Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to participate in the debate on the motion moved by the honourable member for Fremantle in relation to the International Day of Democracy and on the motion that was carried through the United Nations General Assembly, which essentially supports the principle of the International Day of Democracy and also urges that democracy be celebrated right around the world.

The motion moved by the honourable member notes that the United Nations General Assembly affirms that:

“ … democracy is a universal value based on the freely expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems, and their full participation in all aspects of life;” and that “While democracies share common features, there is no single model of democracy and that democracy does not belong to any country or region.”

The problem with the United Nations is that, although it is a very useful international forum and has done much good work, it has often been accused, with some justification, of essentially being a talkfest. People express lofty sentiments and various delegates at the United Nations talk on and on. Motions are carried but, regrettably, there is often not a lot of positive impact flowing from the debate in the United Nations General Assembly. Having said that, I am not one to run the United Nations down, as it is certainly a force for world good. However, in some respects, I think it is regrettable that we do not see more actions of substance from the United Nations and more positive outcomes for the world community as a result of discussions at the United Nations General Assembly.

Often one finds countries which are completely undemocratic but are rather hypocritically mouthing pious platitudes about the importance of democratic principles. There is a whole series of nations that have totalitarian regimes, nations where the population has no authority or right to determine its government. One finds many of those countries are at the assembly putting forward sentiments of support for the notion of democracy while denying it to their own citizens. All honourable members would obviously not approve of such hypocrisy.

In Australia, we are singularly fortunate because we are one of the oldest democracies in the world, even though we are a relatively young country. Someone told me once that Australia was the sixth oldest democracy in the world. Initially, one’s reaction is to say that that simply could not be true, but then one looks at the fact that during the entire period of this country’s life, certainly since we gained representative government, we have always had democratic governments and we have always been governed by the rule of law. We have freedom, stability and a way of life that people in other places throughout the world do not enjoy. We have heard of the appalling examples in South America where people who oppose regimes there sometimes just disappear. But here in Australia if one is, shall we say, questioned by the law or charged under the law then one has an entitlement to one’s day in court. We have a system of which we are justly proud.

Personally, I believe that our constitutional monarchy has played a very important role in being one of the foundations of our society. It has been a guarantee of our freedom, stability and a way of life that many other nations simply envy. All members of the House support the system of democracy. I just think that, while we have a general election and we might not like the outcome, we ought not to question the process. I go round to the schools in my electorate, as no doubt you do, Mr Deputy Speaker Schultz, and talk to students about democracy.

Is it not wonderful that, when a government is defeated, the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister for the time being and then, under the conventions of how we are governed, as the head of government goes and formally advises the head of state, the Governor-General, of the result of the election—although obviously the Governor-General looks at the internet or watches the TV like everyone else—and advises that he as Prime Minister would no longer have the confidence of the House and recommends to the Governor-General that the Leader of the Opposition be commissioned to form a government? The Governor-General then issues a new commission and a new government is formed. There is an orderly transition. New ministers take over, the parliament is recalled and the system of democracy goes on. Then in three years time, when the next election occurs, the government has the opportunity of being judged by what it has achieved and the community of Australia will once again determine whether or not that government should be returned or whether another government should replace it. If the result were that that government was defeated, there would similarly be another orderly transition.

One can go right back to when Federation occurred to see that this has been the way that we have operated as a nation. While I certainly support the principles enunciated in the United Nations General Assembly about the importance of democracy, highlighting democracy, emphasising democracy and encouraging democracy, we as Australians—along with a number of other countries—lead by example. I said earlier that I was advised that we were the sixth oldest democracy in the world. The reason for that is that we have been continuously democratic, whereas many of the now democratic countries of western, central and even now eastern Europe for very long periods, particularly in the 20th century, were under the yoke of communism or other forms of totalitarianism. We as Australians have been fortunate because we have a system whereby the electorate makes a decision at the ballot box, the decision is respected, the people who win the election are allowed to take their place to implement their policies and there is never any question by anyone in our political system that that system should not continue and should not be encouraged.

We do find that there are a series of countries that play lip-service to democracy. While I do not want to highlight large numbers of these countries in the time available to me, Zimbabwe has been a case in point. President Mugabe’s government was defeated and it took an extraordinarily long period of negotiations before some sort of settlement was reached, one which still saw President Mugabe—who stole the election, who intimidated his citizens, who threw people who owned farms off their property—in a power-sharing agreement. Why on earth should there be a power-sharing agreement when there has been an election and the Movement for Democratic Change won and the party of the President, ZANU-PF, was defeated? Unfortunately, there had to be this long and fairly tortuous series of discussions before some semblance of democracy was restored. It is probably a question of watching this space to see just how effective that settlement is going to be. I certainly hope it is and I certainly hope it is only a transitional arrangement and that Zimbabwe can achieve a situation like Australia has in that, when we have an election, everyone respects the results.

There was a recent election in Fiji. I was privileged, along with the now Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs, to represent Australia as part of the Pacific Island Forum election observer group. We collectively judged the election in Fiji to be fair and free, and Mr Qarase’s government was returned. Then, a few months afterwards, there were people who did not respect the result of the election and there was a coup. Commodore Bainimarama is now the dictator of Fiji, the so-called interim Prime Minister, but he does not have the support of the people and he seems to be, regrettably, quite reluctant to allow the people of Fiji to determine who their government is in fact going to be. Having said that, I do applaud the sentiments in the motion carried by the United Nations General Assembly. It is important to encourage member governments, non-government organisations and individuals to commemorate the International Day of Democracy. It is important to raise awareness of the value of democracy, but even more important than raising awareness of the value of democracy is the implementation of democracy so that people in other parts of the world are able to enjoy the freedoms that we have as Australians.

It could be that in some parts of the world they say that democracy is not the best way to go and that somehow you can have dictatorship of the majority through the implementation of the results of an election. I am not convinced by that argument at all. I think the best guarantee of democracy is by having a government put in office as a result of the freely expressed will of the people and then, of course, that government has the opportunity to govern. If that government does not meet the expectations of its people after quite a period of time in government, then that government will be removed from office and replaced by another government.

It is important that democratic government is a government of the people, by the people. The democratic ideal and the concept of democracy as expressed in the resolution of the UN General Assembly ought to be applauded. I do support the international celebration of the International Day of Democracy but, more importantly than celebration, we need action. Actions speak louder than words. What we need to do as a world community is to act on that sentiment in favour of democracy and make sure that the oppressed people around the globe are given the same free political rights that we have as Australians. I commend the motion to the Committee.

See this speech in context