Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Procedure, I present the committee's report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled Raising the standard: inquiry into recommendations 10 and 27 of Set the standard: report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

The Set the standard report was the culmination of a comprehensive review, led by former sex discrimination commissioner Ms Kate Jenkins, into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces.

It made 28 recommendations aimed at ensuring the parliament is safe and respectful. Two of its recommendations fell within the remit of the Procedure Committee. The committee undertook to:

1. review the practices and procedures of the House, with a view to improving safety, respect and inclusiveness, and,

2. examine the House's sitting pattern and hours, considering the wellbeing and work/life balance of parliamentarians and workers.

The committee made six recommendations, based on the evidence received and in the spirit of the Set the standard report.

The parliamentary chambers are unique work environments. Freedom of speech and the robust exchange of ideas are core principles of parliamentary democracy. But that doesn't mean that our debates shouldn't be respectful.

The use of offensive language and disorderly conduct are already prohibited by the standing orders.

However, the committee recognises that specifying discriminatory language as offensive under standing order 89 would strengthen the Speaker's ability to rule such language out of order and set more explicit expectations.

Accordingly, the committee has recommended amending standing order 89 to specify that offensive language includes words that are sexist, racist, homophobic and otherwise exclusionary or discriminatory.

The codes of conduct developed separately by the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards, once adopted, will also contain specific prohibitions against bullying, harassment and discrimination in the chamber.

Our second recommendation is for an additional option to assist the Speaker to manage disorderly behaviour.

Currently, the Speaker can direct a member to leave the chamber for one hour under standing order 94(a). The alternative is to 'name' the member—a much more serious sanction.

The committee heard throughout the inquiry that the one-hour withdrawal is not a significant deterrent to poor behaviour. We have therefore recommended changing standing orders so the Speaker can exclude a member for three hours for continued or more serious disorderly conduct.

A three-hour penalty would mean a badly behaved member is more likely to miss speaking opportunities and important votes, and should help the Speaker address disorderly conduct swiftly and proportionally in instances where naming is not appropriate or warranted.

Our third recommendation is for a review of the training and guidance material available to members on the standing orders relating to language and behaviour in the chamber, and the avenues available for members to draw the Speaker's attention to potentially disorderly conduct.

Our report acknowledges the need to balance several competing priorities when setting the days and hours of sitting. Australia's diverse demography and geography means that some members spend significant time travelling to Canberra and long periods away from their families.

Given the improvements made in successive parliaments, the committee has not recommended changes to sitting hours, but we will maintain a watching brief to monitor the careful balance between making the most of members' time in Canberra and maintaining wellbeing and safety.

The committee agreed that there would be benefits in establishing a House standing committee on gender equality, diversity and inclusion.

Such a committee would not only be able to scrutinise potential legislation referred to it and the work of the Public Service from a gender, diversity and inclusion perspective, but would provide an important forum for debate on these matters.

Finally, the committee considers that it would be timely for the House to consider making the language in the standing orders gender-neutral during the next major review. This would help bring the standing orders into line with modern drafting practices.

On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank everyone who made a submission or met the committee publicly or privately, particularly:

Set the standard built a case for change across Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. The recommendations in our report aim to create change in the chamber itself—by strengthening the Speaker's powers, clarifying expectations and improving members' understanding—and to raise the standard in the House.

I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context