This article is part of the series: Politics and government of Australia
Federal Government
Executive
Legislative
1901 - 1972 - 1974 - 1975 - 1977 - 1980 - 1983 - 1984 - 1987 - 1990 - 1993 - 1996 - 1998 - 2001 - 2004 - 2007 -
Judicial
State and territory governments
Executive
Legislative
ACT - NSW - NT - Qld. - SA - Tas. - Vic. - WA
Local government
Political parties
Democrats - Greens - Labor Party - Country Liberal Party - Family First Party - Liberal Party - National Party
Foreign relations
The Senate is the upper of the two houses of the Parliament of Australia. The lower house is known as the House of Representatives.

Queen (Queen Elizabeth II)
Governor-General (Michael Jeffery)
Prime Minister (John Howard)
Cabinet
Federal Executive Council
Parliament

• Senate
  House of Representatives
  Elections
  
  
  
  • Federal electoral system
    Electoral divisions
    High Court
    Lower Courts
    Constitution
    Governors and Administrators
    Premiers and Chief Ministers
    Parliaments and Assemblies
    State electoral systems Origins and role
    There are detailed conventions and rules regarding situations in which the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree. If the Senate repeatedly refuses to pass legislation initiated in the lower house, the Government may either abandon the bill, continue to revise it, or call a double dissolution (election for both houses of Parliament) and attempt to pass the bill at a subsequent joint sitting of the two houses.
    On 8 October 2003, the Prime Minister John Howard initiated public discussion of whether the mechanism for the resolution of deadlocks between the houses should be reformed. High levels of support for the existing mechanism, and a very low level of public interest in that discussion, resulted in the abandonment of these proposals.
    
    Where the houses disagree
    The constitutional text denies the Senate the power to originate or amend appropriation bills, in deference to the conventions of the classical Westminster system, under which the executive government is responsible for its use of public funds to the lower house, which has the power to bring down a government by blocking its access to Supply - i.e. revenue appropriated through taxation. The arrangement as expressed in the Australian Constitution, however, still leaves the Senate with the power to reject supply bills or defer their passage - undoubtedly one of the Senate's most contentious and most powerful abilities.
    The ability to block Supply was the origin of Australia's most significant constitutional crisis, that of 1975. The Opposition used its numbers in the Senate to defer supply bills, refusing to deal with them until an election was called for both Houses of Parliament, an election which it hoped to win. The Prime Minister of the day, Gough Whitlam, contested the legitimacy of the blocking and refused to resign. The crisis brought to a head two Westminster conventions that, under the Australian constitutional system, were in conflict - firstly, that a government may continue to govern for as long as it has the support of the lower house, and secondly, that a government that no longer has access to Supply must either resign or be dismissed. The crisis was resolved in November 1975 when Governor-General Sir John Kerr dismissed Whitlam's government and appointed a caretaker government on condition that elections for both houses of parliament be held. This action in itself was a source of controversy and debate continues on the proper usage of the Senate's ability to block Supply and on whether such a power should even exist.
    
    Blocking Supply
    Under the Constitution, the Senate must:
    These conditions have periodically been the source of debate, and within these conditions, the composition and rules of the Senate have varied significantly since federation.
    
    be comprised of an equal number of Senators from each original state;
    have at least six Senators per state;
    contain a total number of Senators that is as close as possible to half the number of members of the House of Representatives; and
    ensure any laws governing the election of Senators is non-discriminatory among states. The membership of the Senate
    The voting system for the Senate has changed twice since it was created. The original arrangement involved a first past the post block voting mechanism. In 1919 preferential block voting came in. Block voting tended to grant landslide majorities and even "wipe-outs" very easily. In 1946, the Australian Labor Party government won 33 out of the 36 Senate seats. In 1948, partially in response to this extreme situation, proportional representation became the method for electing the Senate.
    
