I was in Old Parliament House last week too, though I thought the highlight was being able to walk around in the old Country Party room. It was a nice touch for the curator to leave old silver ashtrays on display. Good ambience.

yeah,
I too wandered through the old Country party room.It was a lovely room. It smelt of political warhorses, tradition and intrigue.

The history was still a living history, not an antiquitarian/heritage history. It was powerful political history.

I had to admit I was suprised by the weight and power of the Senate. That was a very different understanding of federalism.

Yeh the other one I liked was the opposition party room. You could smell the smoke embedded in the leather, and "the we'll get them next time" style coat racks.

It was also very masculine as it was not a place for women. It was a place that was designed for men to get away from womem and children to do secret men's business.

It would have been tough being a woman in that place --eg.,Janine Haines as women were seen predominantly as adornment or support for men.

Though the old Parliament unbecame being an exclusive male domain, it's culture remained a place charged with a masculine ethos. You could smell the aggression, bullying and abusiveness.

Politics is still a world that continues to be dominated by men.

Gary, Very true decription. Definately testosterone charged environment. I also got a huge laugh out of the 1970s style kitchens, and how poor the amenities were by modern standards. They reminded me of my mothers house when I was a little kid. For all their big power they still had dodgy kitchens and toilets, poorly designed, in glaring colors, that looked more like locker room fare than grand ol' parliament.

A good reminder too that their power is dependent upon society giving it to them through adapting and advancing culture and technology. Then again, that mob would probably be happy presiding over a tribe of cavemen if they could. Power is an end in itself, even though I tend to think the technical and cultural achievements of Australians are more important.

Cameron,
yes the kitchens and bathrooms were how you described them. It was very primitive working conditions and you can understand why the bult the new house on the hill.It is much more comfortable and spacious.

But I do think that this 'primitiveness' can be interpreted differently to the classical liberal of government power being bad.

A lot of these politicians do this kind of work as a public duty and they put up with the poor working conditions, low pay and long hours to do so.

True, they love to exercise power--as I do--- but they also do the political work--as I did-- as citizens to help make their country a better place to live.

Gary, I dont doubt a lot of the politicians, and their staff, are public minded. I would also be willing to be 99% of them were when they entered that environment. But large, and powerful, organizations get a life of their own, that is often diametrically opposed to the moral and ethical beliefs and practices of their constituents.

Parliament is no exception. Parliament and politics are also becoming more and more divorced from the people. Seeing the clunky, cramped 1970s bathrooms is a good reminder that there is no parliamentary power without the people creating the wealth, that is the basis for that power, in the first place.

Cameron,
yes it is a political machine that requires and denands conformity. However politics is also a world with its own values, ways of doing things, demands etc.

What your comments about the disconnect between the political world and the public overlook is the location of politicians in their electoral offices outside Canberra and in the community life of their electorate.

They do go to a lot of community functions--it is part of the job. They have a good idea what is going on. That is why you get a restless backbench.

So are you arguing that the disconnect between people and representative, and between common weal and selfish use of power is the Executive Cabinet? That is where it falls down and representative government fails to live to its promise?

Cameron,
It is hard to put the finger on it as it is complex and contradictory with both aspects--(disconnect in from the people and disembeded in local communities--true. The latter is embodied in the architecture of Old Parliament House, the former embodied in the architecture of New Parliament house.

I reckon that Howard now sees his chance with control of the Senate to break free of all constraint on his power. Whitlam and Keating yearned for it for their reform programs---but Howard has the opportunity to do it. He is really going for.

It was what the Bush administration did as guided by the neocons after 9/11. They went for itand for a while the foreign policy (imperial power) and domestic concerns (Republicans rule for forever) went hand and hand. That is unravelling now and Bush is encircled, on the defense,under attack etc etc.