Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Earlier today, the honourable member for Fisher raised a matter of privilege relating to the taking of a photograph of him in the House of Representatives. Acts which may obstruct or impede the House in performing its functions, including causing this indirectly by bringing the House into odium, contempt or ridicule, or by lowering its authority, may constitute contempts.

While the taking of an unauthorised photograph in the chamber could potentially be seen as a contempt, as I said in my statement to the House earlier today, I would take action directly against a member for disorderly conduct should I become aware of such behaviour. I indicated to the House the responsibilities of members generally for their conduct and the implications for all members if such actions were to become more common.

In the only comparable example of which I am aware, a member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly raised as a matter of privilege the taking of an unauthorised photograph in the chamber. After investigation, the Speaker reported to the assembly that a staff member in the Premier’s office had admitted to taking the photograph, had apologised unreservedly and had destroyed the photograph. No further action was taken.

The honourable member for Fisher refers to an interference with the free performance by him of his duties as a member as a result of the photograph being passed onto his local newspaper and being published. He states that the photograph was passed on by email but has not provided evidence of the email or its source. Acts which attempt to interfere with the free performance by a member of his duties as a member can be regarded as a contempt under section 4 of the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987. Such acts must amount to or be intended or likely to amount to improper interference in the free performance of a member’s duties.

In this case, I can understand that the publication of the photograph is embarrassing to the member and I can see how it might influence the views that his constituents may have of him. In the absence of more specific evidence of the effect that this has had on the free performance of his duties, and given the consistently held view that the House’s privileges and contempt powers should be exercised sparingly, I do not find that a prima facie case has been established.

The honourable member asked me either to conduct a forensic examination of the photograph to establish who may have taken it or to permit him to undertake a forensic examination. I have already noted in my statement earlier that the examination of the available footage is not conclusive. Whilst I am concerned about the matter and its implications, I do not believe that further forensic examination as proposed would be conclusive, so I do not propose to agree to the member’s request.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That the following matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges and Members’ Interests:Having regard to the matter complained about by the honourable member for Fisher, whether formal rules should be adopted by the House to ensure that the use of mobile devices during proceedings does not interfere with the free exercise by a house or a committee of its authority or functions or with the free performance by a member of his or her duties as a member.

It is quite clear that this incident has caused considerable concern for the member for Fisher, and he raised it in this House as appropriate. There is a specific case which he raises, but I think also what it has raised for all members of the House is the general issue of the impact of new technology on the functioning and performance of members of this House. Hence it is appropriate that the committee have a look at those broad issues and hence the resolution which I have moved and which I gave you notice of, Mr Speaker, which I think is certainly not inconsistent with your determination as to the specifics of the complaint legitimately put forward by the member for Fisher. I think it is appropriate that it be examined by the House of Representatives Standing Committee of Privileges and Members’ Interests. It is quite clear that we have a responsibility to act as members of parliament in a way which is appropriate. It is quite clear that the member for Fisher feels sincerely aggrieved by the actions of another member of this House towards him. Hence, it is appropriate that the committee examine this issue. I commend the resolution to the House.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Without wishing to oppose the motion, I point out that it would have been courteous of the Leader of the House to have raised this with the opposition before he put this motion before the House. It is in fact grossly discourteous of the Leader of the House to raise this matter in this way. The other point I make is that implicit in the Leader of the House’s remarks is the suggestion that a member of this House might have done something wrong, and I think it is very wrong of the Leader of the House to make that kind of smear against another member of this House. It is absolutely incumbent upon all members of this House to give each other the benefit of the doubt when it comes to that kind of conduct. It is typical of the kind of nasty politics played by the Leader of the House that he should have made that kind of statement here in this House today.

The opposition is not going to oppose this motion, because we think that the rise of new media does pose challenges for the operation of this House, and obviously mobile phones should not be used as cameras in this House against the standing orders. I utterly reject any suggestion that members of this House might have acted dishonourably and any suggestion that members of this House have acted poorly against each other. I think it is contemptible for the Leader of the House to come in here and play nasty Sussex Street politics with a matter as important as this.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In closing on this issue—

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

16:04:36

Question put.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In response to the comments of the Leader of the Opposition, I did not name any member in this House; the member for Fisher did that this morning in his contribution. With regard to references to the Privileges Committee, I refer the Leader of the Opposition to the manner in which the member for Mackellar moved a reference of me to the Privileges Committee and the way in which the opposition moved a reference about the member for Robertson to the Privileges Committee. I have not done that. This is a general reference looking at the use of new technology and its impact on members of parliament. I commend it to the House.

Question agreed to.