MPs have a tougher job than critics realise

Are they doing to MPs what they increasingly decry in relation to other groups in society; clustering them together and alleging that politicians collectively are only in it (their job as MP) for themselves, that they are untrustworthy and, worst of all, are a bunch of crooks.

They are not.

Australia has many ethical, compassionate MPs who care about the wellbeing of the community they represent.

The majority work incredibly long hours striving to improve people's lives.

But their role sometimes requires them to make what some people consider are harsh decisions.

But before rushing to criticise, should the public pause to consider it is nearly impossible to introduce policies that do not have winners and losers?

Is it worth recalling the policies many people and groups are demanding require increased revenue and that governments get their revenue from taxation?

Is it also worth remembering several policy decisions are the result of international events beyond the control of any federal government or parliament?

Perhaps critics need to pause a moment and examine, in a dispassionate and open-minded manner, the multi-faceted role of federal MPs and contemplate whether the expectations placed on them warrants a re-examination of previous harsh assessments.

This exercise may help to address the growing lack of trust in MPs and the political system.

The following offers only the briefest account of the role of MP but it is a starting point.

Wherever they live in Australia federal MPs must reside in Canberra when Parliament is sitting.

For many this means travelling great distances not always accessible via a direct flight to Canberra.

MPs have to maintain an electoral office which involves hiring appropriately skilled staff, managing those staff and responding to the needs and wants of those they have been elected to serve.

Then there are their parliamentary duties. The public face of this aspect of an MP's role is the brief, televised theatre of question time. But parliamentary duties extend well beyond this often unedifying spectacle.

MPs are also law-makers so they need to debate bills, sometimes amend them and vote on them for a bill to pass into law.

Backbench MPs sit on parliamentary committees that demand more of their time.

It involves reading draft reports, and even though the research and writing of drafts are undertaken by dedicated parliamentary staff, MPs have to acquire a level of knowledge about the issues being examined so they understand the reasons for and impact of the recommendations they make.

Membership of a parliamentary committee may also involve having to travel to different states and territories for committee hearings.

Some MPs undertake other more onerous roles. They are parliamentary secretaries, assistant ministers and have charge of a designated policy area.

They report directly to a senior cabinet minister when undertaking this role

Ministers have particularly arduous demands on their time. They are responsible to Parliament for various government departments and sometimes several at the one time.

The most time-poor minister is the prime minister.

None of the above includes the time required to negotiate with independent MPs and MPs from other political parties, the time demands placed on ministers in particular by the media, their responsibilities to a political party should they belong to one (most do), the many presentations they give at conferences and the many community-related functions MPs are invited to and often expected to attend.

All of the above comes at a cost to family life. Many people respond to this by saying MPs choose to do the job and can quit if they find it too demanding.

But when making that assessment do they apply the same work-life balance argument that is increasingly part of today's work-related conversations, or do they think MPs are not entitled to the same considerations?

This is not intended to be a puff piece on MPs. There is much to criticise about the systems they create for themselves, the hypocrisy evident in many of their utterances and deeds, their disregard for the public interest and their parliamentary conduct during question time.

READ MORE:

Those criticisms are valid and no doubt will be the subject of future media attention, opinion pieces and commentary.

But in the interest of fairness, the demands placed on MPs and the sometimes-unreasonable expectations of the Australian community should be raised as we have much to be proud of in our federal political system, its democratic institutions and the majority (not all) of its members of Parliament.

Doubters should take a quick look at many countries around the world, including the odd democracy, for confirmation of this fact.