I was struck by several aspects of the Australian political situation when I stepped onto this marvellous country the first time, more than 10 years ago. The first, quite ironic, was that the head of state was Queen Elizabeth, a fact that immediately took me back in time, coming from the Republic of Malta, whose independence from British rule had been long achieved half a century ago.
I had also noticed state and federal governments, which Malta being a single state did not have. There is also the split legislature between the House of Representatives and the Senate (or Legislative Assembly), which exists at the federal and all states except Queensland.
In Malta I always took an interest in the country's politics, and I didn't fail to do the same in Australia. This also happened naturally for the different elections I went through, whether local, state or federal.
I have to say that in the short time I've been in Australia, this year's federal election seems to me to be the most interesting. The first reasons is that for the first time, I have an experience of the election of all members of the Senate, whereas usually only half the members are elected at a time.
Another reason is the ever increasing support for the minor parties and independents from the electors. In the 2013 federal election, there were many comments about senators that were elected on less than 1% of the primary vote, and ended up elected due to preferences that many people were unaware of.
The Liberal-National government has changed the rules, with the assistance of the Greens, with the claim that the result will be closer to the will of the people. Unstated was the desire for the Coalition Government to remove the situation where its parliamentary agenda is frustrated by the small parties and independents. This was doubtless the reason for the government to advise the Governor General to dissolve the entire Senate, in order to shuffle the cards and hope to end up with a more amenable Senate (meaning one with less members not from government ranks). However in fact it may result that the Turnbull government will end up with the short straw in this.
I started with the Senate, where the impact of the SP are mostly felt in day-to-day politics. These seem to have considerable support, which from 1983 onwards was always higher than 13% of the formal voltes, and in the latest election (2013) was as high as 33%! Nevertheless, the percentage of Senators elected was always less than the votes earned.
On the other hands, the BP had the opposite situation, that is the percentage of Senators they elected was always higher than the votes earned. Therefore, a quite consistent percentage of votes, between 2-12%, that were given to the SP were wasted.
In the House of Representatives, there is a similar story, with the SP always elected (much) less seats as a proportion, when compared to votes, and the BP always elected more. What was notable was the sheer quantity of votes wasted in this Parliament: between 6-12%.
This is a huge number of wasted votes, and is the result of the system used in districts for the House of Representatives, where there is a single winner (first past the post) in each district, an English system.
There is less waste in the Senate due to the proportional voting system, with more than one member being elected for each state or territory.
Despite the high level of wasted votes, support for SP in the elections for the House of Representatives has always been substantial, even up to 20%, and the last three elections always saw an increase, however the support level was also always less yhan that im the Senate by 3-12%. I interpret this as supporters of SP aware of the high quantity of wasted voted in elections for the House of Representatives, and thus feeling compelled to vote for some BP candidate.
This to me is a travesty of democracy. Many from the BP say this is better for political stability, but isn't it in their interest to say so? The system currently favours the powerful, who have absolutely no interest to change their own influence.
Earlier during the week, the Liberal and Labor parties announced they would preference each other, to reduce the possibility of the Greens party to elect members in the House of Representatives. It's clear that this is a major preoccupation of the BP, which are afraid of the SP and independents. Australia, although geographically isolated, is not immune from the global trend of people sick to death of the traditional parties, which are felt not to represent them any longer, and are ready to try something different, although this is not without its risks.
I do think that stability is important, however I don't believe that SP necessarily lead to its lack. I think it is far more important to have decisions that are taken in the interest of people, rather than of the privileged few, than to have stability.
In this country, it seems that many people are not longer affected by the fearmongering of the BP. In principle this is good, in my view, as a free choice in elections is the pinnacle of democracy. Nevertheless, similarly to BP not having a monopoly of good sense politics in every area, the SP and independents also do not have such a monopoly. One makes more sense in one area, another in another, and others in none!
The choice is always in our hands! We should never forget the people will get the government we deserve!
Nevertheless, courage! Let us vote with the power of conviction in those we believe represent us fully.
