Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

A proportion of petitions received by the committee each year are assessed to be noncompliant with the standing orders. These out-of-order petitions constituted approximately 33 per cent of the total number of petitions received in the last financial year. This is unfortunate as these petitions cannot be considered in the House’s normal petitions process and end up as dead-end documents, mostly returned to the original petitioner if known.

Petitioners who send petitions which receive an out-of-order assessment receive advice as to why the petition could not be considered valid and also information on how to prepare a petition which would meet the House’s requirements. Of course some matters will never meet the House’s requirements because the matters fall outside the power and jurisdiction of the House—or because the matter requested is illegal or incites illegal behaviour. But some petitions fail on correct content and formatting only.

It is worth noting, however, that even if a petitioner were to prepare a replacement petition they may have lost the momentum of their original signature gathering. For example, they may have missed a critical event or anniversary and/or the petition issue may have been time critical. So reducing the number of first-time out-of-order petitions is still very important. As a result, the committee devotes resources to its website and to publications available in both members’ offices and the secretariat. It also provides the direct assistance of the secretariat in interpreting the petitioning guidelines. Even so, despite the committee’s best endeavours, not all petitioners will utilise these.

In some cases it is obvious that the petitioner has prepared a petition with complete ignorance of any requirements for petitioning the House, as the document does not meet the House standing orders on multiple counts. And some petitions are sent to the committee out of order in spite of petitioners knowing the rules, as some petitioners think the committee has discretionary decision-making power. Of course this is not the case and these petitions will be certified as not meeting requirements and returned to the petitioner.

Most out-of-order petitions contain what the committee would describe as common mistakes of petitioning the House—generally in isolation. Standing order 204 is one of the primary standing orders outlining the content and format requirements of petitioning the House. Most of the conditions are quite straightforward; however, a couple of the standing order requirements cause consternation for some prospective petitioners. Today I will outline the most frequently observed errors and omissions and why a petition is invalid if this occurs.

Whilst preparing a petition should not be excessively difficult, there are sound reasons why rules governing petitioning are necessary. For example, standing order 204 requires petitions to be addressed to the House of Representatives, yet one of the more frequent reasons for a petition to be out of order is not addressing the petition to the House and to the House only. Similarly, the request for action must be to the House—and not to other people or entities.

A petition is a one-off document prepared for the attention of the House’s elected representatives. After a petition is tabled, it becomes a House document and therefore cannot be tabled elsewhere—for example, in the Senate—nor can it be forwarded elsewhere. Therefore, it must be addressed only to the House. If the House is receiving the document then it should also be responding to the request.

Another common mistake is where the terms exceed 250 words. The terms are, by standing order definition, ‘the reasons for petitioning and the request of the House’. Although 250 words may seem overly succinct, it is done for good reason: to ensure the matter is able to be concisely conveyed to the House and to provide a standardised approach so no petition is favoured over another. Similarly, letters, affidavits and any other documents, including photos, do not form part of a petition and will be removed before tabling.

The other repeatedly observed mistake I will mention today is submitting a petition without any identifying principal petitioner or contact details on the first page of the petition. Per standing order 205, the first page of a petition must state the full name and address of a clearly identified individual who organised the petition—the principal petitioner. The principal petitioner must sign the page using their handwritten original signature, unless the petition is finalised with the common seal of a corporation. This rule ensures that the milestones of the petition, including any response, can be conveyed to the principal petitioner. By signing this page, the principal petitioner also endorses the petition as being prepared with genuine intent. Please note that what I have outlined does not cover the full list of reasons why a petition may be assessed as being out of order, merely the more frequently encountered.

See this speech in context