Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Procedure I present the committee’s report entitled Re-opening the debate: inquiry into the arrangements for the opening day of parliament, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—The opening of parliament is a hugely important occasion in Australia’s democracy. It is the time when the parliament comes back together following an election and it is the time when the people’s representatives are officially sworn in and take their place in the chamber. It is the time when the government, through the Governor-General, announces its agenda for the ensuing parliamentary term. The practices and procedures for the opening of parliament are, not surprisingly, largely borrowed from the British parliament at Westminster and ceremony is an integral part of the proceedings.

Previous Procedure Committees have conducted specific inquiries into the opening of parliament on three separate occasions: in 1991, 1995 and 2001. Each report reflected a desire to balance tradition and modernity. This report is formulated on the same principle. The committee strongly believes that the ceremony and tradition of opening day should be maintained. This report does not attempt to make any fundamental changes to the opening day but instead makes recommendations for change within the sound existing framework. The recommendations of previous reports were not able to effect change and the committee is hopeful that this report will be more successful.

The primary reason for undertaking this inquiry was to analyse the staging of the Indigenous ceremony welcome to country at the opening of this parliament. The committee was delighted with the conduct of the ceremony and feels it should be part of future openings. The committee has therefore recommended that the welcome to country ceremony become a formal part of opening day through inclusion in the standing orders.

The committee is of the view that there should also be some changes to the order in which events occur and more emphasis placed on particular moments in the day. One of these moments occurs when members are sworn in. It is the committee’s view that the current arrangements do not adequately reflect the significance of this moment. Section 42 of the Constitution says that members must be sworn in before they can take their seat in the House. This section has never been interpreted literally. In fact, currently members take their seats twice before being sworn in. But the committee is suggesting that it should be interpreted literally.

The committee’s proposal is that members be called to the chamber at the conclusion of the welcome to country, formalising the moment when members leave the public space and enter the chamber for the first time. All members wait at the perimeter of the chamber when entering for the first time; members would then be called forward in small groups, swear an oath of affirmation and then be invited to take their seats. The committee believes this change will add to the ceremony of the swearing-in process.

Another important moment that deserves greater attention is when members leave the House for the first time as sworn members of parliament. Under current arrangements members simply disburse from the chamber at their leisure. The committee is proposing that members should instead move in a procession led by the Speaker to the Great Hall where invited members of the public wait. This will allow for some interaction between members and the people that they have been elected to represent, and the symbolic gesture would also serve to remind members of their duty to represent the interests of their constituents. It would also provide an opportunity for there to be greater interaction between the opening activities that take place in the chamber and the elements of the day for the general public that are held in the public spaces in and around Parliament House.

The committee believes that the current structure of the afternoon’s proceedings is confusing and illogical. Members return to the House only to leave a few minutes later to meet the Governor-General. Members then return to the House again, only to leave yet once again to attend the Senate. The committee recommends that when members return to the House at 2.30 they instead commence business. This will include the announcement of the ministry and the opposition front bench and the election of the Speaker’s deputies.

A little after 3 pm, the Black Rod would arrive to summon members to the Senate to hear the Governor-General’s speech. At the conclusion of the speech, members would return to the House to conclude a few necessary items of business and then adjourn for the day. Any other items of business would be dealt with the following day. After the adjournment of the House, the Speaker would lead a procession to the Members Hall to meet the Governor-General and this would be followed by the traditional afternoon tea. The committee believes that this new order of business would give the proceedings of the afternoon of the opening day of parliament a much more logical flow.

It has been the view of previous procedure committees that an alternative venue should be used for the Governor-General’s speech, specifically the Great Hall. This committee does not share that view. The main argument for holding the speech in the Great Hall is that it would provide more equal treatment to the two houses. However it is not obvious to the committee that members feel at all inferior by attending the Senate. In fact many members may enjoy the rare opportunity they have to be present in the Senate chamber.

Holding the speech in the Senate also allows the retention of the important ceremonial moment of the Black Rod knocking three times on the chamber door to summon members. This moment adds greatly to the theatre of the opening of parliament. If Australia were to become a republic at some stage in the future then this issue would obviously need to be revisited.

Before closing, I would like to thank the secretariat, in particular Joanne Towner and Andrew McGowan, for their extraordinary support in preparing the report. The committee hopes that this report will spark debate among members about the nature of the first day of parliament and looks forward to hearing the views of all members on this important subject. I commend the report to the House.

Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the member for Parramatta wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

In accordance with standing order 39(c), the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.