LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:23): I have a supplementary question. Given the minister's support for the Tasmanian reforms, why did the government not introduce multi-member electorates in the lower house in South Australia?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:23): As I have just said, Tasmania has a different system. It has single-member electorates in the upper house and multi-member electorates in the lower house. That is the Tasmanian system. We have a tradition within the Westminster system, which applies in every other part of the British commonwealth, other than perhaps Tasmania, where we have the single-member electorate composition. That has been the tradition of our system. The government is formed by the party or group, as the case might be, that wins the maximum number of seats in the lower house. That is our tradition, and this government certainly does not propose to move away from that system, which has been a part of our government ever since self-government in 1857 and, indeed, for much longer in the United Kingdom on which our parliament has been based. In fact, while I am using the example of the UK parliament, that parliament has reformed its upper house in significant ways to reduce its powers—

The Hon. S.G. Wade interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Well, yes; but it has also reduced its powers to block legislation, which has made that house much more accountable. So, I think the direction the government is proposing is very much in line with the reform in western countries. When the Hon. Nick Xenophon was here, I understood that he was a supporter of four year terms. It will be interesting to see what his views are and whether he still holds that view.