HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)
2019-11-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. C. Bonaros:

1. That in the opinion of this council, a joint committee be appointed to inquire into and report on the effectiveness of the current system of parliamentary committees in supporting the role and functions of the South Australian parliament;

2. That, in the event of a joint committee being appointed, the Legislative Council be represented thereon by three members, of whom two shall form a quorum of council members necessary to be present at all sittings of the committee;

3. That this council permits the joint committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it thinks fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the committee prior to such evidence being reported to the council;

4. That standing order 396 be suspended as to enable strangers to be admitted when the joint committee is examining witnesses, unless the committee otherwise resolves, but they shall be excluded when the committee is deliberating; and

5. That a message be sent to the House of Assembly transmitting the foregoing resolution and requesting its concurrence thereto.

(Continued from 15 May 2019).

The Hon. I. PNEVMATIKOS (17:15): I rise today to speak briefly on the motion by the Hon. Connie Bonaros to establish a committee to review the parliamentary committee system. Labor will be supporting this motion as proposed and amended by the Greens, converting a joint committee into a select committee.

It is appropriate that the committee system be reviewed and is long overdue. On that basis, Labor will be providing our support. In this context, the role of the committee will necessarily look at ways to improve the current processes and structures that surround and support the committee structures in this parliament. Labor looks forward to contributing constructively to the committee and its deliberations.

The Hon. M.C. PARNELL (17:16): I move to amend the motion as follows:

Paragraph 1—Leave out 'in the opinion of this council, a joint committee be appointed' and insert 'a select committee of the Legislative Council be established'.

Paragraph 2—Leave out paragraph 2 and insert new paragraph as follows:

2. That the committee consist of six members and that the quorum of members necessary to be present at all meetings of the committee be fixed at four members and that standing order 389 be so far suspended as to enable the chairperson of the committee to have a deliberative vote only.

Paragraph 3—Leave out 'joint' and insert 'select'.

Paragraph 4—Leave out 'joint' and insert 'select'.

Paragraph 5—Leave out paragraph 5.

I rise to support the motion. Members would be well aware that, for most of my time in this chamber, I have called for reforms to various aspects of parliamentary standing orders and the rules and practices in relation to committees, in particular. I think this committee is a good way to tease those issues out further.

The original plan was to have a joint committee of both houses. My understanding is that there was not sufficient support across the parliament for that to happen. On that basis, I have a number of amendments on file, which I have formally moved as a job lot. The amendments effectively make the motion one for the creation of a select committee of this house, rather than a joint committee of both houses, and they also have the effect of increasing the membership of the committee from five to six.

My understanding of the discussions with other parties is that it is generally agreed that the committee would be well served by having two members from the Liberal Party, two from the Labor Party and two from the crossbench. Certainly, in relation to the Greens, my colleague the Hon. Tammy Franks and I both have a great passion to engage in this issue, but we have decided that if the committee is successful the Hon. Tammy Franks will serve on it.

I hope to work closely with her and, through her, feed some of the ideas I have for committee reform to this particular select committee. With those brief words, I would urge this council to support the motion as proposed to be amended by me, pursuant to the filed amendments.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (17:19): I rise on behalf of the government to indicate that we recognise there appears to be a majority of members in this chamber who are going to support the amended motion. The government's position, however, remains in accordance with its joint party room decision to oppose the original motion. We have obviously not had an opportunity to discuss the amendment that was only tabled today and we only became aware of today, because our joint party meeting met earlier this week.

Our position in part was dictated by an understanding we had with the Australian Labor Party that they too would oppose the original motion. We proceeded on that basis and indicated that we would oppose the motion as well. As is their right, the Australian Labor Party yesterday advised that they had changed their position and were now supporting what we understood to be the original motion but as we have now established is an amended motion. We have only become aware today of the amendments that have been tabled.

If we wanted to, we could jump up and down and say that we were unaware of the amendments, but I am sure there will be occasions where other members will find that amendments get moved on the day and I am sure that they, similarly, will not jump up and down and say they were not made aware of these amendments until the last day and will be able to respond quickly on the spot in relation to them.

