South Australian Parliament Workplace

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. I. Pnevmatikos:

That this council—

1. Commits itself to leading cultural change within the parliamentary workplace;

2. Welcomes the recommendations made in the Equal Opportunity Commission’s Review of Harassment in the South Australian Parliament Workplace;

3. Declares that sexual and discriminatory harassment will not be tolerated in the parliamentary workplace; and

4. Takes the necessary action to implement Our Watch’s Workplace Equality and Respect Standards.

(Continued from 17 March 2021.)

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:57): I rise on behalf the Greens in this parliament to support the motion of the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos. I note that this motion is similar to one that I have moved, noting the equal opportunity commissioner's Review of Harassment in the South Australia Parliament Workplace. It is indeed a sad day when we have several motions and a report that is condemning of the practices in this place that have seen quite frightening, disturbing—but unsurprising to most women—cultural practices that include sexual harassment, and that create a toxic workplace and do not support the full enjoyment of democracy, particularly by women in this parliament.

I also note that this particular motion welcomes the report and I do welcome the report. It is an opportunity to have a conversation that has been silenced for far too long. Indeed, the report itself took quite a few motions over many months to ever see the light of day and to get to the equal opportunity commissioner's purview in the first place.

My fear is that while we have now had some response to the report, and I understand we have acceptance and acknowledgement of the recommendations, I have yet to hear where we are up to with issues, such as a people and culture unit, to ensure that human resources are managed in a way that befits the 21^st century, not a fiefdom in the Dark Ages. I have yet to hear whether or not we are progressing with things like codes of conduct for all parliamentarians, not just those who are ministers in this place.

As a crossbencher, that was one of the concerns I raised with the government quite early on, as to how those who are not in the leadership of either of the two older parties (in this place and the other) would be informed and know that progress was being made.

I look forward to hearing the Leader of the Government tell us that we have made progress and that there is imminent work coming through, in particular one of the points of the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos's motion, that our watch's workplace equality and respect standards will soon be implemented for this parliament. I look forward to hearing how that is to be implemented, when it is to be implemented and what progress we have made on these quite useful, timely and urgent recommendations within this report.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (17:00): I wish to thank the Hon. Ms Bonaros; I have another engagement at 10 past 5 so she has kindly allowed me to speak before her. The government's position, as I am advised, is that this motion, in exactly the same terms I am advised, was passed with the support of government members in the House of Assembly and therefore, on that basis, government members are supporting the motion in this house, given that government members have already supported it in the House of Assembly.

The parliament has established a joint committee which will be charged with looking at some of these particular issues. As I understand it, the joint services committee is already considering a response to key parts of this particular report. I think, as I have indicated before, the author of the report, in my view, does not understand the complexity of the parliament, ministerial offices, members' electorate offices and a variety of other people who work in Parliament House who do not report directly to either the joint services committee or to the President or the Speaker—for example, protective security staff.

Staff who work for members of the Legislative Council, for example, are answerable to their immediate employer and are employed by Electorate Services within Treasury, so there are complexities. Clearly there are staff who answer to the Legislative Council, there are staff who report to the House of Assembly and there are joint services staff that the joint services committee has responsibility for. But there is a range of other people who work here—for example, ministerial advisers spend a good amount of their time in Parliament House but they are employed under completely different arrangements again through contracts with the Premier of the day and, in some cases, are actually public servants who operate in ministers' offices but spend time down here at Parliament House.

One cannot expect the author of this particular report to understand the complexities of the government's arrangements at Parliament House so I make no criticism of the author but, therefore, any committee or joint services committee or President or Speaker or, indeed, cabinet and government will have to bear in mind the complexities of who is actually employing whom and who is responsible for whom within Parliament House.

In a number of the other areas, for example, the recommendations about amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act, my understanding is that the Attorney-General is still taking advice in relation to those particular issues. Whilst the motion in the Assembly and in the Council welcomes the recommendations, the Attorney-General, sensibly, is seeking advice as to what the implications might be of some of the mooted amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act.

There are a number of others, as I said, which will be subject to the advice of the joint committee which this parliament has now established to make recommendations on back to both houses of parliament in relation to how various things might or might not be progressed.

The only other thing I can place on the record is that there are about 24 government departments and agencies, I am advised, that are implementing action plans in line with a workplace equality and respect framework, which is implicit in the member's fourth recommendation regarding Our Watch's Workplace Equality and Respect Standards.

I indicate that, as I said, as government members supported a similar motion in the House of Assembly some weeks ago now, government members in this chamber are supporting this particular motion, with those caveats in relation to what ultimately the parliament's response might be, because that will be a decision for parliament or for the Joint Parliamentary Service Committee or, again, as I said, whoever the employing authority is for various other people who work in Parliament House. They will each need to respond in their own way in relation to the implications of some of the recommendations that are canvassed in both the report and referred to in this particular motion.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (17:06): I, too, rise to speak on the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos's motion calling for an end to sexual and discriminatory harassment in this place. I, too, welcome the recommendations of the Equal Opportunity Commission's review of harassment in the South Australian parliament workplace and look forward to the timely implementation of all of them.

I do not propose to take up too much time today. I am conscious that we have a very important issue to get through, but I think it is important to put some things on the record today. I have spoken before on this and will no doubt be speaking again until we get it right. In doing so, I echo the sentiments of the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos and the Hon. Tammy Franks. I appreciate some of the complexities also that the Treasurer has just highlighted that we are working through.

