Bills

Parliamentary Committees (Response to Reports) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 7 February 2024.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (17:50): I rise to speak in support of the Parliamentary Committees (Response to Reports) Amendment Bill 2024, ensuring transparency and accountability should be listed by this Labor government as a top priority. The need for this bill, though, clearly shows that they have utterly failed in this regard.

First, it was answering questions on notice within a respectable time—something we still battle with constantly. Now it is ignoring the hard work of parliamentary committees and members of the public, many of whom have exhausted themselves physically and emotionally on inquiries, many of which deal with sensitive or difficult topics, by not responding to tabled reports.

Conversations with staff from multiple shadow minister offices have revealed a repeated pattern of contempt across the spectrum of Malinauskas cabinet ministers. As an opposition, we are appalled at the level of disrespect that the government has shown time and time again. It is time that this government is held to account, and that is exactly what this bill intends to do. Across the board we are pushing to ensure that the government cannot get away with ignoring the real issues that impact everyday South Australians.

The Premier and his ministers continuously avoid genuine problems raised within this parliament through committees and by concerned citizens, instead deciding to focus on the bright lights of shows and events in an effort to detract the public from ever-growing debt, deficit and dysfunction within government departments.

The Hon. Rob Simms has introduced this amendment bill in an effort to address the poor habit of Labor government ministers not acknowledging or responding to parliamentary committees' tabled reports, and the opposition agrees with the measures contained herein. This amendment bill legislates a mandated response from the government of the day to parliamentary committee reports.

Within my own shadow portfolios, and indeed the committees that I have joined or been on, I can point to tabled reports which have been ignored by this current government. This includes the parliamentary committee into bird hunting, then extending more broadly across the cabinet, as with the parliamentary committee into public and active transport, as the Hon. Robert Simms mentioned in his second reading speech, to the agreement of my colleague the Hon. Ben Hood. Substantial effort and time goes into committees by members and staff, as well as those witnesses willing to speak up or write submissions as evidence. It is utterly disrespectful for the relevant minister to disregard the committee and their report.

If this government wants to be open and transparent with the public, and indeed this government absolutely should be open and transparent with the public, then I ask why is it that the crossbench and the opposition, yet again, have to remind them not only of what is standard practice but really what is the lowest benchmark in terms of due diligence? It is beyond disappointing that, just like we saw with questions being taken on notice, it is taking a motion or legislation to correct the despicable arrogance of this current Labor government.

In summary, I want to place on the record that perhaps a future conversation may need to be had as to whether the four-monthly way to respond to a tabled report is somewhat lenient, but I am happy for that conversation to be had once this legislation has passed both chambers, as indeed it should pass both chambers. Something urgent needs to be done to address this government's failure to respond to the work of many committees and, indeed, the parliament and the work of many individuals right across South Australia. As such, the opposition supports the current measures in this bill and we commend it to the chamber.

The Hon. J.S. LEE (17:54): I rise to make a brief contribution in support of the Parliamentary Committees (Response to Reports) Amendment Bill 2024. The bill seeks to amend the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, to require the relevant minister to respond to recommendations of a parliamentary inquiry within four months of the report being tabled. Currently, reports from select committees are not subject to the response timeframe from the government, allowing ministers potentially to ignore their recommendations indefinitely if they choose to.

This makes a mockery of the select committee process and begs the question of why members of parliament and members of the public should use their valuable time and tremendous efforts engaging in select committees to identify policy solutions that the government can simply ignore. It can be seen as disrespectful and even insulting to the individuals, organisations and businesses that take the time to write submissions and appear as witnesses in an effort to share their experience, expertise, needs and aspirations with parliamentary committees.

This bill will not force the government's hand to accept or adopt the recommendations put forward by select committees, but it does require the relevant minister at the very least to read, engage with and respond to the recommendations of a committee report. I believe this bill will strengthen the level of ministerial accountability and provide greater respect and fairness for matters of importance to the people of South Australia. I commend the bill to the chamber.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (17:56): I rise to speak briefly on behalf of the government on the Parliamentary Committees (Response to Reports) Amendment Bill 2024. At the outset, I indicate that the government will not oppose the passage of the bill through the council today and will further consider our position on the matter in the other place.

In South Australia, it has long been the case that ministers must respond to standing committee reports within four months of receiving the report from the relevant committee. Government agencies put significant work into considering the recommendations made by standing committees and supporting ministers in providing a response. To extend this requirement to select committees would require additional work by these agencies, particularly given the number of select committees.

So far this term, I am advised, there have been 22 select committees established across the two houses. However, we acknowledge the intent of the Hon. Robert Simms in introducing this bill and the important matters often raised by select committee reports. We will continue to consider this matter while the bill is before the House of Assembly should it successfully pass today.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (17:57): I thank all honourable members for their contributions: thank you to the Hon. Nicola Centofanti, the Hon. Jing Lee and the Hon. Russell Wortley. I appreciate the support of all parties for this. I note the government's position that they will not be opposing the bill, and I appreciate that.

As has been articulated by the Hon. Jing Lee, this bill does not force the relevant minister to implement the recommendations of a select committee. I think that is a very important point to note. All it requires is that they provide a report in parliament on their response. That can be as simple as saying why a recommendation cannot be implemented or simply noting a recommendation, but it is wanting to ensure that the relevant minister has read and engaged with the substance of the report.

It is a particularly relevant debate this week. It is two years since the public and active transport committee handed down its report—two years, and we are still waiting for any response from the relevant minister. I think that does underscore why a reform such as this might be necessary, because two years without a callback in terms of action on the recommendations is disappointing. Members of parliament obviously put a lot of work into these committees. More importantly, members of the community actually invest their time and energy into our committee process.

As the Hon. Nicola Centofanti noted, it can be challenging for members of the public to appear before these committees, particularly when they are talking about sensitive matters. If they are doing so, I think the least that they can expect of their elected representatives is that the government of the day at least engages with the content of the final report and indicates what elements can be taken up.

I think that is the least that the community is entitled to expect of their elected representatives. If you have gone to the effort of appearing before a parliamentary committee and making a submission, you do not think that the minister is going to simply take the committee report, stick it in a top drawer somewhere and let it sit there and gather dust. You would want the minister to respond.

I note the Hon. Russell Wortley has referenced the number of committees that have been running during this term of parliament. Many members of the crossbench and others have offered in this place to address committee reform. It is an ongoing discussion. There is always the potential to look at how we can do committees better. I do not think that should be used as a reason to not take action and to not have the relevant minister engage with the recommendations of the report.

I hope that this does start a conversation around how ministers can engage more effectively with these committees. I should just say in closing that there are many ministers in the Malinauskas government who I think do this really well, who engage openly with parliamentary committees, who are interested in the recommendations and who seek to take action on things. It is not a problem that affects everybody, but I think legislation is a good way of dealing with this, because it means that at least you have a set standard in place that operates across the board. I think that always makes sense.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (18:03): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.