John Murphy (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Since the last presentation I made on 18 March, the Standing Committee on Petitions has conducted three roundtable hearings in Canberra, Sydney and Brisbane. In the 43rd Parliament, Speaker, you would be aware of roundtable hearings that have been held on petitions which may have particular benefit from further explanation and discussion, rather than taking a sweep of all petitions received. For example, petitions may be heard because of the unique nature of their subject matter or to provide a particular clarification of the concern or of the ministerial response. This approach has enabled the committee to conduct more in-depth hearings with principal petitioners and/or with public servants.

As I mentioned in March, there is considerable benefit in the committee conducting roundtable meetings with public servants on certain petitions to draw out more about the subject matter and to discuss the ministerial responses. The first roundtable hearing, held on 20 March, was located here in Canberra, with public servants attending from two government departments having specialisations in the subject matter areas of the selected petitions.

The committee also discussed three individual petition issues with senior officers from the Department of Health and Ageing. The first related to a petition calling for the restoration of the extended Medicare safety net for obstetrics—two petitions which had a combined signature count of 2,755. The second petition matter, with 5,185 signatures, called for specific Medicare rebates to be introduced for an advanced radiotherapy treatment for certain cancers, called CyberKnife treatment. And the final petition relating to the Health and Ageing portfolio, with 5,081 signatures, requested the immediate full implementation of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program—a petition which was again discussed with the principal petitioner in Sydney.

Officers from the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities also appeared to discuss a petition of 10,364 signatures requesting an immediate ban on the importation of primates for research purposes.

These hearings with public servants are not an investigative or accountability exercise, nor are they to draw out comments on the merits or otherwise of the government's programs or administration. Rather, these hearings are a forum to explain the background of the subject matter, to clarify the current programs or policy and to detail any outcomes of new initiatives, results of reviews, or expected changes, if any. This forum provides the principal petitioner and any interested parties with further information on the government's framework of approaching the policy matter. The general public can view the hearing on the day, listen to the broadcast or read the dialogue published in the Hansard transcript.

All these petitions exhibited robust signature counts, but I want to emphasise that signature counts alone are not a determinant for conducting a public hearing. These petitions, particularly those from the health portfolio, covered issues with some degree of complexity, whether in terms of the subject matter itself or in the policy or process detail. For example, the process of analysing whether new technology items are eligible for specific Medicare rebates is quite complicated, as is the calculation of the extended Medicare rebate and the impact of policy changes on market behaviour. Hearings with public servants on these types of petition matters add particular value because they provide an opportunity to elaborate on the ministerial response and, importantly, to clarify processes or data.

The committee thanks the well-informed officers who participated in the hearing on 20 March. Next week, I will discuss the Sydney and Brisbane meetings, where the committee met with principal petitioners.