----------------------
Kien hemm diversi aspetti li kienu laqtuni fuq is-sitwazzjoni politika tal-Awstralja meta rfist l-għatba ta' dan il-pajjiż meraviljuż, iktar minn għaxar snin ilu. L-ewwelnett, kienet ironika li l-kap tal-pajjiż hija r-reġina Eliżabbetta, fatt li mallewwel ħadni lura fiż-żmien, peress li kont ġej minn Malta Republic fejn l-indipendenza mir-Renju Brittanniku kienet ilha li ħaditha ħamsin sena.
Kont innutajt ukoll il-gvernijiet statali u federali, li f'Malta bi stat wieħed dan ma jeżistix. Ukoll, hemm il-qasma fil-leġislattiv bejn il-kamra tar-rappreżentanti u dik tas-Senat (jew Assembleja Leġislattiva), li teżisti fil-livell federali u l-istati kollha ħlief Queensland.
Jien f'Malta kont nieħu interess fil-politika tal-pajjiż, u ma nqastx li nagħmel dan fl-Awstralja. Dan jgħodd naturalment ukoll għall-elezzjonjiet diversi li għaddejt minnhom, kemm fil-livell lokali, statali u federali.
Nista' ngħid li fiż-żmien qasir li ilni l-Awstralja, l-elezzjoni Federali ta' din is-sena tidher li hija l-iktar waħda interessanti għalija. L-ewwel raġuni hi li għall-ewwel darba, qed ikolli esperjenza tal-elezzjoni għall-membri kollha tas-Senat, mentri s-soltu jiġu eletti biss nofs il-membri tas-Senat.
Raġuni oħra hi l-appoġġ li dejjem jidher li qed jikber fil-partiti żgħar u l-indipendenti minn-naħa tal-eletturi. Fl-elezzjoni federali tal-2013, kien hemm diversi kummenti dwar senaturi li ġew eletti wara li ngħataw inqas minn 1% tal-ewwel vot, u spiċċaw telgħu minħabba preferenzi tal-vot li ħafna nies ma kinux jafu fejn se jispiċċaw.
Il-gvern Liberali-Nazzjonali bidel ir-regolamenti, bl-għajnuna tal-Partit tal-Ħodor, bl-għajta li r-riżultat ikun iktar qrib tar-rieda tal-poplu. Mhux mistqarra kienet ir-rieda tal-Koalizzjoni tal-Gvern li tonqos is-sitwazzjoni fejn l-aġenda parlamentari tiegħu tiġi sfrattata mill-partiti ż-żgħar u l-indipendenti. Bla dubju wkoll din kienet ir-raġuni għaliex il-gvern iddeċieda li jagħti parir lill-Gvernatur Ġenerali jxolji s-Senat kollu, sabiex jerġa jħallat il-karti, u jispera li jirriżulta f'Senat iktar maneġġevoli (jiġifieri b'inqas membri mhux tal-gvern). Imma fil-fatt, jista' jkun li l-gvern ta' Turnbull se jibqa b'xiber imnieħer.
Bdejt bis-Senat, fejn l-iktar li jissemma l-impatt tal-PŻ fil-politika ta' kuljum. Jidher li dawn għandhom appoġġ konsiderevoli, li mill-1983 'l hawn kien dejjem iktar minn 13% tal-voti li jgħoddu (formal votes), u fl-elezzjoni tal-aħħar, fil-2013, din anke telgħet għal 33%! Madankollu, il-persentaġġ ta' Senaturi li tellgħu kien dejjem inqas mill-voti li qalgħu.
Mill-banda l-oħra, il-PK kellhom is-sitwazzjoni l-opposta, jiġifieri li l-persentaġġ ta' Senaturi li tellgħu kien dejjem iktar mill-voti li qalgħu. Għalhekk, persentaġġ pjuttost konsistenti ta' voti li ngħataw lill-PŻ inħlew. Dan il-persentaġġ kien bejn 2-12%.
