The Jacqui Lambie affair has been a circus: an embarrassment for her and Clive Palmer; a poor reflection on the Senate; and an example of what happens when voters deliberately or neglectfully support parties and candidates with undeveloped policies.
Nonetheless, the Herald believes Senator Lambie's decision to quit the Palmer United Party and sit as an independent is likely to be a positive development.
Jacqui Lambie will need to be fiercely independent if she is to retain any credibility.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
The parliament should get to scrutinise policy more closely, operate more transparently and produce better legislation under the new arrangement.
Even though parliament has a number of senators in debt to the donkey vote, cynical preference deals, vote harvesting and suspect party names, their role remains crucial to our democracy.
Voters rely on the Senate to review bills so as to stop government overreach and, as Democrats founder the late Don Chipp said, "keep the bastards honest".
Now, instead of the government relying on PUP holding all the aces with three of its own senators plus Ricky Muir from the Motoring Enthusiasts Party, Senator Lambie will be free to consult and examine options more broadly. She might even find a like-minded colleague in Senator Muir and listen to advice from more experienced policy hands than Mr Palmer.
To pass bills in defiance of Labor and the Greens, the government needs support from six crossbenchers. It used to rely on negotiations with PUP - in effect Mr Palmer - with help from another pair.
Too often the government used the PUP ploy as an excuse to deliver up reforms to parliament as a fait accompli, rushing them through the Senate far too quickly for proper explanation and examination.
Mr Palmer has also exercised his Senate power to pursue personal vendettas, such as establishing an inquiry into the Queensland government. Senate inquiries should not be pure political playthings.
Crucially, Mr Palmer struck a dirty deal to deliver the government its plan to water down the future of financial advice reforms. As the Herald said at the time, "PUP senators should rethink now. They must recognise they have been the victims of some dodgy advice."
Now Senator Lambie has seen sense and helped reverse that decision with support from South Australian Nick Xenophon, the ex-DLP now Independent John Madigan and Senator Muir.
Granted, on some other matters, Mr Palmer has done well to negotiate better outcomes from government proposals. Pragmatism such as passing Direct Action with caveats has been worthwhile. PUP has also held its ground against the worst excesses of government policy such as increased interest rates on student loans and a two-tier medical system through a $7 co-payment.
Senator Lambie remains 100 per cent opposed to those as well, although she has hinted at a willingness to negotiate over reductions to the renewable energy target, the future of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, temporary protection visas and redefining refugees. She also stresses she wants rewards for her state.
But the Tasmanian has not been without fault during this upheaval. She has been heavily influenced by lobbyists and advisers, probably because of her immense workload and the complexity of her job. It will only get more difficult. She will need to be fiercely independent if she is to retain any credibility.
Senator Lambie has made ridiculous threats, too, such as opposing all government legislation until it delivers a bigger pay rise to the armed forces.
Her talk of personal animosity for government leader in the Senate, fellow Tasmanian Eric Abetz, hardly augurs well for compromises to secure the passage of legislation, either.
The magic number for the crossbenchers to block bills is three.
Now there will in effect be four blocks of two senators - Lambie and Muir; Xenophon and Madigan; PUP's Dio Wang and Glenn Lazarus; and the Liberal Democratic Party's David Lleyonholm and Family First's South Australian Bob Day.
Senator Xenophon, the most hardworking of senators, keenest student of legislation and above all a pragmatist, looms as even more important to the government.
As such talk of the Upper House becoming even more unworkable with Senator Lambie out of PUP is pure bluster.
The new dynamics simply mean that the government will have to show more respect for Senator Lambie, her fellow crossbenchers and, most of all, for the Senate's important role.
The public deserves to have a government that explains its policies thoroughly and doesn't sneakmeasures through parliament. The Lambie-PUP split should help that process.