House debates

Thursday, 20 September 2007

Committees

Publications Committee; Report

9:47 am

Photo of Trish DraperTrish Draper (Makin, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Publications Committee, I present the committee’s report entitled Printing standards for documents presented to parliament, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—Firstly, I would like to acknowledge and thank my colleagues on the committee for their worthy contributions and efforts in compiling this report: the current and former chairs of the Senate Publications Committee, Senator Julian McGauran and Senator Guy Barnett; and the deputy chair of the House Publications Committee, the honourable member for Lyons. Can I take this opportunity to thank the member for Lyons for his years of experience in this place in assisting the committee and assisting me as chair—Dick, you did a tremendous job; thank you very much. Thank you also to our committee members, the honourable members for Braddon, Isaacs, Werriwa, Riverina—Kay Hull, who assisted the committee no end with attention to detail—and the member for Ryan; Senators Fisher, Hurley, Marshall, Nash, Sterle and Wortley; and former committee members Senators Campbell, Johnston and Polley.

Mr Deputy Speaker, as you are aware, many thousands of documents are presented to the parliament each year. Most are required to be tabled by law, to assist the parliament with its legislative and oversight functions and to contribute to effective and accountable governance. These documents include the annual reports of all government agencies, reports of royal commissions and other government inquiries, parliamentary committee reports and a wide variety of other material. One of the responsibilities of the Joint Committee on Publications is to issue printing standards for documents presented to parliament. These standards ensure that all documents, particularly those selected for inclusion in the parliamentary papers series, conform to certain requirements. The current standards have been effective in ensuring that documents presented to parliament conform to the requirements of the parliamentary papers series with minimal additional cost to author bodies. However, developments in printing technology, the needs of a wider audience and alternative means of accessing documents have all made it appropriate to re-examine the standards.

One of the most significant issues investigated was the use of colour printing. A number of arguments were put to the committee that supported the view that the standards should be revised to allow for more flexibility. Such arguments included the evolving purpose of annual reports; the use of graphs, illustrations and diagrams; web publishing issues; and design matters. The committee is sympathetic to the wish to include more colour in documents that have an audience beyond the parliament, particularly where such bodies are in direct competition with private enterprise. In the past, the committee’s reluctance to allow the use of full colour in documents has been due to the additional cost involved. In its present inquiry, however, the committee found that technological advances have made full-colour printing with a white border nearly as cost-effective as two-colour printing. The exception is colour that bleeds to the edge of the page. Colour bleeding results in a significant cost increase and represents an inefficient use of government funds. The committee has therefore recommended that colour bleeding be avoided in all documents presented to parliament. In light of the numerous valid reasons for allowing greater flexibility in the use of colour, and technological advances in recent years, the committee has issued revised standards, effective from 1 January 2008, which will provide government bodies with increased flexibility in the use of colour in certain circumstances.

It should be noted, however, that the committee expects government bodies to continue to achieve value for money in the production of their documents and maintains that for most annual reports black plus one colour is sufficient for text. In determining whether to use additional colours, author bodies should carefully consider the purpose and audience of the document. They should also weigh the additional costs involved with colour printing against the expected benefits. The report also deals with several other issues, including possible sanctions for noncompliance with the standards, potential cost-saving measures, improved communication with print providers, better training for print procurement officers and environmental issues.

In conclusion, I would like to thank all those who made submissions to the inquiry and particularly the 20 witnesses who appeared before the committee at its very successful roundtable discussion. I would also like to acknowledge the work of the committee secretariat, including the Secretary of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Publications, Mr Jason Sherd, who is currently on paternity leave; the Secretary of the Senate Standing Committee on Publications, Ms Naomie Kaub; and inquiry secretaries Ms Peggy Danaee and Mr Andrew McGowan. I commend this report to the House.

Comments

No comments