Fair Agenda

Federal parliamentarians will today debate the creation of an “Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission”, with advocates warning the model proposed isn’t strong enough to realise the change needed. 

Fair Agenda, the Australian Democracy Network and Transparency International Australia have all voiced concerns that the restriction of the enforcement body’s power to recommend sanctions in cases of serious parliamentarian misconduct will undermine its ability to meaningfully improve parliamentary safety and standards.

Quotes attributable to Renee Carr, Executive Director of gender equity movement Fair Agenda: 

“Australians want our politicians to be held to higher standards of behaviour. We reasonably expect any misconduct by parliamentarians to be addressed by a strong, independent body with the power to, at the very least, recommend appropriate consequences. Instead, in cases of serious parliamentarian misconduct, this proposal will take the question of sanctions from the independent body, and hand it back to someone’s peers in the parliament.”

"We need a parliamentary standards system that ensures matters of misconduct are brought above the politics of the day. This requires independent recommendations on appropriate sanctions.”

"If a parliamentarian is engaging in misconduct; the public deserves to know what our independent standards enforcement body thinks is an appropriate response; and whether the parliament follows that advice. That is what has just been legislated in Victoria. It's beyond disappointing to see the federal parliament introducing a weaker model, when it is supposed to be setting the standard.”

Crossbench members in both chambers will introduce amendments to strengthen the proposed IPSC model, by requiring the IPSC to recommend appropriate sanctions in cases of serious parliamentarian misconduct; and requiring the Privileges Committee to report its reasons if it departs from these recommendations. Amendments will be proposed by Andrew Wilkie MP in the Lower House and Senator Larissa Waters in the Senate. 

Lines attributable to Andrew Wilkie MP, Independent Member for Clark and member of the Privileges Committee, says:

“The Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission bill goes some way to addressing the problems that were raised in the Set the Standard Report.”

“But there is one glaring omission. That is where a matter involves a ‘serious offence’, the power to impose sanctions is taken away from the IPSC and given to the Privileges Committee. This flies in the face of the Set the Standard recommendation for a fair, independent, confidential and transparent complaints processing mechanism which will hold parliamentarians to account for poor behaviour.

“I plan on moving an amendment to remedy the Government’s Bill. My amendment enables the IPSC to include recommendations for any sanctions in its report to the Privileges Committee. Moreover, should the Privileges Committee choose to deviate from the recommendations of the IPSC, it must table its reasons for doing so when it reports its decision.”

Lines attributable to Greens leader in the Senate and spokesperson on Women, Larissa Waters, who also serves as a member of the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce:  

"The Greens share advocate’s concerns that the suggested MP sanctions are far weaker and less transparent than we would have liked.

“The Greens pushed for stronger sanctions, including higher fines for MPs and more consequences for Ministers when there is an adverse finding.

“The Greens will move amendments to the Bill to give the IPSC power to suggest sanctions, as suggested by Jenkins, and if Privileges depart from that suggestion, table an explanation as to why. 

“Australians need to trust that their elected officials will be held responsible if they misbehave, and a strong and transparent process is needed for that confidence.”

Other members of the crossbench have also expressed their support for a stronger IPSC model.

Lines attributable to Kylea Tink MP - Independent Member for North Sydney, and member of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards said:

“The Commission is not as strong as it could or should be. We know self-regulation doesn’t work – in any sector. Placing the Privileges Committee in charge of sanctioning MPs found to have significantly breached the standards is like asking arsonists to put out their own fires and means there is no guarantee that disciplinary actions will be impactful.”

“As with debate around other new integrity measures – including the National Anti-Corruption Commission  – we must have a process and consequences that hold people to account and offer an appropriate level of transparency.”

“Importantly, we must also acknowledge that, as a democracy, we are not breaking new ground here. In fact Australia is behind a number of other parliaments, including the UK, and for this reason I think we should be stepping into this boldly. Australians expect it and it’s time our parliament met those expectations.”

Lidia Thorpe, Independent Senator for Victoria:

"This draft legislation falls short of the Set the Standard report recommendations.The IPSC must be able to make sanction recommendations, and if the committee decides not to follow them, they should explain why. We can't have politicians policing one another and deciding on their own penalties without transparency or accountability."

"The Privileges Committee is government controlled and dominated by Labor and Coalition politicians. Everyone on it is white and most are blokes. When we're talking about serious misconduct, often rooted in misogyny and racism, we can't blindly trust a political committee to decide on sanctions with no transparency. It's a joke. This is the reason we needed an independent IPSC in the first place."

"I support the amendments proposed by the crossbench in both Houses and I'll be introducing further amendments to strengthen the ability of the IPSC to tackle misconduct."

Zoe Daniel, community Independent Member for Goldstein says: 

“Kate Jenkins’ report was called Set the Standard for a very good reason. Because that’s what the horrifying accounts of workplace culture in Parliament House demanded; that we should lead the way and our workplaces should be role models for employers everywhere.”

“If we are to win the trust of the community in general and women in particular parliament should legislate the recommendations for transparency and accountability in the Jenkins report in full.”

Helen Haines, Federal Independent Member for Indi says:

“There has been longstanding acceptance of unethical and toxic behaviours in Parliament that would not be tolerated in other workplaces or settings. It has eroded public faith in Parliament and our democracy and I am glad we will have an independent commission to address this. 

“We must ensure the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission and the Privileges Committee operate with transparency if we want to build trust with people who work here and with the public. 

The Bill as currently drafted means serious findings could be made about an MP, but they could face no sanction and the public could never know. I will support amendments to bring more transparency to this process.”