Motions

Petitions, Suspension of Standing Orders

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Minister for Education) (11:04): I move:

That for the remainder of the session, standing orders be and remain so far suspended to provide that—

Eligible petitions—referral, response and address

1. Eligible petitions referred to Legislative Review Committee

A copy of every petition, being a single petition, received by the house, certified by the Clerk and signed by 10,000 or more persons, an ‘eligible petition’, shall be referred by the Clerk to the Legislative Review Committee.

2. Minister’s response to a report on an eligible petition

(a) Within six sitting days of a ministerial response being made to a report relating to an eligible petition, the prescribed minister shall at the usual time during routine business for ministers to give notices—

(b) Address the house and explain:

(i) What if any action is to be taken in relation to the petition; and

(ii) If no action is to be taken in relation to the petition, the reasons for that fact.

(c) Without further leave of the house, the time allowed for the address by the prescribed minister is limited to 15 minutes.

3. Minister’s address noted

In the event that a minister addresses the house with a response to a report relating to an eligible petition, a member may give notice of a motion, in accordance with the same rules as for other notices of motion, ‘That the house note the minister’s address.’ The notice of motion will be taken into consideration within the time allocated for Private Members Business: Committees and Subordinate Legislation.

The purpose of this motion is to enact the bill brought to this house, and indeed the parliament's attention, by the member for Florey in relation to there being a response by the parliament using our mechanisms when there is a petition signed by more than 10,000 South Australians.

The bill was supported by this house and the council and is now the law of the state. Usually, when we have laws, there are regulations that give practice to those laws. In the case of a bill relating to petitions in the house, the regulations in question are our standing orders. The usual practice—and probably the long-term practice—is for the Standing Orders Committee of the parliament to give some reflection on these matters, and I expect that to be the case.

I am advised that a member may be imminently bringing a petition to the house that may potentially have the requisite number of signatures. Rather than delay the inclusion of a sessional order to give effect to the bill that the parliament has passed, the government has sought advice from the Clerk about what those sessional orders would look like. We present them to the house for inclusion in the sessional orders. I would anticipate that they will then be available immediately upon the house's adoption of them for any member who wishes to bring a petition with the requisite number of signatures.

I would further anticipate that the Standing Orders Committee of the parliament, either after the first application of the sessional order or potentially at some stage in the next year or so, would give their consideration to the application of the sessional order to whether it has worked in the way in which it was intended in its current form, and further consider whether it is adopted in the standing orders at that point or whether amendments might be considered.

The government will be supporting the introduction of this sessional order into our house's sessional orders today, but I indicate to the house that I as the member for Morialta, as would indeed the government, would be open to further reflections on enhancements and/or the adoption into the standing orders of this sessional order as is in the future.

Once again, I take the opportunity to thank the member for Florey for bringing the initial bill to the house. That bill has been supported by all corners of the political spectrum because I think what it does is ensure that once you have a petition of 10,000 signatures, you clearly have an issue of some public significance and interest.

The mechanism outlined herein, whereby consideration will be given by a parliamentary committee, and then the opportunity and mechanism for a debate in the house about the report of that committee, I think gives an enhancement to the status of those petitions over and above what they currently have. With that, I encourage all members to support the motion.

Mr BROWN (Playford) (11:07): The right to petition the parliament is one that citizens of our state enjoy, and it is also a very important one. It is an ancient right, but not one that should not be modernised whenever possible. I think the bill presented by the member for Florey was a very good one and, as the minister pointed out, it was supported by all members of the parliament. But, like all pieces of legislation, it is not just about the bill or the act itself; it is also about how it is implemented, and I think the government's attempt to bring forward this motion today is a very good one.

It is also very appropriate that after this is done the Standing Orders Committee later looks at it to see if it has been working effectively. I would also agree that any petition that can be signed by over 10,000 people of this state is certainly an issue that needs to be considered by this parliament, particularly since it is also in the form of what could be described as a 'real' petition with real signatures, and not online Facebook likes types of petitions, which I note receive a large number of likes even though they do not deal with very serious issues.

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner interjecting:

Mr BROWN: That's right. I know we have all seen petitions receive tens of thousands of likes that deal with who should be Dr Who and other important issues like that. I think that a petition presented that more than 10,000 South Australians have actually put their names and addresses to it is certainly something this parliament should consider. I think that this is a good first attempt at a procedure to implement the legislation that has been passed by the parliament and that it is eminently sensible that the Standing Orders Committee look at it afterwards. I am pleased to advise the house that the Labor Party has resolved to support this motion.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (11:09): May I just say how grateful I am, on behalf of the electors of the state, for the support from both the government and the opposition. I think it really reinvigorates for electors the notion that parliament is part of a participatory democracy, a place where their views can be considered more than once every four years, in a far more detailed manner, by bringing to the attention of the house issues of relevance and importance to them. I am very grateful also for this opportunity to thank the parliament on behalf of the electors of the state, and I look forward to perhaps being the first person to table a 10,000-plus petition under the new rules.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Minister for Education) (11:10): The week has got off to an excellent start, with bonhomie and goodwill on all sides. I look forward to three days of spirited debate in the same spirit as we seek to support the best interests of the people of South Australia, whom we serve. The member for Florey has brought a good bill to the house, and we are about to put it into a place where it can be enacted. I am sure that there will be value in the consideration of these matters in the future where we have 10,000 signatures and those petitioners whose attention is drawn to the debates, as I am sure many of them will be, will equally value that effort.

Motion carried.