    Voting system
    The Australian Senate voting paper under the single transferable vote system resembles this example, which shows the candidates for Tasmanian senate representation in the 2004 federal election.
    Electors must either:
    Because each state elects 6 senators at each half-senate election, the quota for election is only 14.3% (33.3% for territories). As a result, some states have upwards of 70 candidates on their ballot papers, and the voter must individually number every single candidate for a "below the line" vote to count. As a result the "above the line" system was implemented. Over 95% of electors vote "above the line".
    Note that the ungrouped candidates in the far right column do not have a box above the line. Therefore they can only get a primary (number 1) vote from electors who vote below the line. For this reason, some independents register as a group, either with other independents or by themselves, such as groups F and G in the above example.
    
    Vote for an individual party by writing the number "1" in a single box above the line - this means the elector wants their preferences distributed according to a party's or group's officially registered ticket.
    Vote for all candidates by writing the numbers 1, 2, 3, through to the last number (in this example, 26) in all the individual boxes below the line. Senate Ballot Paper
    The size of the Senate has changed over the years. The Australian Constitution requires that the number of Senators approximate as nearly as possible to half of the number of members of the House of Representatives, and it has therefore grown periodically. The Constitution originally provided for six Senators for each state, and thus a total of 36 senators. This was increased to ten Senators per state (and a total of 60) in 1948. In 1975, the two territories, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, elected 2 Senators each for the first time, bringing the number to 64. The last expansion took place in 1984, under which the number of senators from each state increased from 10 to 12, and the entire Senate to 76. The Senators from the Northern Territory also represent constituents from Australia's Indian Ocean Territories (Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands), while the Senators from the Australian Capital Territory also represent voters from the Jervis Bay Territory.
    Normally, half of the Senate is contested at each election, for terms of up to six years, but during a double dissolution, every seat faces re-election. Senators from the territories only serve half-terms, and must stand for re-election every three years. Unlike the House of Representatives, Senators serve fixed terms which expire on the 30th of June every three years. Thus, while the voters elect Senators at the same time as lower house members, such Senators' term of office does not begin until the 1st of July following their election. As a result, the new Parliament will often sit for some time with the old, lame-duck Senate.
    
    The "Unrepresentative" House
    George Campbell (ALP) Helen Coonan (Lib) John Faulkner (ALP) C Fierravanti-Wells (Lib) Michael Forshaw (ALP) Bill Heffernan (Lib) Steve Hutchins (ALP) Sandy Macdonald (Nat) Fiona Nash (Nat) Kerry Nettle (Grn) Marise Payne (Lib) Ursula Stephens (ALP)
    Andrew Bartlett (Dem) Ron Boswell (Nat) Sue Boyce (Lib) George Brandis (Lib) John Hogg (ALP) Barnaby Joyce (Nat) Joe Ludwig (ALP) Ian Macdonald (Lib) Jan McLucas (ALP) Brett Mason (Lib) Claire Moore (ALP) Russell Trood (Lib)
    Cory Bernardi (Lib) Simon Birmingham (Lib) Grant Chapman (Lib) Alan Ferguson (Lib) Mary Jo Fisher (Lib) Annette Hurley (ALP) Linda Kirk (ALP) Anne McEwen (ALP) Nick Minchin (Lib) N Stott Despoja (Dem) Penny Wong (ALP) Dana Wortley (ALP)
    Eric Abetz (Lib) Guy Barnett (Lib) Bob Brown (Grn) Carol Brown (ALP) David Bushby (Lib) Richard Colbeck (Lib) Christine Milne (Grn) Kerry O'Brien (ALP) Stephen Parry (Lib) Helen Polley (ALP) Nick Sherry (ALP) John Watson (Lib)
    Lyn Allison (Dem) Kim Carr (ALP) Steve Conroy (ALP) Steve Fielding (FFP) Mitch Fifield (Lib) Rod Kemp (Lib) Julian McGauran (Lib) Gavin Marshall (ALP) Kay Patterson (Lib) Robert Ray (ALP) Michael Ronaldson (Lib) Judith Troeth (Lib)
    Judith Adams (Lib) Mark Bishop (ALP) Mathias Cormann (Lib) Alan Eggleston (Lib) Chris Ellison (Lib) Chris Evans (ALP) David Johnston (Lib) Ross Lightfoot (Lib) Andrew Murray (Dem) Rachel Siewert (Grn) Glenn Sterle (ALP) Ruth Webber (ALP)
    ACT Gary Humphries (Lib) Kate Lundy (ALP) NT Trish Crossin (ALP) Nigel Scullion (CLP) Labor (ALP)  • Democrat (Dem)  • Family First (FFP)  • Greens (GRN)  • Liberal (Lib)  • Country Liberal (CLP)  • National (Nat)
    Parties which currently have representation in the Senate:
    Parties which have held Senate seats in the past include the Democratic Labor Party, Liberal Movement, One Nation and the Nuclear Disarmament Party.
    Due to the need to obtain votes state-wide, independent candidates have difficulty getting elected. The one exception in recent times was the Tasmanian Brian Harradine.
    The Australian Senate serves as a model for some politicians in Canada, particularly in the Western provinces, who wish to reform the Canadian Senate to take a more active legislative role.
    See also: Australian House of Representatives, List of longest-serving members of the Australian Senate
    
