This opinion piece by Richard Torbay was published in the SUN-HERALD newspaper on 6 July  2008 .  It outlines  his views on  'conscience votes' and is a strong argument for consensus politics. 

Voters sick of sleazy deceit
We live in paradoxical times. The major political parties have merged philosophically but continue to behave like ideological adversaries.
People in my electorate, and in Sydney too, shake their heads at this charade and lament the loss of elected representatives driven by conviction, and accountability to their electors.
There's too much hype and spin around the political process to compensate for a lack of policies and principles.
People see through it and it's making them more cynical and less engaged.
The gulf between what people really want and see as important and what the party politicians are talking about could hardly be wider.
The perception is political leaders and their party machines will do and say anything to get elected - then do and say anything to stay in office.
Any compromises are more about retaining the prizes of incumbency than service to the people and good policies.
Opportunism, deceit and sleaze in politics continue to serve up a daily soap opera for the media.
The fusing of the major parties on policy has led to less informed debate on important public issues.
It has become more about managing the problem rather than finding the best long-term solution.
Think of the fashionable economic theory of budget surpluses which led to underinvestment in infrastructure such as roads, public transport, hospitals, schools and public housing over the past two decades.
The blinkered view that privatisation and public/private partnerships (PPPs) constitute a quick fix has itself become ideologically immutable.
It's a classic case of trying to fix problems created through one set of poor decisions with others in the same vein.
No wonder people are cynical. There has been far too little scrutiny of the sell off of public assets, which can fill the coffers of cash strapped governments. The spin that it's for the public benefit is barely challenged.
Where is the proper, informed public debate on these issues?
Where are the impact statements, the long term projections, the alternative options? Quite a number of the privatisations and PPPs have come nowhere near meeting the criteria of public benefit on one side and sound business practice on the other.
Look at the extraordinary political alliances created over the privatisation of electricity assets in NSW.
When some Labor MPs connive with the opposition to defeat their own party's legislation - policy which the coalition also has in its party platform - we're in sideshow alley.
I don't pretend to be a wide eyed idealist looking to eliminate the lively, robust, gladiatorial aspects of party politics, or politics in general, but I am convinced that what we are experiencing now is neither robust, nor gladiatorial.
It is politics on life support.
I'm not suggesting that we can deliver all things to all people but what I am suggesting as remedies are two things.
Politicians should claw back, or be granted, the right to be advocates for their communities.
They should be allowed more opportunities to cast a conscience vote on issues directly affecting their constituents and they should not be threatened with de-selection if they don't always toe the party line.
Secondly we should try solution based or consensus politics in NSW to counteract the failure of successive governments to deliver effectively on major issues such as public infrastructure.
These matters require long term planning and commitment outside the cycle of elections and continuous campaigning.
We need strategies to address the problems to be signed off by the major and minor parties and independent MPs.
It would guarantee continuity over the long haul regardless of which party held government.
It would engage the best minds in parliament regardless of their political persuasion. It would use the public service to best advantage.
It would restore some heart and soul and real excitement back into politics.
It would lift the quality of debate on these major issues and hopefully set a higher standard to re-engage our communities and lead us all into proper, long term planning.


Richard Torbay is the independent member for Northern Tablelands and the Speaker of the NSW Parliament.

By Invitation Only is a space for people of influence to have their say. Edited by Kerry-Anne Walsh.

