I would like you to try to cut yourself away from your connections and feelings about political politics, government and Opposition, and consider the essentials of the referendum and what it means to the ordinary citizens.
Essentially, the referendum invites you to participate in the democratic process of election in the most direct and effective way.
There are two ways in which we choose people to perform functions: By election or selection.
For example, if we wish to fill a post in the public service, the Public Services Commission (PSC) invites applicants stating what the applicants are expected to do and the qualifications required. Then, the qualified applicants are interviewed, either by the PSC itself or by a panel appointed by the PSC and, one of the applicants is selected for appointment.
A similar procedure is employed in the world of business. Applications are invited and a selection is made. Of course, in private commerce, jobs may not be advertised. Exercising his prerogative, an employer may select the employee of his choice.
But when we are in the public domain and our objective is to choose persons to represent the people and exercise power and authority on their behalf, the process of selection is first employed by the political parties to find suitable candidates to compete with each other at a convention.
The political parties make their own rules to anoint a standard bearer for a particular electoral division. The convention may be closed or open. A closed convention being one where only party members may vote and, an open convention meaning the obvious. The important thing being that the standard bearer is elected by a majority of votes.
Finally, at a general election the people choose from among the party candidates, in each electoral division, a member of the House of Representatives.
Presently, members of the Senate are chosen by the government, Opposition and the bodies designated in our constitution by the process of selection. When a senator is selected, he has no term of office and may be removed and replaced at any time by the executive of the body which selected him. A senator so chosen is expected to represent the interests of the body which selected him and by each senator doing so, the interests of all those bodies will be served. But, there is a great weakness here. The senators are in a straitjacket. How can they use their independent judgement when they have to be always conscious of pleasing their bosses? They are on a short leash which bodes ill for the proper exercise of the power given to them because, they are inhibited by the desire to please the person or persons who selected them.
Members of the House of Representatives also represent the interests of their constituents but, they have a larger duty to represent the interests of the whole nation and, because they enjoy a term of office (much too long, in my opinion) they can do so “without fear of favor”. Why, then, should it be different with the Senate, traditionally referred to as the Upper House if, as many of us believe, it should be composed of men and women of wisdom and experience, which usually comes with age.
Some voices have been raised questioning the timing of the referendum. They ask why now. The answer is why not now. What better time can there be than at general election or municipal elections to ask the people to make a decision on a matter of national importance?
It has been suggested that there might be some confusion in the mind of an elector in dealing with the referendum and that he may make a mistake in voting for a member of the House of Representatives. Those who share this view have a very poor opinion of our electors’ quality of mind.
The matter of a Senate is serious but, the question posed by the referendum is simple. We are asked to choose which principle we prefer in deciding on the members of the Senate – the elective or the selective. Anyone who tells you not to exercise your judgement and your privilege in voting for or against an elected Senate in this referendum is not your friend.