    Australian Democrats
    Australian Greens
    Australian Labor Party
    Family First Party
    Liberal Party of Australia
    National Party of Australia
    Country Liberal Party Parties in the Australian Senate
    
    Latest result
    
    Party composition
    This table has been simplified in the following ways:
    
    Liberal, National and Country Liberal members are grouped as Coalition.
    Greens Western Australia members are grouped together with Australian Greens. Historical
    The 2004 election saw a significant change in the composition of the Senate, which began on 1 July 2005. This was the first time since 1981 that the government in the House of Representatives also had a majority of the seats in the Senate.
    This government majority meant that, for the first time in a generation, a government did not generally have to negotiate with other political parties if it wanted to secure passage of legislation through parliament.
    
    Current
    
    The Senate in practice
    The Australian Senate typically sits for 50 to 60 days a year.
    
    The work of the Senate
    One of the functions of the Senate, both directly and through its committees, is to scrutinise government activity. The vigour of this scrutiny has been fuelled for many years by the different party composition of the two houses. When the Howard government won control of the Senate in 2005, it sparked a debate about the effectiveness of the Senate in holding the government of the day accountable for its actions. Government members have argued that the Senate continues to be a forum of vigorous debate, and its committees continue to be active.
    
    Holding governments to account
    Senators are called upon to vote on matters before the Senate. These votes are called divisions in the case of Senate business, or ballots where the vote is to choose a Senator to fill an office of the Senate (such as President of the Australian Senate).
    Party discipline in Australian politics is extremely tight, so divisions almost always are decided on party lines. Nevertheless, the existence of minor parties holding the balance of power in the Senate has made divisions in that chamber more important and occasionally dramatic than in the House of Representatives.
    When a division is to be held, bells ring throughout the parliament building for four minutes, during which time Senators must go to the chamber. At the end of that period the doors are locked and a vote is taken, by identifying and counting senators according to the side of the chamber on which they sit (ayes to the right of the chair, noes to the left). The whole procedure takes around eight minutes. Senators with commitments that keep from the chamber may make arrangements in advance to be 'paired' with a senator of the opposite political party, so that their absence does not affect the outcome of the vote.
    The senate contains an even number of Senators, so a tied vote is a real prospect (which regularly occurs when the party numbers in the chamber are finely balanced). Section 23 of the Constitution requires that in the event of a tied division, the question is resolved in the negative. The system is however different for ballots for offices such as the President. If such a ballot is tied, the Clerk of the Senate decides the outcome by the drawing of lots. In reality, conventions govern most ballots, so this situation does not arise.
    
    Votes in the Senate
    One feature of the government having a majority in both chambers since 1 July 2005 has been an increased emphasis on internal differences between members of the government parties. This period has seen the first instances of crossing the floor by Senators since the conservative government took office in 1996. Recent cases of government members crossing the floor to vote with the Opposition have included Senator Gary Humphries on civil unions in the Australian Capital Territory, and Barnaby Joyce on voluntary student unionism. Neither of these instances resulted in the defeat of a government proposal, as in both cases Senator Steve Fielding voted with the government. A more significant potential instance of floor crossing was averted when the government withdrew its Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill, of which several government Senators had been critical, and which would have been defeated had it proceeded to the vote.
    
    See also