I have issued two media releases on this issue - one dated 10 December 2007 and another dated 9 May 2008.  In both I outlined my stance in relation to the proposal by the Premier Morris Iemma to privatise the States electricity industry. 
My view has been supported by many constituents, some have taken the trouble to write to me and others have voted on the online poll. 
I have called for all country based MPs to unite in opposition to the State Government’s planned privatisation of electricity because I believe it to be a cynical exercise.
I have reproduced the statements published in my media releases and reiterate my stance against any sale. 
On Friday, 9 May 2008 I said -
'The power privatisation debate had debased political standards in NSW and both the government and opposition had misled the people, Member for Northern Tablelands Richard Torbay said today.
“With all its duck shoving, manoeuvring, number crunching and backflipping it has been an exercise in sheer hypocrisy and the worst I’ve seen since entering Parliament,” he said.
“The vital component missing in this debate has been the interests of the people.
“They have been misinformed and misled from start to finish. Although it looks as if we have a done deal on the privatisation, very few people in regional NSW have any idea of how it would impact on them or whether it is a sound long term decision. That is the debate we should have had.”
Mr Torbay said the Labor government went to the 2007 election with a commitment not to privatise the state’s public electricity assets and despite internal divisions now seemed set to push it through.
After sitting on the fence throughout the debate, the Liberals and Nationals had given their support this week based on conditions that were simply a face saving device to mask growing political division within the parties.
The Nationals who had publicity opposed the sell off and were still telling their constituents they were against it, had also caved in at the last minute to fall in line with their Coalition partners, the MP said. “It’s like dairy deregulation and firearms legislation. The Nationals say one thing in the electorate and then go back to Parliament and vote against it.
“I am still opposed to the electricity privatisation and have not heard any arguments to convince me otherwise. Short term it will inevitably lead to loss of jobs and poorer services in country areas. But in long term the policy of selling off public assets may be seen as short sighted.
“The debate we should be having is the lack of government investment in public infrastructure over a long period and whether the people would be better served through reversing this position.”
On Monday, 10 December 2007 I said -
"In all these deals to sell public utilities to the private sector, country communities end up as the losers and this would be no different. The real reason behind privatising power has been the lack of investment by governments from both sides of politics over a long period.
“They let it go until they can’t cope and then argue that the expense of upgrading is beyond public resources. It is a ploy that we’ve seen on many occasions particularly with the sell off of Telstra which has had a negative impact on services and led to rising costs for country people.”
Mr Torbay said he had been contacted by many local people expressing serious concern over the prospect of rocketing charges and loss of jobs through the electricity privatisation process.
“The government has guaranteed an independent watchdog to regulate prices until 2013, but inevitably we will see job cuts and diminishing service levels in the country if this privatisation goes ahead ,” he pointed out.
“I would rather see a pledge to invest significantly in infrastructure to raise the level of services in rural areas and retain an adequate workforce to deliver those services.”
The MP said recent violent storms in the area had exposed the pressure on local resources with teams being called from right across the area to restore power and repair damage.
“Any further cuts to jobs would seriously compromise services,” he said. “In my view the power privatisation plan is sloppy policy and lacks vision,” he said.
“It’s another example of short term thinking with the government standing by and allowing country people be treated as second class citizens.”

Richard Torbay: Speaker of the NSW Legislative Assembly and Member for Northern Tablelands

Richard Torbay is a community leader who has earned a well-deserved reputation for re-inventing himself. It is well known that he has climbed the ladder in a remarkably short time from kitchen hand to Speaker of the NSW Legislative Assembly, making him one of the most powerful politicians in the State. What distinguishes each new role he takes on is that he redefines it and stretches it to the boundaries of possibility and sometimes well beyond.

Mr Torbay is well known at the University of New England as a member of its Council since 1996 and as the former head of the UNE Union, which he served for 20 years, starting as a kitchen hand at the age of 18. In each of his promotions through the ranks of the University’s commercial services provider, he made a name for himself, becoming CEO in 1991. During that time he expanded the organisation to 170 staff, made record profits, opened the Belgrave Twin Cinema in Armidale and acquired Tattersalls Hotel as an asset for the Union.

During that period he made his first foray into politics, standing as a candidate in the 1991 Armidale City Council elections. He moved up to the position of Deputy Mayor and served as Mayor from 1995-2000. As Mayor he became chairman of the New England Local Government Group and chairman of the NSW Country Mayors Association. Amongst his achievements was the Building the Future Forum, launched by the NSW Premier, which set guidelines for Armidale’s growth and development on many fronts. Along with the late Peter Monley he guided the voluntary amalgamation of Armidale City and Dumaresq Shire Councils.

In 1999 Mr Torbay was challenged to stand for the seat of Northern Tablelands as an Independent. At the time it was considered a safe and virtually unassailable National Party seat. Come election day he romped home after a robust campaign which he won with 59 per cent of the vote following the distribution of preferences. In two subsequent elections he has increased that majority and in 2007 was second only to Premier Morris Iemma with the highest two party preferred result in the State.

As well as building a public profile, achieving record funding for the electorate and hosting more Ministers’ visits than had been seen in the Northern Tablelands for decades, he also served on several top level Parliamentary Committees. These include the Public Accounts Committee, the Speaker’s Technology Advisory Group, the Joint Committee on the Office of the Valuer-General, the Regional Investment Taskforce, the Joint Select Committee on Bushfires, the Standing Committee on Public Works and the Joint Committee on Tobacco Smoking in NSW.

Following the 2007 election he was elected unanimously as the first non-aligned Independent Speaker of the NSW Legislative Assembly and a key member of a new Rural Task Force to report to the government on issues affecting regional communities. One of his first priorities as Speaker was to change the NSW Constitution to allow him to speak, debate issues and deliver Members Statements on the floor of the House when they affect his electorate. While some commentators have seen this as just an aggregation of power for the role of Speaker, Mr Torbay has made it clear that he is primarily a representative of his local communities and he cannot see they should be disadvantaged in any way.

