Parliamentary Affairs Vol. 59 No. 4, 2006, 638–653 Advance Access Publication 6 April 2006 One Step at a Time: Australian Parliamentarians, Professionalism and the Need for Staff BY KATE JONES1 Downloaded from IT is almost never a compliment to call someone a ‘professional politi- cian’. The implication is that the politician so defined is slick, opportun- istic, only interested in money and power. Opposed to the idea of professionalism is a suggestion that there was once a golden age of ama- http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/ teurism in which politicians served the country and community from a sense of duty and dedication. However, the concept of professionalism for parliament and parliamentarians has other, very different, connota- tions from the popular one. Joan Rydon, in her study of Australia’s Commonwealth parliamentarians, identified two complementary aspects of professionalism. First was the idea of the parliamentarian as a pro- fessional, one of ‘those who see politics as the central activity of their at Purdue University Libraries ADMN on June 12, 2015 lives and attempt to keep it as such’.2 The second was the professionali- sation of the occupation, marked by ‘better pay, generous superannua- tion, improved working conditions, more secretarial assistance, better library and research facilities, larger travelling allowances’.3 In 1994 Michael Rush discerned similar evidence of an increasing professionali- sation of British politicians: improved salaries, better accommodation, staff and research services, their length of service and tendency to retire at about the normal retirement age and their predominant recruitment from a narrow age range.4 This article discusses one aspect of that professionalisation of working conditions and entitlements for parliamentarians in the Commonwealth Parliament, the provision of personal staff for mem- bers in both their electorate offices and their offices in Parliament House. It was not until the last quarter of the twentieth century that parliamentarians became entitled to several staff with secretarial, research, media and other administrative responsibilities. This hap- pened not because governments or parliamentary administrations became convinced that parliamentarians needed more assistance, but because parliamentarians themselves began to work differently and realised that they could not fulfil their responsibilities in a modern society without assistance. The timing of the provision of personal staff was also related to con- cepts of amateurism and professionalism applied to parliamentarians. This can be seen most clearly in official views about how parliamentarians Parliamentary Affairs Vol. 59 No. 4 © The Author [2006]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Hansard Society for Parliamentary Government; all rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1093/pa/gsl015 One Step at a Time 639 should be paid. Although members of the Commonwealth Parliament have been paid since the Parliament was first established, in 1901, and many had been members of the six colonial legislatures and had spent large parts of their lives as parliamentarians, there was ambivalence about their role. They were still seen largely as amateurs serving the nation from a sense of duty and explicitly eschewing the idea of politics as a job or pro- fession. This ambivalence was reflected in the arrangements for their pay- ment made in the Constitution. They were given not a ‘salary’ but an ‘allowance’ that would enable them to live while carrying out their parlia- Downloaded from mentary duties. A similar situation applied to British members of parlia- ment (MPs). They were not paid until 1911, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lloyd George, explicitly denied that the payment was a salary: [I]t is not recognition of the magnitude of the service, it is not a remuneration, it is not a recompense, it is not even a salary. It is just an allowance, and I think http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/ the minimum allowance, to enable men to come here, men who would render incalculable service to the State, and whom it is an incalculable loss to the State not to have here, but who cannot be here because their means do not allow it.5 The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia was established in 1901 when the six Australian colonies joined together in a federation.6 Its structure and proceedings were modelled largely on Britain’s West- minster system, with the one large exception that it did not have a at Purdue University Libraries ADMN on June 12, 2015 hereditary upper house. The designers of the new parliament also had extensive experience of the workings of the colonial parliaments and used those lessons to good effect. Like many British institutions trans- mitted to Australia, both colonial and Commonwealth parliaments underwent some changes on the journey that were not immediately apparent to the participants. The nation of Australia came into exist- ence on 1 January 1901, the first election was on 29 and 30 March 1901 and Parliament first met on 9 May 1901 in the Exhibition Build- ing in Melbourne. The next day it moved to the Victoria’s Parliament House, a few blocks away from the Exhibition Building, where it was to remain for 27 years, evicting the state parliament from its own building. The capital city of Australia was yet to be built, since a wrangle between the two largest colonies, New South Wales and Victoria, had resulted in an agreement that neither would be the capital. As a result, the planned city of Canberra was built in a then-remote inland area of New South Wales, which some contemporary observers felt had been a nice site for a sheep station. In 1927 the Parliament House in Canberra was ready for occupation, as indeed was Canberra itself. The Common- wealth Parliament moved to its new building and then moved again in 1988 to a newer, larger and grander Parliament House constructed on a hill behind what has now become known as Old Parliament House. Some observers, perhaps descendants of those who had regarded the site of Canberra itself with scepticism, looked at the New Parliament House and reflected that it had been a nice hill. 640 Parliamentary Affairs The Commonwealth Parliament consists of an upper and a lower house, the Senate and the House of Representatives, both directly elected. The House of Representatives is the house of government, and in 1901 it had 75 members representing electorates of roughly equal numbers. The Senate consisted of 36 senators, six from each state, thus allowing the smallest state equal representation with the largest. The structure has not changed, but in 2005, there were 76 senators and 150 members of the House of Representatives. The Constitution laid down the structure of the Parliament but had no instructions on its infrastructure. Downloaded from The MP in 1901 was predominantly a legislator and saw his role as specifically parliamentary. He made speeches, attended political meet- ings and introduced, amended and debated legislation. In this role he had no need for staff other than those looking after the physical and administrative fabric of parliament. He was also male. Although the http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/ Commonwealth Franchise Act gave women the right to vote in federal elections and stand for parliament in 1902, the first two women were not elected until 1943. As Australian society developed more complex, specialised and professional bureaucratic and political institutions, especially during and after World War II, a new period of professional and administrative support emerged. This would lead to more elaborate support arrangements and more educated and skilled staff emerging in the 1970s and early 1980s. Finally, by the turn of the century, a new at Purdue University Libraries ADMN on June 12, 2015 period of globalisation, mass media and fast communications and high expectations of immediate response and action had emerged. In this context parliamentarians, like some other professionals, had support teams which they managed and on which they relied to provide resources and specialist as well as general assistance. Today the work of a parliamentarian encompasses a number of roles: the legislator, the policy-maker, the social worker and the party activist. This is not only an Australian phenomenon. A study of British legislators in 1992 found that they devoted most of their time to constituency matters.7 With such diverse responsibilities, parliamentarians rely heavily on staff with pro- fessional expertise to support them. From vocation to profession: 1901–73 It took nearly half a century for backbenchers to acquire access to per- sonal staff and another 30 years for recognition that they now needed more and different staff. When the new Commonwealth Parliament first met in Melbourne in May 1901, its staff consisted of 53 parlia- mentary officers, a number of whom had transferred from the colonial parliaments. They were very specifically the staff of the parliament, not the staff of the parliamentarians, although some parliamentarians apparently employed staff privately.8 Until 1944 backbenchers had no personal staff supplied by government or parliament, although they did have access to the services of typists at Parliament House and at the central parliamentary offices in the state capitals. When Robert One Step at a Time 641 Menzies, later to be the prime minister, was the leader of the Opposi- tion in 1944, he had a staff of two.9 In the same year each MP became entitled to employ an electorate secretary, variously described as an ‘electorate typist’ or a ‘secretary-typist’. There was no apparent restric- tion on where they could be located, but they had no travel privileges. This meant that no travel, including going to Canberra when parlia- ment was sitting, would be funded. It is likely that most were located in the member’s electorate office outside Canberra; most such offices were hundreds or thousands of kilometres from the national capital.