Fil-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti, kellna storja simili, fejn il-PŻ dejjem tellgħu (ħafna) inqas siġġijiet bħala proporzjon meta mqabbel mal-voti, u l-PK dejjem tellgħu iktar. Li kien notevoli kien kemm kienu l-voti moħlija f'dan il-Parlament: bejn 6-20%.
Dan huwa numru enormi ta' voti moħlija, u huwa r-riżultat tas-sistema li tintuża fid-distretti tal-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti, fejn ikun hemm rebbieħ wieħed (first past the post) f'kull distrett, sistema Ingliża.
Hemm inqas ħela fis-Senat minħabba s-sistema proporzjonali fil-vot, b'iktar minn membru wieħed jiġi elett f'kull stat u territorju.
Minkejja dan il-livell għoli ta' voti moħlija, l-appoġġ tal-PŻ fl-elezzjonijiet tal-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti dejjem kien imdaqqas, anke sa 20%, u f'dawn l-aħħar tliet elezzjonijiet dejjem żdied, imma f'kull elezzjoni dejjem kien inqas mill-appoġġ fis-Senat b'bejn 3-12%. Dan ninterpretaħ bħala ħafna eletturi li jappoġġjaw lill-PŻ jafu li l-voti moħlija fl-elezzjonijiet għall-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti huma għolja ħafna, u għalhekk iħossuhom kostretti li jivvutaw lil xi kandidat ta' PK.
Din is-sistema hija fl-opinjoni tiegħi travestija tad-demokrazija. Ħafna mill-PK jgħidu li huwa aħjar hekk għall-istabbiltà politika, imma mhux hekk jaqblilhom jgħidu? Is-sistema bħalissa tivvantaġġja lill-kbir, u l-kbar m'għandhom ebda interess li jnaqqsu l-influenza tagħhom stess.
Iktar kmieni dan ix-xahar, il-partiti Liberali u Laburisti ħabbru li se jagħtu preferenzi lil xulxin, sabiex jnaqqsu l-possibiltà li l-Partit tal-Ħodor itellgħu membri tal-parlament fil-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti. Jidher ċar li din hija preokkupazzjoni kbira tal-PK, li qed jibżgħu mill-PŻ u oħrajn indipendenti. L-Awstralja, għalkemm iżolata ġeografikament, mhix iżolata mix-xejra globali fejn in-nies xebgħu sal-ponta ta' mneħirhom mill-partiti tradizzjonali, li ma jħossuhomx jirrappreżentawhom iktar, u lesti li jippruvaw il-ġdid anke jekk dan fih ir-riskji tiegħu.
Jien l-istabbiltà naħseb li hi importanti, imma ma jidhirlix li l-PŻ neċessarjament iwassal għal nuqqas tagħha. Irrid ngħid ukoll li għalija iktar importanti li jkollok deċiżjonijiet li jittieħdu li jkunu ta' fejda għall-poplu kollu minflok għall-ftit ipprivileġġjati, milli jkollok stabbiltà.
F'dan il-pajjiż, jidher li ħafna nies m'għadhomx jiġu daqshekk affettwati mill-biża' li jippruvaw ixerrdu l-PK. Din fil-prinċipju hi ħaġa tajba, fl-opinjoni tiegħi, u l-għażla ħielsa fl-elezzjoni hija l-quċċata tad-demokrazija. Madankollu, bħal ma l-PK m'għandhomx il-monopolju fuq politika bis-sens f'kull qasam, l-PŻ u l-indipendenti ukoll m'għandhomx dan il-monopolju. Min jagħmel sens f'qasam, min f'ieħor, u min fl-ebda wieħed!
L-għażla dejjem tibqa f'idejna! Ma ninsewx li poplu jkollu l-gvern li jistħoqqlu!
Imma kuraġġ! Nivvutaw bil-qawwa tal-konvinzjoni f'min nemmnu li jirrappreżentana fis-sħiħ.
1http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/FedElect, retrieved 13/6/2016
1http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/FedElect, retrieved 13/6/2016
No comments:
Post a Comment