The current Parliament of Australia has 17 members on the cross-bench of the House of Representatives. That’s a record number in living memory and potentially influential if the Labor Government were somehow to lose its majority, currently at 3 votes.
If the Parliament were hung (and I fervently wish that this were the case) then one or more of the cross-bench would need to provide Supply and Confidence for the Labor Party to continue to govern. Or, if all the cross-bench got together, (highly unlikely) they could then support an alternative Coalition Government.
What difference could they make to Australia’s economic policies? And could there be an improvement in the (currently abysmal) making of economic policy?
Well, they could make a difference. One only has to look at the effect that independents had on the last hung parliament: the Gillard Government of 2010. Admittedly, things didn’t end too well, but during its term this Government had an outstanding record of positive policy implementation including: introducing the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), the Gonski funding, the initial rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN), a mining tax and the carbon pricing scheme. Right now, if we still had a mining tax and a carbon pricing scheme it would go a long way towards getting us out of economic difficulty.
The kinds of improvements that I would be looking for are as follows:
- Much more urgent and focused action on decarbonisation of our economy and investment in renewable energy (our number 1 economic and environmental problem).
- Moving to a balanced-budget situation over the economic cycle. Given that we are currently running a perpetual deficit, this requires either increased overall taxation or a reduction in spending or both.
- Greatly reducing the currently high level of inequality in wealth and incomes. This would require a whole suite of policies aimed at taxing the rich and giving to the poor as well as finding ways to get disadvantaged people into secure, well-paid jobs. It would also require better (more equal, better funded) childcare, aged-care, education and health systems.
- Improving decision making in infrastructure funding. Ending the pork-barrel of doling out government money aiming to buy votes.
- Dismantling monopolies and oligopolies, or at least, better regulating them. Ideally, a number of industries should be renationalised, or at least have competitive Government involvement, starting with the electricity grid.
Who on the cross-bench would be most likely to support such economic reforms?
Well, on point number 1 there are fourteen members of the cross-bench who are pretty vocal about getting real action on climate change. That’s a pretty large number. Only three members could be considered lukewarm or cool towards climate change issues. They are:
- Dai Le, the independent member for the electorate of Fowler in Western Sydney. Her main priorities are stated to be reducing the cost of living and getting down unemployment.
- Andrew Gee, the independent (formerly National) member for the electorate of Calare in Central West NSW. He is all about “getting runs on the board” ie. government largesse for his electorate.
- Bob Katter, the independent member for Kennedy in North Queensland. Bob does have some positive ideas. For example, he is in favour of a national energy grid and removing any taxes on bio fuels. However, he doesn’t appear to be seriously concerned about climate change and is dead against carbon taxes and mining taxes.
None of the above three decarbonisation recalcitrants are likely to rush to support a Labor Government in need of supply or confidence, seeing that they tend respectively towards Liberal, National and Katter views of the world.
On point number 2, budget balance, there are about eight members of the cross-bench who have some proposals aligned to achieve this objective. These are:
- The four Greens: Adam Bandt, Stephen Bates, Max Chandler-Mather and Elizabeth Watson-Brown, representing inner-city electorates in Melbourne and Brisbane. The Greens are not shy of making everyone pay their fair share of taxes.
- Allegra Spender, the member for Wentworth in Sydney’s posh Eastern Suburbs. Allegra is forthright in talking about about GST, income taxes, stamp duty, and capital gains tax, and the urgent need for tax reform.
- Kate Chaney, the member for Curtin in Perth’s comfy south-west. Kate recognises that our tax system is complex and requires reform so it is fit for purpose.
- Zoe Daniel, the member for Goldstein in Melbourne’s upmarket Bayside. Zoe notes that there have only been tweaks and no major reform since the introduction of the GST in 2000, that Politics killed any consideration of the Henry Tax Review written in 2009 and that, a decade and half on we need another clearheaded broad-based review.
- Kylea Tink, the member for North Sydney, long a stronghold of independent-minded electors. Kyle advocates more holistic tax reform, taking pressure off personal income and broadening the tax base including adequate review of PRRT. (I am not completely in agreement with this stance, but I give credit for recognising the problem and agree that it is one way to go.)
On point number 3, reducing inequality, the Green Party stands out as having the most positive ideas for dealing with the issues. The Teal independents generally are strongly in favour of equality for women and protection of minorities but are a bit quiet on other inequality issues. Zoe Daniel deserves a special mention for her stance on the Stage 3 tax cuts for high-income earners and for her policies on housing and HELP/HECs. Andrew Wilkie has strongly progressive views on education, employment, house, health and social security.
On point number 4, improved decision making on spending, quite a number of independents are unfortunately vociferously in favour of electorate-based pork barrelling. Andrew Gee is a standout champion in this regard, with Rebekha Sharkie not far behind. The Teals and the Greens however, are not at all greedy.
On point number 5, Bob Katter takes aim at the supermarket oligopoly and wants to renationalise Qantas. The Greens are against the big corporations and want to Government to take direct control of housing, healthcare, electricity, transport and education. Most of the other cross-bench members tend to be rather quiet on these issues.
Some combination of Tealery, Greenery and a splatter of Katter, would be greatly beneficial to Australian economic policy making, enlivening a current d0-nothing dead zone. The worse thing that could happen would be if Labor were to cut a deal with one or more members greedy for pork-barrel projects for their own electorates and ready to forget about their other professed concerns.
As a summary, I suggest that the Greens have the best overall economic policies. Some of the Teals: Allegra Spender, Zoe Daniels, Kylea Tink and Kate Chaney are strong on tax reform. Zali Steggal, Sophie Scamps and Monique Ryan make useful suggestions. Andrew Wilkie is fairly quiet on economic policy but has runs on the board, having supported Julia Gillard, despite being double-crossed by her over gambling reform. And Bob Katter has a unique perspective, he is pretty bad on climate change but he should be respected for some of his views.
So 4 out of 17 are very good at economics, another 4 are pretty good, 2 more are interesting, another 4 at least recognise the urgent need for decarbonisation, and the remaining 2 need to lift their game.
