IT'S not often a politician will publicly come out and criticise a piece of their own party's legislation. It's even rarer to see them cross the floor to vote against it. But that's exactly what we've seen twice in the past eight months.
The four Liberal politicians who crossed the floor represent electorates where many of the biggest conflicts between agriculture and mining have occurred in recent times - think Rex Minerals' Hillside mine, Terramin's efforts to reopen the Bird-in-Hand mine at Woodside or the campaign for a moratorium on unconventional gas extraction in the South East.
Fraser Ellis, Nick McBride, Steve Murray and Dan Cregan probably faced some challenging conversations within the party room about the issue, and while their votes couldn't alter the outcome this time, they at least took the opportunity to stand up for their electorates.
Related reading: Renegade Liberals remain firm on balancing farmer, mining rights
I don't often read the Hansard's transcript of parliament, but the mining bill debate made fascinating reading. What really captured my interest was the speeches from the four Liberal MPs who crossed the floor. Their words were passionate, insightful and moving, and reflected the value of agriculture in their electorates.
This same passion is likely to re-emerge when Frome MP Geoff Brock's private members bill seeking an independent inquiry into land access is introduced later this month.
That the opposing viewpoints hold their views so strongly is not a reason to give up or not even try.
Energy and Mining Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan says he supports the idea of an inquiry, but thinks ensuring it achieves meaningful outcomes could be tough. Finding agreement on a theoretical concept is the easy part, he says, but try putting it into practice and things would get "pretty woolly pretty quickly".
In a way, this is true. Viewpoints on the issue cover a broad spectrum, but all involved are firm in their beliefs. We could have a thorough inquiry that makes a suite of recommendations, but still have both sides feeling ignored.
Related reading: Brock seeks inquiry into mining land access
But I would argue this is the risk with all inquiries. If we only had inquiries on issues everyone agreed on or no one cared passionately about, it'd be a pretty sad state of affairs.
That the opposing viewpoints hold their views so strongly is not a reason to give up or not even try, but rather a reason to leave no stone unturned in our efforts to find a solution everyone can support.
