Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

In my speech in the second reading debate I foreshadowed my amendment on sheet 5502 and I again outlined the case for appointments being made on merit. I indicated in that speech that there was a long history of debate surrounding the issues of appointment on merit. It is particularly important with respect to the board of the Reserve Bank that merit is secured. In my additional remarks in the Senate Economics Committee report on the Reserve Bank Amendment (Enhanced Independence) Bill 2008 I indicated that the United Kingdom parliament appointed in 1995 the Nolan committee to examine these issues. The chamber will recall that, at that time, it was a conservative government and they initiated this important accountability initiative. When that committee determined its principles, it set out a range of principles that should inform the making of appointments. Both the UK government and the UK parliament fully accepted the committee’s recommendations and the Labour government has itself advanced appointments on merits procedures even more in its own term of office. So the world has moved on overseas in this area, but we have not moved on sufficiently.

In effect, my amendment specifies a broad range of criteria that must be established by the minister. The amendment itself does not decide on what the criteria should be; it just determines a broad range of criteria. The amendment specifically says the general principles on which selections are to be made should include but not be limited to merit, independent scrutiny of appointments, probity, and openness and transparency. The purpose of putting those in is not because governments do not necessarily follow that or might not follow that, but to ensure that they do follow that, because governments and ministers change over time. That was understood in the United Kingdom and they are principles that I have sought to push in this parliament.

The other thing is to address a perceptual problem. There is a perception through the media, through the political class and in the populace at large that appointments are not always made, as they should be, on merit. This is particularly important issue with respect to the board of the Reserve Bank. That board has a really mighty responsibility and we need to be doubly careful in this area.

I have motivated these sorts of amendments at length before and I made quite lengthy remarks with respect to this amendment in my speech in the second reading debate, so I do not propose to detain the chamber any longer. I move Democrat amendment (1) on sheet 5502:

(1)    Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1A  After section 14

Insert:

14A Procedures for merit selection of appointments

        (1)    The Minister must by writing determine a code of practice for selecting and appointing the Governor, the Deputy Governor and the 6 other members as required by section 14 that sets out general principles on which the selections are to be made, including but not limited to:

             (a)    merit; and

             (b)    independent scrutiny of appointments; and

             (c)    probity; and

             (d)    openness and transparency.

        (2)    After determining a code of practice under subsection (1), the Minister must publish the code in the Gazette.

        (3)    Not later than every fifth anniversary after a code of practice has been determined, the Minister must review the code.

        (4)    In reviewing a code of practice, the Minister must invite the public to comment on the code.

        (5)    A code of practice determined under subsection (1) is a legislative instrument for the purposes of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003.