It also explains Richard Torbay’s success as a Member of Parliament. His focus on his family and delivering results for the communities he serves has made him a popular figure in the Northern Tablelands. His astute judgement and capacity to take on an enormous work load has won him the respect of his colleagues in Parliament from all political denominations. Richard is only 47 and whatever new roles he takes on in the future, there is no doubt he will continue to make his mark as a remarkable community leader, an astute businessman and politician, an extroverted participant in charity events and a compassionate champion of those suffering hardship.

(Biography prepared by the University of New England for the 6 October 2007 Graduation Ceremony and the awarding to Richard Torbay of an Honorary Doctorate in recognition of his contribution to the University.)

Role of the Speaker and other Officers of the House

The Speaker
The Speaker is the Presiding Officer of the Legislative Assembly and as such must act with both authority and impartiality. The office of the Speaker is recognised in section 31 of the Constitution Act. The Speaker is described as the Legislative Assembly's "independent and impartial representative".

The first act of a newly elected Parliament, after swearing in of new Members takes place, is the election of a Speaker. Section 31B of the Constitution Act and Standing Order 10 outline the secret ballot mechanism of election.

By authority of a colonial minute dating back to 1885, the Speaker holds office from the date of election, during the period of dissolution to the election of a successor.

There are important provisions in the Constitution Act 1902 which relate to the Office of Speaker: what happens when the Speaker is absent from the State; the fact that the Speaker is not counted in a quorum; the Speaker's casting vote and the fact that Members resign to the Speaker.

Under section 70 of the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act 1912, the Speaker issues writs to fill vacancies caused otherwise than by a General Election.

The Speaker's role in the House is to maintain order, put questions after debate and conduct divisions. In maintaining order the Speaker interprets and applies the Standing Orders and practice of the House by making rulings and decisions. The Speaker's decisions are, however, subject to the will of the House exercised through a motion of dissent. (S.O. 95)

When presiding in the Chair the Speaker exercises a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes. Section 32(2) of the Constitution Act 1902 and the standing orders provide that in the event of an equality of votes, the member presiding will give a casting vote. In accordance with section 31(4) of the Constitution Act 1902 the Speaker is able to participate in debate and vote on any question when not presiding in the Chair.

The Speaker is the mouthpiece for the House, for example, conveying Messages and Addresses from the House to the Governor.The Speaker is also charged with upholding the rights and privileges of Members and of the House.

The Speaker also has extensive administrative functions, being responsible, with the President, for the overall direction of the Parliament. In this, the Presiding Officers are advised by the Clerks of both Houses. The Speaker is solely responsible for the operation of the Department of the Legislative Assembly.


The Deputy Speaker, Assistant Speaker and Temporary Speakers
The Deputy Speaker and the Assistant Speaker are elected on the first sitting day of each Parliament, or whenever the Office becomes vacant. The procedure of election is set out in Standing Orders 13-14.

The principal responsibility of the Deputy Speaker is to act for the Speaker both in the Chair and also in the Speaker's capacity when the House is not sitting. In the absence of the Speaker from the State, the Deputy Speaker performs the duties of the Speaker and is vested with all the power, authority, duties and functions of the Speaker. (Constitution Act 1902, s. 31A). In the absence of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker, the Assistant Speaker performs the duties of the Speaker.

At the beginning of each Parliament, the Speaker nominates not more than five Members who will be Temporary Speakers. They relieve the Speaker, Deputy Speaker and the Assistant Speaker on a temporary basis whenever requested.


The Leader of the House and the Manager of Opposition Business
The Leader of the House is usually a Minister appointed by the Government to manage the Government business in the Legislative Assembly. The Leader sets and arranges the Government legislative program (the days on which the House will sit and the bills Cabinet has decided will be dealt with) and is the Government's main spokesperson on procedural matters. The Leader and the Manager of Opposition Business often consult together in an effort to facilitate the orderly conduct of business.


The Party Whips
The duties of the Whips are in the main to liaise with Ministers in regard to the business of the House, secure the attendance of Members in the House, arrange speakers for debates, arrange "pairs" and generally act as intermediaries between the party leaders in the House and backbench Members.


First Published: July, 1991
Updated: August, 2007

Your local MP can give you advice on a wide range of issues relating to the State Government. These might include questions you have with things such as the local health service, RTA, education, policing, housing and many other areas. Should it be considered necessary, your MP can write to Ministers of Government or other authorities, seeking advice. If you aren’t sure whether your State MP is the right person to help you, simply contact the office of your Local Member to discuss your concerns.