While some Canberra watchers have been quick to draw parallels between David Pocock and Tasmania's late senator Brian Harradine the reality is the two are nothing alike.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
If it had been Harradine who had the power to say yea or nay to the government's industrial relations reform bill he would have extracted a very high price for a "yes" vote despite his former ALP affiliation. As transactional politicians go, Harradine would be hard to beat when it comes to the art of the deal.
Senator Pocock has also demonstrated he is cut from very different cloth to another colourful Tasmanian, Senator Jacqui Lambie, who sidelined herself from the industrial relations reform bill debate by a vitriolic - and very public - attack on the union movement and the workers it represents.
Because of this the government, even though it knows her support is highly negotiable, didn't appear to even bother to try to win Senator Lambie over to its side.
Why should it when it could negotiate with a crossbencher who was not only willing to admit he wasn't an expert on industrial relations, but also had the ability to listen and to learn?
One of the best possible demonstrations of this very desirable - but often unfortunately rare on the crossbench - characteristic was Senator Pocock's invitation to the Industrial Relations Minister, Tony Burke, to attend his recent "town hall" in Gungahlin to explain the proposed industrial relations changes to ACT voters.
This proved the new senator, who has the potential to wield even more power in the upper house than Harradine had in the early years of the Howard government, is neither a prisoner of any particular ideology or open to electoral inducements and sweeteners.
The result of his measured approach to the proposed reforms has delivered a win-win for the Albanese government, the union movement, small business and those dependent on assistance payments, including those on JobSeeker.
It is a much better outcome than if the legislation was either passed in its entirety or defeated in the Senate.
While employer group representatives, including AI Group chief executive Innes Willox, are still crying foul over the introduction of multi-employer bargaining, the amendments negotiated by Senator Pocock have added significant protections for small businesses employing fewer than 50 people.
The cut off for exclusion from multi-employer bargaining is to be increased from 15 to 20 staff. This means 97.5 per cent of all small businesses are now exempt from this provision. And, perhaps even more importantly, the amended legislation will put the onus on unions to make the case for businesses with up to 50 staff being included in multi-employer bargaining.
The only point on which Senator Pocock could possibly be accused of horse trading was his insistence that in the interests of fairness and equity an independent panel be established to review the adequacy of support payments such as JobSeeker ahead of each federal budget.
While this will not necessarily guarantee increases in the level of such payments, which are rapidly being eroded by the rising cost of living and soaring rental and fuel prices, it at least puts the issue on the agenda.
Given the value of all of these amendments and proposals it is difficult to accept Mr Willox's dismissal of Senator Pocock as " ... an honest guy. But unfortunately politics is often a game of chicken and he's been the first one to blink".
If, instead, one accepts Bismarck's proposition that "politics is the art of the possible" Senator Pocock has demonstrated that although he is only a newcomer to the game he has already mastered many of its elements.
