamentary debate on Australia’s deployment in Afghanistan. Will other issues that have long been off the table again be subject to rigorous debate?

Speaking on Monday’s Lateline, Rob Oakeshott MP, one of the four independents poised to determine the next government, spoke among other things about the inability of individual MPs and Senators to force a vote on a particular issue. He argued strongly that this should change in the new Parliament.

“I think it is a blight on our system in Australia that a private member who might have certain beliefs about what’s important to their electorate and their country cannot get a private member’s Bill voted on in the Parliament. They can introduce it, but they cannot force a vote.”

Among other parliamentary reforms being proposed by Oakeshott and the now very powerful crossbench are more conscience votes (where MPs and Senators may “cross the floor” and vote against their party’s prevailing position) and according greater importance to the recommendations of the parliament’s many committees.

Realistically, economic management, education, health, the national broadband network, and other domestic issues will still dominate parliamentary proceedings. Foreign policy seems to be low on the agenda of both the Gillard and Abbott camps and we will still have to work hard to ensure that Tibet is brought to the attention of the parliament. But when we do get a look in, we will be much better positioned to bring about real outcomes.