As lawmakers, we should be absolutely leading by example, not being the bad example. This is, I think, as we all now appreciate, a defining moment in time, not just for the parliamentary workplace but for all professions and workplaces where clear power imbalances continue to exist. We know harassing behaviours are especially common in professions and workplaces where there is a significant gender power imbalance, as was exposed recently after an investigation into the legal profession.

We have had clear confirmation in not one but two reports now, sadly in the two professions in which the mover and I am a member. It is there in black and white for all to see. We know victims are afraid to speak up for fear of career repercussions. These are not irrational fears. It can be career ending to call out bad behaviour. Victims are blamed when clearly it is the perpetrator who should be.

Victims do not know where to turn or what the complaint processes are, even if they choose to report, but I think it is also important to say that in many cases we know what all the mechanisms are in terms of reporting this sort of behaviour. We know where we ought to go and what we ought to do, but we remain fearful of doing so. The complaints processes, though, are ad hoc and completely inadequate in this place, so it is encouraging that processes will be considered by the newly established parliamentary committee, along with other outstanding recommendations.

There has been some good news to date. A change of standing orders to allow breast or bottle feeding in the chamber has already been answered in one chamber at least. The other place has acted swiftly and promptly to address this issue. I remain hopeful it will soon be addressed in this chamber as well.

The committee has also been tasked with drafting the code of conduct for MPs—yet another long overdue reform. While an improvement in processes is absolutely welcome, the systemic issues—the power imbalance that I have alluded to—still need considerable work in this place and indeed many other places. We need to understand the risk factors and take real steps to address them. We know these include gender, we know they include age, disability, sexuality, cultural and linguistic backgrounds and insecure work status. We know harassment is more likely to occur in less diverse workplaces.

Next week, I will be introducing my gender equality bill, which seeks to address the gender imbalance in select public sector agencies. Why? Because we know that underlying issues of sexual harassment, and issues that have been highlighted in this report, are issues of gender inequality not just in the Public Service but all professions. I will speak more to that at that point, but again, if we do not start at the top, then what hope do other workplaces have?

For now, I commend the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos for her continued robust advocacy in this space and look forward to zero tolerance of sexual and discriminatory harassment in this and every workplace. Before I close, I would like to reflect on reports yesterday and today of a magistrate facing two inquiries now over sexual harassment: one by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and the other by the Chief Justice.

If you think, as apparently some members of this parliament do, that these inquiries are a waste of time or unnecessary, you only need look as far as the bravery exemplified by Ms Bitmead—the lawyer who made the claims against a sitting magistrate, a judicial officer—to appreciate the positive impacts these reviews are having. They are giving victims confidence to call out inappropriate and normalised behaviours. They are giving them the strength they need in the face of what is undoubtedly a daunting and extremely intimidating experience.

It is the abhorrent behaviour of perpetrators that brings the legal profession, and indeed this profession and all professions, into disrepute—not the bravery of those who are willing to stand up and call it out. The reputations of our professions do not suffer because people are willing to stand up and say, 'I have been victimised by a perpetrator.' They suffer and they find themselves in absolute tatters, as parliaments across the nation find themselves right now, because for decades we have failed to acknowledge our own failings. We have chosen to sweep bad behaviour under the carpet and we have normalised bad and inappropriate conduct. Regrettably, we have victimised those who have had the intestinal fortitude to question it, to fight for change, to fight for gender equality and to call it out.

As the President of the Women Lawyers' Association SA, Ms Kymberley Lawrence, said just today in InDaily, the issue of sexual harassment has been there for such a long time but this culture of silence is being broken by the Equal Opportunity Commission report. Precisely the same sentiment can be expressed about the report into this parliament and the practices in this parliament and indeed all other workplaces. As was highlighted today by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, if it is not reported, if we do or say nothing, it will not stop.

The Hon. I. PNEVMATIKOS (17:13): Thank you to the Hon. Tammy Franks, the Hon. Connie Bonaros and the Hon. Rob Lucas for their contribution to the motion. I also wish to thank the member for Reynell for introducing this motion in the other place. Some of the behaviour of this parliament has not gone unnoticed. For years the rights and dignity of workers in this place have been ignored.

The amalgamation of the Equal Opportunity Commissioner, staffers and members both in the federal and state spheres coming forward with accusations of sexual harassment and rape, and the Enough Is Enough campaign, have forced both the state and federal government to act.

Since the introduction of this motion in March, women from all different workplaces have continued to fight for their rights, calling out inappropriate behaviour and taking action against misogyny in the workplace. Yet, both the state and federal governments remain complacent, with no meaningful or structural action taken to address the issues. It simply is not good enough that, after nearly three months of having the equal opportunity commissioner's Review of Harassment in the South Australian Parliament Workplace, we are still waiting to implement the recommendations.

If the chamber is to support this motion, it is a sign of support to survivors who have led the campaign asking for greater protection within their workplaces and a change to the deep misogyny entrenched in parliamentary culture. Further, it reinforces this chamber's commitment to work towards bettering our workplace and actively implementing recommendations made to the parliament on addressing issues of harassment.

I acknowledge that the Hon. Connie Bonaros has a similar motion on this issue and I will be supporting it. We can no longer remain complacent on these issues. A select committee was established by this chamber; we are yet to meet. There have been two false starts and no progress has been made on the issue. Now is the time for action, not words.

Motion carried.