Parliament House Matters

CHAMBER FILMING

The PRESIDENT (15:28): I rise to address comments in The Advertiser of last week in relation to filming and photography of proceedings in the council. I was asked by a reporter from The Advertiser whether I was considering reviewing conditions for granting the privilege of recording and broadcasting the proceedings and guidelines for press photographers that restrict filming or photographing to only the member who has the call at any particular time during the proceedings of the Legislative Council.

I confirm to the reporter that it is not my intention to alter the current guidelines and practices or to allow the media to have access for filming beyond the public gallery. Apart from anything else I would not do so without canvassing the views of all members of this council. One media organisation has deemed fit to describe the practices of this council as anachronistic. For myself, I disagree. The established practices of the parliament, and this council in particular, have stood the test of time. Those practices exist for a purpose. One purpose is to ensure that the deliberations of this council considered by the people of this state to be important if not critical to the legislative process will be conducted without undue external pressure, particularly from media organisations such as the one to which I have referred.

I consider that the media debate, including editorial comment, adversely reflects on this council and the office of President and has the potential to undermine the workings of this council and public respect for, and confidence in, the council itself as an institution. It is important to acknowledge the independence of the Legislative Council and the inalienable right of each house to be its own master.

I have not been approached personally by any member calling on me to review the established practices and procedures; however, all members should consider whether any alterations would in fact enhance transparency or the democratic process or whether such alteration might not lead instead to circumstances where the predominant focus would be on happenings ancillary to, and not forming part of, the proceedings of the Legislative Council.

More importantly, members could be subject to what may be deemed as being personally humiliated and demeaned. An examination of the practices adopted by other jurisdictions reveals that, in general, comparatively strict guidelines are maintained and in some of these jurisdictions media outlets have less freedom as they are subject to in-house feed under the control of their parliamentary administrations.