WA's Speaker of the House is from Albany so...

So, what does it mean? Quite a bit and not a lot.

Peter Watson MLA is the (Labor) Member for Albany and was first elected to the WA Parliament in 2001. He's had a good run, is well regarded as a representative and a couple of times defeated some real quality opponents in recent state elections.

Its not anti age sentiment that causes me to say this, its just facts. Peter has been in Parliament 16 years & this year he turns 70. It is plain and fair to say, the majority of his political career has passed and it's likely this will be his last term in office.

Labor was swept to power in the big red tsunami and Peter found himself a member of parliament and a member of the government. He was also elected as Speaker of the House.

This saw him, in a jovial way, man handled to the Speaker's chair at the opening of parliament. Its a very old tradition that comes from the House of Commons in the UK. The Speaker of the House was the person who relayed the opinions and views of the House of Commons to the King. There were occasions were the King took exception to the House's views and the Speaker was executed. So the man handling to the seat is a tradition that's continued to this day.

So what does it mean for Albany's residents? Not much in one respect, if you're having trouble with whatever issue that requires you to contact the local MP, that goes on as before. The MP can still going into bat for you on matters as per before. He still represents the electorate.

However there's a list of things the Speaker can & cannot do unlike a normal MP.

1. The Speaker does not have any formal role in the formation of government business. He or she may claim they'll still "stand up and fight for..." their electorate, that the government MPs know they'll be pushing for their electorate long & hard, but they're outside the process. They're not in cabinet, they have no pull and basically have as a member of government as much clout as a brand new back bencher.
2. The Speaker cannot speak for or against any bill in parliament. In fact they're not allowed to speak out publicly on government business, they're an umpire. So they're constrained only to speaking in private to government members.
3. The Speaker cannot put a bill forward in Parliament nor be a part of formulating a bill.
4. The Speaker cannot vote for or against a bill, in fact the only time & place they can vote is if there's a tie. This is unlikely to happen during this next term of Parliament as Labor has such a great majority.
5. The Speaker can't vote therefore cannot cross the floor. In Labor's case they can't cross the floor unless they're granted permission to do so, called a conscience vote. Seems to suggest the rest of the time, a Labor MP cannot follow their conscience, they do as the party instructs them. If the cross the floor against party wishes they will be expelled from the party. How's that representing the electorate first going for you?
6. The Speaker can only speak on matters of compliance & behaviour in Parliament. They're the impartial umpire. It is a position of some prestige, but you are relieved of a great deal of Parliamentary responsibility when you become the umpire.

And that leads us to today's dilemma. We now have a legislative representative for Albany who can't form legislation, can't vote for it, can't vote against it, can't cross the floor in the best interests of the electorate, has no say on the electorate's behalf on the floor of parliament, cannot ask questions, cannot call anyone to account...all they can do is administer a supposedly impartial umpiring set of decisions on the MPs who can be a part of the system.

You phone or power gets cut off accidently and getting it resolved is not gong smoothly, yes your local member may be able to help. But if a raft of legislation needs support or opposition...he is not your man. It is very easy to say "The government is very aware that as a MP & Speaker I'll still talk to and fight hard for my electorate"

It's as common as someone retiring for any reason at all saying "Stepping down to spend more time with the family".

Classic hollowism that can not be adequately verified nor disproved, good go-to-tactical-replies, straight our of Sir Humphrey Applebee's handbook.

Wash up - Albany has a representative, possibly in his last term of office who is speaker of the house with no legislative vote, no legislative voice, no formal place in the formation of government business and cannot publicly speak on matters of government business.

He's an umpire. Will he be good for Albany?
Possibly as good as he's ever been as he isn't burdened with government business, nor a cabinet seat...where he would have been able to be more closely involved with government decision making.

He may or may not fight for Albany with his government colleagues...there is absolutely no way of knowing at all. If he thinks we should believe that he can influence cabinet to make decisions in the best interests of the State AND Albany whilst he's the lower house umpire...well I should offer to sell him a bridge.

This is the game, he is an umpire which puts him well outside forming, supporting, opposing or amending legislation.

Bit like putting your money into footy tipping at work but you can't actually pick any teams.