The Foundation of Democracy - Sir George Reidy Q.C.

I am honoured by the invitation of your Society that I should be your guest speaker this evening.
I thought I should like to have a few things to say on the foundations of our system of democracy. I shall endeavour to make reference to the life and work of several of the illustrious members of the Victorian Parliament.

Over the years, Britain established the convention that the Ministry responsible for the government of the country should have the support of the majority of the members constituting the lower house of the Parliament, I have described this as a convention, advisedly, because although it is a highly important principle in our constitution, it is not set down anywhere in any Act of Parliament in black and white, whether in Britain, in the Victorian Constitution or in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. It is one of the unwritten laws of our Constitution.
The strength and prestige of Parliament depends in a large measure on the character of the man who, for the time being, holds the office of the Speaker, who, as you know, is the presiding officer of the lower house.

We have had some very great men as Speakers of the Victorian Legislative Assembly, but I want to make particular reference to the man who held office as Speaker between the years 1880 and 1887. This was the famous Peter Lalor. Emphasis has naturally been placed on the more colourful side of Lalor's life, namely his leadership of the Eureka rebellion, but equally important is the contribution which Lalor made to the maintenance with dignity and impartiality of the office of Speaker.
To quote from Professor Ian Turner's recently published brochure on Peter Lalor, "he acquired an extensive knowledge of Parliamentary procedures during his term as Chairman of Committees and he took great pride in the office of Speaker." In Lalor's own words, "'The first duty of a Speaker is to be a tyrant. Remove him if you like but while he is in the chair obey him.î The Speaker is the embodiment of the corporate honour of the House. He is above party. He is the greatest representative of the people.

ìLalor became a great stickler for Parliamentary propriety, maintaining the strength, dignity and impartiality of the chair, and he was rewarded with general acclaim."
Lalor's contribution to the dignity and impartiality of the Speakership has been matched by those of other great men who have held this office. I believe that the outstanding figure in this group of men was George Higinbotham. Few people who pass by the stature of Higinbotham outside the Old Treasury building realise that it commemorates a man who, as Attorney General and later as Chief Justice, gave brilliant and dedicated service to his fellow men. He was a controversial figure. He was a man of great culture and charm but, at all times, was the champion of the underprivileged. He was a man ahead of his time and often espoused unpopular causes. In 1873, he was ridiculed by the press because he advocated votes for women.
To his mind, Victoria had become a self-governing colony and the Queen's representative was bound, in carrying out the functions of government, to follow the advice of the ministers who were members of the Victorian Parliament, and not that of ministers or bureaucrats ensconced in the British Colonial Office. Thus he developed one of the principles of responsible government that the ministry should be responsible only to the Parliament from which it originates and not to any outside body.
Sir Isaac Isaacs, early in his political career, was dramatically involved in an incident associated with the basic principles of responsible government. If a Minister differs from the rest of the cabinet on some important matter of principle, he must leave the Cabinet. He cannot stay in the Cabinet, and at the same time publicly criticise its decisions.

Isaacs, after a comparatively short time in Parliament, was appointed to the office of Solicitor General. A question arose whether several of the principals concerned in the conduct of a bank, including a former member of Parliament of high social standing, should be prosecuted for conspiracy. The Attorney General of theëCabinet who was a senior to Isaacs as a law officer of the Crown, decided not to prosecute. He was supported in his decision by the rest of the Cabinet, apart from Isaacs who voiced his opinion publicly. The upshot of the controversy was that Isaacs was asked by the Premier to resign from the Cabinet, which he did.

We are indeed fortunate that there was an abundance of men so well endowed intellectually and morally when the States and the commonwealth were attaining self-government.
Those who at present carry the burdens of Parliamentary life, whether in the State or Federal sphere, have inherited the task of maintaining and developing this cherished system of responsible government. It is meeting and will always meet certain challenges.

Excerpts from an address by the Hon. Sir George Reidy Q.C. at the Society's Annual Dinner, 28th November, 1974.