Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

We have before us a motion dealing with a code of conduct for members of parliament. The member for Lyne wishes that the draft code in the appendices of the report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests be endorsed. He also desires that the Leader of the House bring forward urgently for the consideration of the House the suggested alterations to the standing orders and resolutions of the House necessary to give effect to the code, for procedures for considering complaints under the code and for the role of the proposed code.

The proposed code includes a process for considering complaints against MPs and a revamped role for the Privileges and Members Interests' Committee. MPs are under unprecedented scrutiny in every aspect of fulfilling their roles. In some respects this is as it should be. Parliamentarians must set the very highest standards in everything they do so the public can have every confidence in their propriety and in the way they discharge their duties. The glare of the media is on everything they do and the largely fishbowl lifestyle of political leaders, even some backbenchers, is intense. In fact, the spotlight on public figures, politicians, is such these days that you wonder if it is really necessary to air or publish some of the material—a lot of it is mere pap being churned out under the guise of society's need to know—or if it is just filling the void of the 24-hour news cycle and the so-called need to constantly update to fit in with online publishing.

This 43rd Commonwealth Parliament has been a difficult one. Hung parliaments are always volatile. This one has certainly been particularly unusual in the allegations drawn against certain members which continue to play out in other tribunal processes and which continue to dog this House and, rightly or wrongly, the reputation of all of those in it.

The purpose of the draft code of conduct is to provide a framework of reference for members in the way they carry out their responsibilities. It outlines the standards of behaviour which Australian people can rightly expect of their elected representatives. It refers to the key ethical principles which should guide the consideration of members. It is by adherence to these standards that members can maintain and, indeed, strengthen the public's confidence and trust in the integrity of the parliamentary institution and not undertake any action which would bring the House of Representatives or its members generally into disrepute. If it does that then, well and good, let us legislate it.

The draft I hold here sets out key principles listed as: (1) loyalty to the nation and regard for its laws; (2) diligence and economy, which refers to the use of MPs' entitlements and using them only for the purposes for which they are intended—this is only right and proper; (3) respect for the dignity and privacy of others; (4) integrity; (5) primacy of the public interest; and, finally, (6) personal conduct and the need for MPs to act at all times in a manner which will tend to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence and in the integrity of the parliament and its members. On that last point the word 'tend' is unnecessary. It will either maintain and bolster the public's perception or it will not. By the wording as it presently stands, 'and tending to' is leaving it rather open ended.

If the code of conduct draft is just another bureaucratic layer or onerous process which MPs, for whom the accountability and justification bar has already been set extraordinarily high, have to meet then perhaps the review process needs to be revisited before being put to a vote. That said, remember the court of public opinion at the ballot box will always prove to be the best democratic way of determining whether or not an MP has satisfactorily fulfilled his or her duties.

See this speech in context