Who else 'profits'?
The first thing that needs to be said about the archaic High Court decision ruling the independent left MP for Wills, Phil Cleary, invalid for office is that it need not have been made. The court might instead have found in Cleary's favour, setting the precedent that in the modern world working for paltry government wages is hardly "an office of profit" — neither in reality nor in spirit.
Cleary correctly called the decision "bad, unimaginative and unnecessary". It is one that again draws attention to the hidebound conservatism and reactionary character of the High Court. While the Australian electoral system is far from democratic, in the case of the Wills by-election the popular vote for an independent left candidate was legitimate and unmistakeable.
It should also be said that no-one benefits from the decision — no one except the Labor Party. Cleary shook the ALP by taking the traditional Labor seat in working-class Coburg, and has now been severely disadvantaged in retaining the seat at the forthcoming federal election. This is perhaps why ALP National Secretary Bob Hogg directed his fire against the High Court almost exclusively on the citizenship question, a factor that could badly hurt Labor when it next goes to the polls.
The decision can only reinforce the deeply entrenched two-party political system at a time when increasing numbers of ordinary citizens are fed up with the tweedledum and tweedledee choice now before them. At a time of high unemployment and with only slim chances of success in most cases, independent candidates are (unlike many major party endorsed candidates) often compelled to hold down existing jobs (in the public service, for instance) while they campaign for office.
The High Court decision is not only blatantly undemocratic, as it relies on an 18th century clause designed to limit the influence of the (then dominant) monarchy over the fledgling elected British parliament. In today's world, it is also immoral and absurd. Today, the parliament itself is for some the source of great profit and questionable gain in the form of direct or indirect rewards, whether legal or otherwise. That is the real injustice that needs attention.