CONSTITUTION (FIXED SESSION PRECEDING ELECTION) AMENDMENT BILL

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (19:50): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Constitution Act 1934. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (19:50): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I will be brief, given the workload tonight, but this is an important bill, and I want to give colleagues a chance to be advised on the purpose of it. It is about bringing parliament back in the February before a state election, the soonest of which would be February 2010. It is a short bill, because it does not need a lot of detail. It is simple: either we will sit in the weeks prior to an election or we will go to a situation where we end up every four years getting up by the first week in December and not having this parliament accountable to the South Australian community until late April or early May the following year, which is an enormous amount of time to have the parliament out of session.

The bill would bring back the parliament for the first Tuesday of February, which would be 2 February 2010. Parliament cannot then be prorogued until the issuing of writs, a matter that is largely in the hands of the government, but one would expect will provide at least one if not two weeks of parliament, given that writs would not be expected until about one month out from the election (approximately 19 February 2010). That gives us three calendar weeks, which could easily be two sitting weeks of parliament, with a break in between, but at the very least one week of sitting. It could also include a Monday and/or a Friday, if need be.

This bill does not require a special vote. Even though it is a fixed session preceding election amendment bill, under the Constitution Act it can be carried by a normal vote on a bill. I have had some research done and it begins with the points I made in my most recent question on this issue in question time. Further to that research, it is very useful to note the average number of sitting hours in a sitting day, which I suggest is the only reliable measure of how often any government has sat, given the unequal lengths of a government's term. On our calculation, for the Bannon/Arnold Labor government of 1982 to 1993 it was six hours and 28 minutes. Under the Liberals, from 1993 to 2002, the average number of sitting hours per sitting day was six hours and 44 minutes, which might sound like only 16 minutes more per sitting day, but had the Liberal government run the exact length of the previous government the total hours sat would have been much higher.

It is true that this government has had more sitting days, but the Liberals sat for longer hours, which is understandable particularly, I think, since they would have wanted to be more accommodating to country MPs. So, let us compare six hours 28 minutes under the 1982-93 Labor government, and six hours 44 minutes under the 1993-2002 Liberal government, to this current government. To date, it is just six hours and six minutes. So, we have sat more days but we have seen less of the parliament under this government than under the previous two governments.

The other point I make is that we rank very low. We had a look at other states and territories, and we actually ranked twelfth out of 15 upper and lower houses in state and territory parliaments in terms of sitting days; by our calculations, about two sitting weeks short. This bill seeks to give back to the South Australian people their missing two sitting weeks but also, importantly, this bill, irrespective of who is in government, Liberal or Labor, ensures that the democratic parliament can come back after the Christmas break and finish business, and here I include important select committees that often do not get the consideration they deserve, particularly with respect to opportunities involving witnesses and broadening that aspect of the parliament's operation, which can then continue during the ensuing period.

I think that probably when the terms came to be fixed—whilst I do not disagree with fixed terms—there was a problem and a mistake made. Parliament may not have considered the ramifications, and we probably should have provided for fixed year terms with an election occurring in November. That would have been much better for the governance of South Australia.

As I said, we should not forget important select committees; some at the moment could continue, including the Budget and Finance Committee. Often the Mid-Year Budget Review does not come out until after parliament gets up when there is an election year looming. The Select Committee on Certain Matters Relating to Horse Racing in South Australia is a pretty involved committee and time for hearing all witnesses would be much better. Many other select committees, including the Select Committee on the Taxi Industry in South Australia, could have received much more evidence and conclude its findings.

Let us not forget that, as of now, with only nine sitting days left in this parliament and the disallowance period of 14 sitting days, any regulations introduced by the government can be disallowed some time in May or June 2010 even though they have been introduced earlier this month. As to regulations that are being put up by the government right now, departments can work on those regulations and it is possible that they could be overturned by the new government after the election even though they had been introduced in early October.

It is a simple bill, so I give notice that I will be looking for a vote on it, unless the government gives an absolute guarantee to sit for two weeks early next year, which is another option for the government. The Premier could come out with a press release tomorrow and say that he is happy to sit in late January-early February. We can have more time for this, but it is a simple, straightforward bill. I believe the South Australian community wants to see us sit in that period and I believe it would be good for accountable government, so I commend the bill to the council.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.