I have been a passionate advocate of the committee system in the Legislative Council from my maiden speech, which was 150 years ago. I can indicate that the Statutory Authorities Review Committee is a committee of the Legislative Council. I made some contribution to the establishment of that, having previously written a thesis in my masters on quangos, or statutory authorities. It was modelled on various committees that existed in other upper houses around Australia.

The establishment of the Budget and Finance Committee was something that I drove through the Legislative Council. When in government, I continued to support the establishment of the Budget and Finance Committee, with an acknowledgment that it was an important role of the Legislative Council.

One of the reforms in that particular committee, which I think has gained favour from a number of members, is an innovation we included for non-participating members to be able to be involved in the Budget and Finance Committee, that is, to allow members who were not members of the committee to come along to participate at the discretion of the chair of the committee, which was always given, to ask questions and to be involved in committee debates and questioning, not that there were deliberations for the Budget and Finance Committee because it was a committee of a different nature.

During my time chairing the Budget and Finance Committee, I think almost every other member of the Legislative Council, at one stage or another, participated in a proceeding of the Budget and Finance Committee. That was something I had seen in other jurisdictions and proposed to be used in the Budget and Finance Committee.

I think my record on committees and the importance of committees in the Legislative Council should speak for itself. I do remain a strong supporter. I also acknowledge the need for a parliamentary form of committees, particularly as a result of the changes that were made in relation to remuneration for members of parliament where there has seemed to be, from a number of members of parliament, less inclination to serve on committees when the payment only related to the presiding member of the committee. I think there is considerable scope for rationalisation.

I think one of the challenges for an upper house committee alone will be that clearly it has the capacity to recommend changes in relation to Legislative Council committees but it has no authority in relation to House of Assembly committees or joint committees between both houses. I can indicate that the government will continue to look at various options in relation to committee reform separate from this particular committee, if it is established.

Members of the government have a range of views; there is not a consolidated view. Members of the government have a range of views in relation to parliamentary committee reform. I am but one member of the government and I guess I have more established views in relation to where I see the capacity to reform some of the processes of the committee system.

Ultimately, the government's views may or may not mirror the views of the majority of members of this proposed committee, because that will be dictated to by the group that has established the committee, that is, the non-government members of the committee: the two Labor members and the two crossbench members. Whilst we are always very respectful of the views of other representative bodies in the parliament, ultimately for there to be a successful resolution there will need to be agreement with the government in relation to sensible progress of parliamentary reform.

I am intrigued by the position of the Australian Labor Party, which for a long period in government did not want to engage in relation to reform of the parliamentary committee system. I think I have recounted a long series of meetings that I and a colleague had with the former attorney-general, John Rau, and lower house members in relation to various options for reform. There was almost broad agreement leading up to the last election, but then the former government went cold on the idea of reform and those ideas fell to the wayside.

Let me conclude by saying that I wish the committee well in its deliberations. I note that it will be restricted in terms of its capacity to achieve change. It can certainly recommend and it certainly has the capacity to try to initiate change in relation to the Legislative Council. I will put on the record my very strong view in relation to changes that occur in relation to our operations as a chamber, whether it be standing orders or whether it be committees.

My position, whether in government over many years or in opposition, has been that changes in terms of our standing orders and sessional orders and in relation to our committees have only occurred as a result of agreement between all parties in the Legislative Council. It is tempting for occasional majorities, or temporary majorities, to force a standing order change, a sessional order change or a committee change, but what comes around goes around in the Legislative Council.

For all of my period in the parliament, I, when I have been the leader for a long period of time, and other Labor leaders such as Chris Sumner and various other Labor leaders of the time, have respected that convention, that if we are going to change the operations of the council in some way we have done so under the convention that all the parties have broadly agreed to that particular change. I would hope that if anything was proposed to occur in relation to the operations of the Legislative Council at the end that convention would be respected in terms of the operations of the Legislative Council.

