Julia Irwin (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Petitions, I present the committee’s report Electronic Petitioning to the House of Representatives, together with the minutes of proceedings. I move:

That the report be made a parliamentary paper.

Question agreed to.

I am pleased to present the report of the Petitions Committee, Electronic Petitioning to the House of Representatives. This is the first report of the committee since its inception early in 2008, and it is something of a landmark. It is another of the significant developments on petitions that have occurred in this parliament. Over the course of the inquiry, the committee looked at range of models currently used by parliaments, and specific proposals for electronic petitions in the House of Representatives. Among current implementations, the examples of the Scottish and Queensland parliaments have been particularly important, offering real-world options from parliaments that have comparable—though not identical—practices to those of the House of Representatives.

Looking at the various options available, the report considers the implications of each if they were to be applied in the House. Some things are more likely to be effective, and some less so, in this particular environment. There are trade-offs to be considered, and things that perhaps should not be put into practice. Among these are things that might be implemented to good effect in the future. The report calls for the House to accept electronic petitions and asks that the House make the necessary changes to Standing Orders to allow this to occur. The committee regards electronic petitions as an addition to and not a replacement for our current system of paper petitions. It also recommends that the House provide, under its own administration, a website for electronic petitions where they can be posted, signed and published.

If put into practice, this will be a major step forward for the relationship between the House and Australians. It is clear from the findings of the committee that electronic petitions offer a powerful tool which can be used by parliaments to encourage people to participate more meaningfully in our system of government. Throughout the inquiry, the committee has maintained a firm focus on this participation and its importance in countering tendencies, identified by some, for the public to increasingly feel disengaged from parliament and government. It may be that changes in the way we communicate and handle information have contributed to this: challenging the way people used to relate to, and be informed about, parliament. However, if parliament itself takes up these same new ways of communicating, the prognosis is likely to improve.

If our recommendations are accepted, electronic petitioning will be a more agile, more easily implemented way for members of the public to engage with parliament. For one thing, for example, it would make it unnecessary—unless they should choose to do so—for petitioners to set up card tables in shopping centres. Much of the physical effort of compiling a petition would be taken away. Second, people would be able to sign petitions regardless of their geographical distribution—an important factor in a country as big as ours—and where concerns raised in petitions frequently go beyond those of local areas alone. Third, the interplay between the petitioner and the House could be so much quicker. If our recommendations were accepted, the committee would receive proposals for petitions, consider them, and—if approved—put them up on the website, where they would be available to receive signatures. Fourth, this process would also ensure that all electronic petitions that are exposed on the web, ready to be signed, would conform to standing orders. This certainty is important if the House is to keep faith and develop an enhanced relationship with the Australian public. Fifth, and by no means the least significant, is that electronic petitions to the House would reflect the way that people communicate now. A number of people indicated to the committee that they wanted to use this way of communicating to put their concerns to the House. By allowing this to occur, the House can be more in touch with the people it serves.

We in the committee think that this is important: we are great believers in the system we have inherited. To us, the key elements of the system—checks and balances, governments being held to account, and the capacity of people outside of government to have their voices heard—are more than just words. They are foundation stones of a way of governing that, for all its faults, has a better chance of being fair, overall, than the alternatives we might consider. The only way we can make sure it continues to operate is by keeping things, to some degree, in motion. It needs to develop, sympathetically and in keeping with both tradition and the present, so that it stays alive and relevant to the needs of the present day.

Committee members from both sides of the political spectrum have shared this sense of the importance of keeping the House open to the views of its public. I could not have wished for a better, more bipartisan approach. In particular I thank the deputy chair, Russell Broadbent, for his consistent support and the passion he brings to the work of the committee. But I also want to express my appreciation to all my committee colleagues. Their dedication and the depth of knowledge they bring to the issues raised in petitions are testimony to the strengths of our system. These members stay in touch with issues raised at every level and show a masterful ability to comprehend and explore them. This committee is a new one and, I am pleased to say, a united one.

Our thanks also to our great committee secretariat: to secretaries past and present, Joanne Towner, who I note is in the chamber this evening, and Catherine Cornish; to inquiry secretaries past and present, Julia Morris and Dr Brian Lloyd; and to our administrative officer, Naomi Swann, who has been with us from the beginning. Many thanks for your assistance. You are definitely a great team.

This report is both an expression of our political system and a contribution to its continued vitality. I commend it to the House.

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

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

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.