Tasmanian Labor wins a rigged race
By Alex Bainbridge
and Tony Iltis
HOBART — Tasmania has a Labor government, it was announced on September 12. The election was the first since Labor and Liberal "reformed" the Tasmanian parliament. The new parliament is composed of 14 Labor, 10 Liberal and one Greens member.
The "reform" reduced the number of representatives, elected by proportional representation, in each of the five electorates from seven to five. This pushed up the quota required to win a seat, making it much more difficult for smaller parties to be elected.
For the first time in many years, one party holds a clear majority of the seats in the state lower house. But, as Tasmanian Greens leader Christine Milne pointed out, it should be called a minority government because it won a minority of primary votes.
"The Green vote is stable at around 10%", Greens spokesperson and Senate candidate Louise Crossley told Green Left Weekly.
"Had the election been held with the old number of seats, the Greens would have won five seats. This election has done exactly what the 'Laborials' wanted — get rid of the independents and minor parties. The only reason the Greens have fewer seats is because the system was changed", she said.
Crossley pointed out that the "reformed" parliament is also less representative in other ways. "The previous parliament had 11 women [MPs]; this parliament will have five or six. Young parliamentarians will also be affected."
The new Labor government has yet to reveal its program. Apart from pledging to keep the Hydro Electricity Corporation in public hands, Labor's election campaign was short on concrete policies and long on rhetoric on health and education.
"One of the interesting features of this election is that the ALP won on an anti-privatisation platform", Democratic Socialist Senate candidate Kamala Emanuel told Green Left Weekly. "However, while the Hydro is likely to remain publicly owned — it would be politically costly for the ALP to break that promise — it will be surprising if Labor doesn't try to privatise other government assets."
Crossley agrees and believes that Tasmania's forests may be privatised. "After the Hydro, the next most valuable [public asset] is the Forestry Commission. Labor voted for a bill in the last parliament to pass ownership of some forests from the crown to the Forestry Commission.
There would be several advantages from their point of view. It would bring money into the state budget and it would guarantee 'security' to the timber industry."
If crown forest is privatised, there will no longer be public access. Public forest often has multiple uses. "In private hands, its fate is much less secure", Crossley said.
While the Liberals' campaign centred on selling the Hydro, and Labor's on keeping it public, the Greens campaigned to lease it.
"Our position on the Hydro was described as a compromise", Crossley said. "In fact, we consider it to be the optimal position. We recognise that the state has a substantial debt."
Emanuel rejects this argument. "Fundamental to the Democratic Socialists' opposition to privatisation is the idea that utilities should serve people, not profit margins. Leasing part of the Hydro, as much as selling it, would mean it would operate to make money for a private corporation.
"Of course, a public Hydro is not enough. We advocate putting it under the democratic control of the public. Part of the problem is that ALP and Liberal governments have used the Hydro to subsidise big business. Corporate customers like Comalco pay below-cost rates while ordinary residential consumers foot the bill."
"We don't buy into the state debt argument", Emanuel said. "The debt comes from this, and other subsidies, to big business. These hand-outs were supposed to create employment but unemployment in Tasmania has skyrocketed. Ordinary working people have never benefited, so why should we be made responsible for paying back these debts? It's time that the capitalist class was made responsible for its own debts."