I think it has served us well over many decades. It is a slippery slope, if it is to be breached, because whoever happens to be in the majority at the moment will not always be in the majority in the future. As I said, what comes around goes around; it is a slippery slope which I advise, very strongly, new members not to engage in. I think the practice and convention has served us well and we will be well served to see it continue.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (17:28): I thank honourable members for their respective contributions. I am not 100 per cent sure what to make of the Treasurer's contribution. He has left me a little perplexed. If he is intrigued by the position of the opposition, then I think it is fair to say that I am even more intrigued by the rationale he has just provided to the chamber. The reality is, if we wanted a joint committee we could have had one. That option was on the table, and so for the Treasurer to suggest that the government was not going to support this because the opposition was not going to, I find a little bit odd, especially given its mantra of accountability and transparency.

In relation to the comment that what comes around goes around, for the majors, I think my response to the Treasurer would be that there are also five crossbench members in this chamber and I think they have worked pretty hard at trying to articulate their views about changes to the government since they have come into power. Those views have been well received, but there certainly has not been any action on those fronts.

So we resort to motions like this, where we establish committees—with input from everybody, including the five crossbench members—and hope that we can come up with some sensible suggestions that will lead to a more fluid framework and improved engagement by South Australians with the democratic process, the examination of legislation they are governed by and issues that affect them. We know that committees are absolutely critical to the work we do in this place each and every day. I will not highlight again the reasons why I move this motion—that was done when I moved it—but suffice to say there is no doubt that our committee structure is in need of improvement.

If that need for improvement stretches across both chambers, then I again make the point to the government that they had ample opportunity to make that happen and have chosen not to do so. The reality is that we do not know the best model of parliamentary scrutiny to underpin our committees. There is likely to be not just one correct model of parliamentary scrutiny. It is only when we thoroughly examine and assess what works well that we will be able to establish what refinements could be made to the current system. There is certainly a lot to be learned from jurisdictions both here and abroad, and that is really the intent of this committee.

I indicate for the record that I support the Hon. Mark Parnell's expansion of the membership of the proposed committee, which seeks to reframe it as a select committee, again given the government's lack of willingness to support it in its original form for reasons that have truly stumped me based on the Treasurer's response. I applaud those in the chamber who support the motion. I regret that the government was not willing to look at this more carefully, but I am pleased that it will be going ahead.

Can I say this to the Treasurer, through you, Mr President: Winston Churchill said, 'To improve is to change, and to be perfect is to change often.' My message to the government would be that change is not something to be feared but rather something that we really need to embrace in this place. I know that we on this side of the crossbench are making every attempt to try to get the government to see that change is sometimes, particularly in this instance, absolutely necessary.

The parliament and the committee structure need to be responsive to the needs of members but, more importantly, they need to be responsive to our constituents, to South Australians. Our reputation rests on our capacity to engage effectively with those communities that we represent and to perform our core functions. We know that academics have decried the South Australian parliament's ad hoc approach to the scrutiny of bills, relying on an informal system of extra parliamentary scrutiny of bills through a process that is often shrouded in mystery. It is not open and transparent to all of us and is certainly not in line with the government's mantra of accountability and transparency.

With those words, I indicate again that this is not a new concept. Other governments have done it; New South Wales has done it. It provides a unique opportunity for us to connect with people, listen to their views and hold the executive branch of government to account for its actions. It provides a vital opportunity for the parliament to restore and enhance its reputation within the broader community—something that it could probably use right now—and contribute to parliament's reputation as the pre-eminent institution for defending rights. With those words, I commend the motion to the chamber.

Amendments carried; motion as amended carried.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: I move:

That the select committee consist of the Hon. R.I. Lucas, the Hon. T.J. Stephens, the Hon. I. Pnevmatikos, the Hon. J.E. Hanson, the Hon. T.A. Franks and the mover.

Motion carried.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: I move:

That the select committee have power to send for persons, papers and records, to adjourn from place to place, and to report on 4 December 2019.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT