Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher. I am sure nobody in this chamber needs convincing as to the value that staff bring to each of our offices. It is not a secret that this place would fall to ruin without them. Personal staffing allocations are determined entirely by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister decides how many staff he or she gets along with how many staff the opposition gets and how many any crossbencher gets. The Prime Minister of the day can also decide to give staff to individual parliamentarians or take staff away. The Prime Minister may provide additional staff for valid reasons or for invalid reasons They might also threaten to cut a parliamentarian's staff allocation for any reason they may choose. Does the minister agree that this discretionary power, which is not subject to disallowance and is not required to be published anywhere, represents a possible corruption risk?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Tyrrell for the question. This falls across Minister Farrell's and my portfolios, as we are implementing the Set the Standard review and the recommendations from that.

I think it has been longstanding practice that the allocation of personal staff is a decision that's made by the Prime Minister of the day. I understand that has always been the case. I would however say to the Senator Tyrrell that we do acknowledge how hard our staff work in this building for any member of parliament or any senator. The demands, particularly in a sitting week and in estimates, and the hours that we expect them to work are particularly onerous, which is why we have been so keen to put in place the recommendations of the Jenkins review into providing better support for staff through the measures that we have introduced and legislation that passed this parliament last session.

The PWSS, an independent statutory authority, commenced on 1 October this year. One of the recommendations from the MOPS review was that the PWSS, once established, should do a resourcing review of members of parliament offices. We have funded PWSS to the capacity that they are able to perform that review. The resourcing that they were provided through the budget provides them with the budget to do all of the things the legislation requires of them and to act on that resourcing review. I understand that that is an immediate priority for the PWSS. That will be a new piece of information that will be provided. I don't think that's been done before. It will be independently managed by the PWSS under the rules that we have passed through this parliament. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Tyrrell, first supplementary?

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister provide an example of any other field where one organisation in a competitive market is given the sole discretion to determine the extent to which its rivals can compete?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not sure that I'm in a position to answer that. But I would just repeat the answer I gave to the first question. The allocation of personal staff, as far as I'm aware, has been at the discretion of the Prime Minister of the day. I know that members and independent senators have had discussions with the Prime Minister around allocation of those personal staff.

In terms of the perceived lack of transparency around that, which I think you raised in your last question. I would point out that the details of those arrangements are published and they are tabled at every estimate sitting, as far as I can recall, through the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee. So the arrangements that are put in place are public and they are transparent. They are available to any member of parliament or indeed those that follow the tabling of reports at Senate estimates.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Tyrrell, a second supplementary?

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Noting that the current Prime Minister has reduced personal staff allocations for crossbenchers, the minister surely agrees that prime ministers historically have not always afforded parliamentarians a reasonable allocation of staff. If that's the case, isn't there a role for an independent body to determine what's reasonable, to make sure it's done at arm's length, transparently and without prejudice?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The resourcing review is certainly at arm's length, and it's independent. It was a recommendation of the MOPS review, and this was an issue that was raised through that MOPS review, so I think that is absolutely appropriate. The government supports that work being done. We have resourced the PWSS so that they are able to do that work. I understand that it's a priority for the organisation. They're aware that this is an issue that has been raised through the parliament. I have no doubt that, when that work is complete and is available to people, people will be able to see the results of that. Let's see what that comes up with. It's an important piece of work that's been recognised, and I know that it's been raised by a number of independent senators and crossbench senators in particular.