Hidden agendas drive upper house critics

The members of the Legislative Council and the chamber itself, have endured plenty of sledges, most of which were entirely politically motivated.

The relevance and workings of the state's upper house have been in the spotlight in the past week or so, with an inquiry into the electoral commission and the close of nominations for the seats of Mersey, Derwent and Windermere.

Labor submitted to the inquiry that the future of the house itself be examined, with leader Bryan Green publicly ruminating about the accountability of MLCs and the difficulties in unseating incumbent members.

Labor has opted not to challenge Mersey independent Mike Gaffney, while the Greens will only field a candidate in Windermere.

The Liberals will not contest any of the three seats.

Given that only one sitting MLC has been defeated at an election in the past decade, it seems highly likely that there will be no change to make-up of the chamber come election night.

This provides an interesting point of reference for the next 12 months of politics.

If and when the government is frustrated by the upper house getting in their way, it will be pertinent to remember that they did not bother to challenge for the three seats.

By the same token, Labor and the Greens should make more of an effort to get their own members elected if they feel the upper house is too conservative.

The left often takes a dim view of the Legislative Council, with some withering attacks on members for being too old and too conservative after the previous government could not pass same sex marriage and voluntary assisted dying laws.

As it transpired, that same house managed to block the current government's pay freeze efforts, and heavily dilute its anti-protest laws.

Those who wish the Legislative Council away are often just frustrated that the members do not share their own views.

That is not to say the upper house is perfect.

If and when the government is frustrated by the upper house getting in their way, it will be pertinent to remember that they did not bother to challenge for the three seats.

Some members seem to take the view that their seat is theirs for life, while the house seems to spend endless hours on private members motions of little or no importance.

It also has a bad habit of turning worthwhile inquiries into open-ended, directionless talkfests.

While the Council could clearly use a decent dose of reform, it is often the place where the public can find out what a government is really up to, and has a history of stopping bad ideas from becoming bad laws.

It also largely functions as a Westminster house of Parliament should, in that it is made up of mostly independent members who represent the interests of their local constituency.

Queensland is our only unicameral state and is undoubtedly worse off as a result - the corruption of Joh Bjelke-Petersen's regime went unchecked for decades, while more recently, Campbell Newman's government could not be saved from itself.

We should view with great suspicion any attempt to scrap the Legislative Council or reduce its powers.

Beneath the surface of such suggestions invariably lies political self-interest and the quest for more power.