Resolutions

Statutory Officers Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's resolution:

1. That this council—

(a) notes message No. 9 from the House of Assembly of 6 May 2014 advising of the appointments to the Statutory Officers Committee of the Hon. M.J. Atkinson, Hon. J.R. Rau and Mr Wingard;

(b) notes section 21(2)(e) of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991 which states 'A person ceases to be a member of the Committee if the person…becomes a Minister of the Crown'; and

(c) invites the House of Assembly to reconsider the appointment of the Hon. J.R. Rau, Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development and Minister for Industrial Relations.

2. That a message be forwarded to the House of Assembly conveying this resolution.

(Continued from 7 August 2014.)

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Industrial Relations) (12:46): I move:

That a message be sent informing the Legislative Council that the House of Assembly notes the resolution of the Legislative Council and invites the Legislative Council to reconsider its apparently adverse reflection on the deliberations of the House of Assembly in appointing the Hon. J.R. Rau to the Statutory Officers Committee. Further, the House of Assembly invites the Legislative Council to reconsider inviting the House of Assembly to reconsider its appointment to the Statutory Officers Committee.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (12:47): I am surprised at some things in this house, but for the government to take the view that they want the Legislative Council to reconsider a motion which has been put I just find extraordinary when the Attorney-General himself is the one who is trying to hang on with grim death to be on this committee. The House of Assembly, with the government numbers, appointed the Attorney-General to be on this committee. For all the reasons which have been expanded in the debates in the other place that was seen to be inappropriate.

Whilst the legislative framework which relates to those who sit on the Statutory Officers Committee is silent in respect of whether a minister of the Crown can or cannot be on it, clearly, within the statements made by this government, and in particular through the Governor's speech upon the appointment of the new government, which said:

My Government will act so that any perception of impropriety is not hidden in the shadows—and we will deal decisively with those who have sought to benefit personally from corrupt practices.

To strengthen our democracy, all political parties must act to ensure that their internal processes are transparent and democratic.

As has been canvassed in the other place, clearly we have a situation where the Attorney-General (as if he has not got enough to do) suddenly wants to be on the Statutory Officers Committee to pursue the management, obviously, of statutory officers. The complication comes and the confrontation to or assault on the independence of this is because statutory officers are appointed usually by the parliament on recommendations where the Attorney-General has a role in what he puts either to his cabinet or to this parliament.

If this government were genuine in its attempts to be transparent, then it would let the Statutory Officers Committee of this parliament be free of the potential interference or influence of a minister of the Crown. I do not actually make a direct reflection on the Attorney-General. He happens to be the one who is nominated to be on this committee, but it should be a circumstance where there is no appointment of a minister of the Crown who otherwise has a role in the nomination or appointment of statutory officers.

I am just stunned that the Attorney-General would want to hang on to this like grim death. It does not sit with his own government's statements of transparency and the democratic process as have been clearly outlined by the Premier to ensure there is not only independence but at least an attempt to be seen to be independent.

It is very disappointing that the Attorney takes this view. We do not have the numbers to stop him putting a motion that this be returned to the Legislative Council, but it is, in my view, inappropriate and unnecessary, and he ought to reread the contributions made by members in the other place if he is in any way to look like he is sitting in a government that is transparent and independent and respects those two institutions.

Motion carried.

Sitting suspended from 12:52 to 14:00.