Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the seventh report of the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills. I also lay on the table Scrutiny of Bills Alert Digest No. 7 of 2016.

Ordered that the report be printed.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

I rise to speak to the tabling of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee's report on the work of the committee in 2015.

Background

As most senators would be aware, the Scrutiny of Bills Committee scrutinises each bill introduced in the parliament and reports to the Senate if it considers that a provision in a bill:

The work of the committee in 2015

The work of the committee in scrutinising bills against its five scrutiny principles assists and improves parliamentary consideration of legislation in a number of important ways. Outcomes of the committee's work include:

Bills Digest

The committee's 2015 annual report outlines some of the key achievements of the committee during that year.

In addition to the quantifiable outcomes of the committee's work (such as amendments to bills and revised explanatory memoranda) I take this opportunity to note the impact of the committee's work prior to the introduction of bills into the parliament.

In particular, I note various government legislative guides refer to the committee's reports and longstanding scrutiny concerns. In particular, the Office of Parliamentary Counsel has issued directions advising legislative drafters to alert instructors to provisions that are likely to be of interest to the committee. In 2015, OPC issued a drafting direction dealing with regulatory powers which noted that if certain provisions are too broadly drafted or not fully justified this may attract adverse comment from the Scrutiny of Bills Committee.

So while it is difficult to quantify the extent of the committee's influence before legislation is introduced into parliament, it seems clear that the committee's longstanding scrutiny concerns do have an 'unseen influence' on the development of legislation.

In addition, the committee's work has directly led to amendments to bills, revisions to explanatory material and contributed to parliamentary and public debate.

I would like to take this opportunity to briefly comment on one example of such an influence in 2015. As part of its regular scrutiny of legislation, the committee sought advice on a provision in a bill which sought to introduce a form of criminal liability for being 'knowingly concerned' in the commission of an offence. The minister provided a detailed response to the committee's concerns and, following the committee's request, presented a replacement explanatory memorandum containing this additional information. In addition, during the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee's public hearing on the bill several questions referencing Scrutiny of Bills concerns were asked of witnesses and their report extensively referenced the committee's comments. The parliament later agreed to an amendment which removed reference to the concept of being 'knowingly concerned'.

Issues of continuing interest

The annual report also notes some issues which the committee will continue to monitor into the future. For example, in 2015 the committee raised concerns regarding standard provisions in appropriation bills, which delegates to the executive of the parliaments power under section 96 of the Constitution. Section 96 provides that parliament may grant financial assistance to any state on such terms and conditions as the parliament thinks fit. However, a standard provision in the regular appropriations bills delegates this power to the minister. Given the Constitution grants this power to the parliament, and noting the role of senators in representing the people of their state or territory, the committee requested additional explanatory material be provided to senators to scrutinise these payments, including detailed information about the particular purposes for which the money is sought to be appropriated. As a result, some further information has been included in relevant explanatory materials and the committee's work has informed debate on the appropriation bills in the Senate. The committee will continue to take an interest in the parliamentary scrutiny of section 96 grants to the states and draw this to the attention of the Senate where appropriate.

Acknowledgments

Finally, on behalf of the committee, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work and assistance of the committee's legal adviser, Associate Professor Leighton McDonald.

I would also like to acknowledge the assistance of ministers and departments, as their responsiveness to the committee is critical to the legislative process as it ensures the committee can perform its scrutiny function effectively. It is good to see that ministerial officers are becoming more prompt with their responses.

And, noting the committee's longstanding practice of undertaking its scrutiny in a nonpartisan, apolitical and consensual way, I also thank all of the current and former scrutiny committee colleagues for their understanding of the committee's approach to its work and their commitment to it.

I would also like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the detailed and extensive work that is undertaken by our secretariat. We would not be able to produce the quality of reports and do our job without their able assistance.

I commend the committee's report on the work of the committee in 2015, and the committee's 7th report and Alert Digest No. 7 of 2016, to the Senate.