Don't like the budget? Your options aren't limited to voting
Democratic theorists, Jean-Paul Gagnon and Mark Chou, have come up with two peaceful ‘people power’ options to oppose the Coalition’s controversial first Budget.
MAY 13 saw the Coalition hand down its first budget. The response
since has been one long story of protest and opposition. Even State
Premiers have banded together to reject the proposed changes.
It's now looking likely that Premiers will ask Senators to staunchly oppose the bill.
The budget, it's been argued, is heavy-handed, unjust and illogical. Most Australians don't want the budget to pass in its current form. Nor do a number of elected representatives, including several Liberal MPs.
But so far, it's primarily been opposition political parties making
their case about how they plan to block the budget. Is there anything
that we, as citizens, can do to block the budget in our own right?
There are at least two approaches.
The first is from ‘within’ the system and the second is from
‘without’ the system. In the past week or so, Australians have already
shown their resolve on both fronts. Yet if we want to pressure the
government to change their path, more Australians still need to act.
Blocking the budget from within
One key form of action is hardly new: communicate directly with MPs
and Senators. The aim here is to petition federal representatives
(Liberal, Labor, National, Green, PUP, independents, and so on) to
maintain their political opposition on your behalf.
Contacting Senators is particularly important since the government
lacks a majority in the upper house. Email them. Send them tweets,
Facebook posts or even snail mail. If you can, try to visit them in
person at their office. Don’t just make noise: make a clear case against
the budget.
You can protest. But protesting from within means that you must be
ready to back up your revolt with a plan for a positive alternative.
Direct your displeasure at government legitimately; make it difficult
for your representative to dismiss you as just another protester. Here,
it's not just citizens who need to act. Political parties and
parliamentarians must be ready to respond.
We saw what shape this type of action can take recently when tens of
thousands took to city streets across the country to protest against the
proposed budget. The so-called March in May rallies united people from all cross-sections of society left disenchanted with their government's plan for their future.
Sydney & Melbourne "Bust the Budget" Rallies
But this was not just any protest. It wasn't just rants and marches.
Political parties, such as the Greens, were also out in force and
they’re asking for people to share
their stories and proposals. They want everyday perspectives to bring
back to Canberra. This is the type of representative politics we need —
the type that depends on our active participation.
Public servants, many of whom may soon face the axe, can also play a
role from within. Before departments close and the projected 16,500
public servants are forced from their jobs, they can strike — even for
an hour. In solidarity with colleagues, and as a symbolic gesture,
public servants can show government that efficiency comes with costs.
Try running a government, even for an hour, with insufficient staff
and see what happens. Sometimes, you just can't do more with less. It's
not just about economic benefits. It's not even about a 'smaller, less interfering government’,
as Joe Hockey put it. It's about the public and how they'll no longer
be served by the government that's supposedly there to represent them.
Blocking the budget from without
The other form of action – which can overlap with the first – is
often advocated by those outside formal political institutions. This
form of action is about peacefully disrupting the continuity of everyday
life. It's about challenging the system until the government gives in
or a new election is called.
The indigenous Idle No More
movement in Canada serves as an instructive example. Protests, marches,
sit-ins, boycotts, and the like can be headline grabbing. But how often
do they truly impact the decisions of leaders? Protest is easily
dismissed or, worse still, condemned.
Take the recent demonstration on Q&A
for example. Not only were the students dismissed by Education
Minister, Christopher Pyne, they were condemned by host, Tony Jones, who
chided:
“That is not what democracy is all about and those students should understand that.”
QandA hijacked by student protesters proposed cuts by Edu Min Christopher Pyne
But what Idle No More does so well in the Canadian context is to
protest where it matters. By peacefully blocking things like major
highways, commercial railway lines (a useful technique for protesters in
country Australia) and the gates of major ports, they target the
national economy. They force a response from government. In Canada, the
government has responded and even entered into dialogue with the
movement.
For those not able or inclined to challenge the budget from within,
this may be your route. For those who feel un-represented by political
parties – even minor parties like the Greens or PUP – there is no need
to speak truth to power through an intermediary. You can stand together
as citizens and associations.
Indignados demonstration Madrid. Image - Samuel Cossar-Gilbert
Some of the techniques used recently in Thailand, or during the height of the Occupy/Indignados Movements
are also helpful. Peacefully and consistently blocking busy inner-city
roads and the entrances to train stations, ferries, and airports has the
effect of annoying others that would rather stay out of politics. It
spreads the message through irritation as those inconvenienced by the
protest are more likely to petition the government to resolve the issue.
Of course, state response to peaceful mass protest has the
unfortunate tendency to turn violent. Rather than dialogue with
demonstrators, governments have a habit of shutting down rallies and
evicting occupiers. Just last week, students protesting the proposed
changes to higher education as part of the budget initiatives were dragged from the streets by police.
Still, this is no reason not to try. Remember: in many other
democracies, it's not uncommon to occupy public spaces for prolonged
periods of time. It shouldn't be in ours either.
Putting the two together
Combining strategies from within and without
will weaken the government’s resolve and strengthen the opposition
case. But there are provisos. Both strategies need to be performed
non-violently. Violence de-legitimises democratic opposition. Both
strategies must have the same goal in this instance: block the budget by
putting forward a more just and measured alternative.
There should also be a clear follow-up policy for the government. Following the world's first Citizens Parliament run in Australia
more than 5 years ago, we would recommend that a citizens’ deliberative
assembly be created to thoroughly investigate the budget. Economic
reforms should then be made in line with the assembly’s recommendations.
In an age brimming with democratic innovations, it's a shame that a government can ask a panel composed of people with possible conflicts of interest to review an entire country’s budget. It's appalling that a government can use dodgy numbers to breed uncertainty and fear in the electorate.
Australians should be thinking seriously about how we got ourselves into this situation in the first place.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License
No comments:
Post a Comment