Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you for the statement to the House on the privileges matter. As you would imagine, it does not satisfy the opposition’s desires with respect to what we regard as a very serious breach of privilege; therefore—by leave—I move:

That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Sturt from moving immediately:That the following matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges and Members’ Interests: Whether the actions of the Deputy Prime Minister, by:

(1)

issuing Members of Parliament with a form requiring that they indicate whether they wish to be informed of, or participate in, launches and ceremonies at new buildings and redevelopment of their local schools, with the intention being that only through registration will Members be allowed to participate;

(2)

changing the guidelines for the launches and ceremonies associated with the former government’s Investing in Our Schools Program:

(a)

to prevent schools from inviting their local Members of Parliament; and

(b)

so that they now require the officiating individual at any such launch or ceremony to be a member of the Australian Labor Party; and

(3)

instructing schools to disinvite their local Members of Parliament from attending programs and announcements at those schools, where the local Member of Parliament is a member of the Coalition,

amount to improper interference with the free performance by members of their duties as members.

We understand the limitations with respect to what can be done with a government that is drunk with power and incapable of allowing free democratic processes to take their course. We in the coalition are deeply concerned about the infringement of our rights as members of parliament with respect to launches, ceremonies and opening events at schools in relation to the Investing in Our Schools Program. The key point to make today is that the coalition’s guidelines, from when we were in government before 2007, have been demonstrably changed by the current government to be much more strict and much less capable of allowing members of parliament to perform their duties. Let me explain why that is the case.

When we were in government the Investing in Our Schools guidelines for 2007 required that a minister be invited to all opening ceremonies. It also required that a representative of the government be given the opportunity to open those events. In practice, that meant that often a coalition government senator would get the opportunity to open a school event. Most senators usually did not get the opportunity to open school events in electorates, whether they were Labor electorates or coalition electorates. We left open the fact that schools would organise those events, but they would work with the department to organise those events. We never at any point suggested that schools not invite their local members of parliament. I am not aware of any occasion when we were in government when a Labor member of parliament who had been invited to open a school events was then ‘disinvited’. Mr Speaker, that has happened to the member for Hinkler, who is in the House and who has written to me, and that is the basis of the reference to the Standing Committee of Privileges and Members’ Interests that we asked you to rule on. The shadow minister for education and I were bizarrely disinvited from opening an Investing in Our Schools Program event just last year at the Paradise Primary School in my electorate of Sturt.

I reiterate that the coalition government’s guidelines have been demonstrably altered. The Deputy Prime Minister keeps repeating that they have not been changed one iota. Let me give two very clear examples where they have been changed. The House will be most interested to hear this. The new guidelines for the Investing in Our Schools Program, right at the beginning, referring to inviting the Minister for Education to an opening ceremony, say: ‘Schools should not invite the minister or their local member directly. The department coordinates all opening ceremony requests between the minister’s office and the school.’ So the invitation goes to the Labor Minister for Education’s office, and they will apparently invite the local members of parliament in coalition seats. Previously, the schools were quite entitled to invite the local members of parliament. In fact, that was the practice.

Principals or governing councils reading these guidelines could be forgiven for not inviting their local members of parliament to school openings that are federally funded. In our view, nothing could be more clearly a breach of the privileges of members of parliament. This amounts to a prima facie case of privilege and we believe it should be referred to the Privileges and Members’ Interests Committee. It is a direct change from the period of the coalition government, and we know that it is affecting members of parliament in their capacity to do their job. The member for Hinkler and I have been disinvited from events. The member for Ryan, in Queensland, has sent me an email in which he specifically indicates that the guidelines have been changed and that he has been stopped from doing his job as the member for Ryan.

There is a second demonstrably different aspect of the Rudd government guidelines—or the Gillard government guidelines—for Investing in Our Schools and that is the second paragraph. It states: ‘The minister generally appoints an Australian government representative to officiate at the ceremony. In 2008 an Australian government representative is a member of the Australian Labor Party.’ The Deputy Prime Minister would say that the Australian Labor Party is in government, so naturally that is the case. But, in the coalition government, we did not have any requirement in our guidelines for Investing in Our Schools that a member of the Liberal Party of Australia or the National Party of Australia be the representative of the government. None at all. You can check the 2007 guidelines and you will find nothing in appendix 4, ‘Recognition requirements’, which says that the person who officiates at the ceremony should be a member of the Liberal Party or the National Party. It is nowhere in those guidelines.

But that is what you will find in the 2008 guidelines. They actually state: ‘In 2008 an Australian government representative is a member of the Australian Labor Party.’ Now, the Deputy Prime Minister might be slightly obtuse about this point. Perhaps she does not realise that, when members of the Public Service are chosen to represent the government and are sent along to open the events or the programs or whatever the change is under Investing in Our Schools, according to the guidelines—and this has happened more often than not—they must also be members of the Australian Labor Party. There is a serious question—and this is another matter for debate—about whether that is in breach of the Public Service Act because it politicises the Public Service.

When I sat in the back row at Paradise Primary School last year—because I had been disinvited from opening the program at Paradise Primary School—I asked whether the public servant who had been sent along was a member of the Australian Labor Party. I can only assume that he was and that when they passed the invitations around at the department of education in Adelaide to go along to Paradise Primary School to do Christopher Pyne’s job for him they asked, ‘Which of you are members of the Australian Labor Party?’ I assume this fellow put up his hand and he was sent along. We are seeing the government politicising the Public Service and finding out who in the Public Service is a member of the Australian Labor Party and who is not. If you want to open an Investing in Our Schools Program event, you must sign up to the Australian Labor Party or you cannot do it.

See this speech in context