House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Constitution (Basic Democratic Principles) Amendment Bill CONSTITUTION (BASIC DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES) AMENDMENT BILL Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly Stuart The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (10:42): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Constitution Act 1934. Read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly Stuart The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (10:42): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I bring this bill to amend the Constitution Act to the attention of the house after reading very carefully the Constitution Act of the former Republic of West Germany (now Germany), which has enshrined in its constitution that members of parliament are to be elected on a democratic basis and that they are subject only to their conscience and are not bound by orders or instructions. Therefore, if a person is elected they should always be in a position, if they desire, to vote on their conscience, or if they believe that the course of action they are taking is in the long-term best interest of their constituents. That particular course of action may be in conflict with the party or the organisation which has sent them to this place from time to time; but, notwithstanding that, there is in my view an absolute overriding responsibility for all of us to be able clearly to exercise our conscience. There are few places in the world where members of parliament are bound by a certain political party. Australia is one of the few places where a major political party binds its members to vote a particular way. If they do not exercise that instruction, action is taken and they could have a rather short time in public office. Even in the United Kingdom, which is the home of the Labour Party (and they came out and established the party in Australia), they do not have the provision to bind people to vote in a certain way. So, it is a very simple but fundamental right and it should not be treated lightly. It should not be subject to the manipulation of back room bovver boys and others who want to exercise control over people. The right should be there. If the people in an electorate determine to send someone to this place or another place they should have enough confidence in them to give them a free hand to vote on issues as they think fit and proper. If they do not do so and the electorate at large does not agree with it, they can get rid of them, but they do not have the ability to get rid of the back room bovver boys. It is a little like people can get rid of members of parliament but they cannot get rid of bureaucracy. In our system, where once every four years the community has the right to elect people to this place, 47 of us are given the privilege to sit in this chamber. It is a privilege to be a member of parliament and an honour to achieve higher office. With that privilege and honour goes the responsibility to act in the best interests of one's constituents and that right should not be impinged, interfered with or placed under threat. The only threat should be that, if a member of parliament does not do their job properly, they will certainly feel the chilly winds of the ballot box. The nervous nellies will feel that. As someone who has been sent to this place on 12 successive occasions, I understand, and I think I have some limited knowledge of being able to test what the community in my electorate is saying. Therefore, I have been very fortunate and I have always exercised an independent point of view when I believed it necessary. I know that from time to time my leaders have found me somewhat difficult to manage but — The Hon. I.F. Evans House of Assembly The Hon. I.F. Evans: Oh, I can't believe that! The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly The Hon. G.M. GUNN: No—and I don't know why. I'm just a simple country lad. However, whatever I have done has been done with a clear conscience because I have believed that it was in the best interests of the people who elected me, and this measure is in the best interests of the people of South Australia. It will bring about better government, because people could with confidence bring matters to the attention of the parliament. From time to time, if a member wanted to raise a matter in here and they happened to belong to the government party and it was going to embarrass the government, great pressure can be put upon them not to do it, even though it is in the public interest to do so. If you cannot discuss issues in this forum, where else can you discuss them? Therefore, if they do it, they are liable to be on the outer and lose their endorsement at the next election. Under my legislation, that would be outlawed. Mr Speaker, as you know, as the protector of the rights of members, the rights and privileges that we have in this place belong to the people; they do not belong to us individually. Parliamentary privilege belongs to the people of South Australia, and those of us who are fortunate enough to come here from time to time exercise that right on their behalf. My bill is small and simple but it is fundamental to the rights and privileges of the people of South Australia. It is a most important right. It is like the right to be able to vote, or a secret ballot. Any person, with very few restrictions, has the ability to stand for parliament. These are all fundamental rights, and so should be the right to vote according to one's conscience in relation to any matter that is put before this house or any matter that one thinks is appropriate to be raised in here. I therefore commend the bill to the house. I sincerely hope that the government does not do what it did last time and just use its numbers to shut down the debate. There was no adequate response on the last occasion when I brought this measure to the parliament. If one looks at the history of why the current German constitution contains these principles, one will see that Germany has had at least two very nasty experiences with anti-democratic forces and has found it absolutely necessary. These provisions do not apply to political parties in the United Kingdom or the United States. I am not aware of the situation in Canada or New Zealand, which are very similar to us in the way in which they are governed. There is an absolute need for this. I commend the bill to the house and I look forward to members participating in the debate and supporting the bill. Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.