oi the 5;

at * >

Report to Parliament

4 9 *h Presiding Officers and Clerks Conference

Wellington, New Zealand, 7-14 July 2018

Honourable Curtis Pitt MP

Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Honourable Members

I table this report for the information of the House on behalf of the Queensland Parliamentary Delegation to the 49*'^ Presiding Officers and Clerks Conference held in , New Zealand. The delegation comprised myself, Mr Neil Laurie (Clerk of Parliament) and Mr Brett Nutley (Indigenous Liaison Officer).

Honourable Curtis Pitt MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly

Date: 14 August 2018 Purpose of the Travel

The purpose of this travel was to represent the Queensland Parliament at 49th Presiding Officers and Clerks Conference and various Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) meetings held in conjunction with the Conference.

The conference was held from 8-13 July 2018. My travel itinerary is enclosed Attachmat ent A. The full conference program is enclosed Aat ttachm ent B.

The conference was hosted by the with many distinguished delegates, observers and spouses of delegates who attended the Conference from the Australian and Pacific Regions of the CPA.

Clockwise from top left: Traditional Maori welcome; Mr Speaker presiding over POCC; Former NZ Prime Minister Rt Hon Helen Clark; Australian High Commissioner in NZ Ewen McDonald; Mr Speaker with Indigenous Liaison Brett Nutley and Clerk Neil Laurie.

I was elected the Deputy Chair of the Conference and also represented the Queensland Parliament at the Australian Region Management Committee Meeting of the CPA (ARMC) and a Joint meeting of the CPA and Australian and Pacific Regions Branches.

The agenda for the ARMC meeting is at Attachment C.

Accompanying persons

I was accompanied by my spouse. Benefits obtained from this travei

Attendance at this conference provided me with the opportunity to:

— represent the Queensland Parliament in commonwealth parliamentary matters to ensure that Queensland views receive due consideration

— develop closer ties with Presiding Officers in other jurisdictions in and the Pacific

— develop a greater understanding of parliamentary practices and contemporary issues in other parliaments

— increase awareness of procedural issues elsewhere relevant to my role as Speaker of the Queensland Parliament

— learn from matters raised by other Parliaments. For example, I was impressed by the New Zealand Parliament's use of social media and intend to incorporate similar outcomes in Queensland

— work with parliamentary colleagues from other cultures to achieve shared Commonwealth goals

— gain an understanding of the needs of delegates in order to begin preparations for Queensland to host the 50**^ Presiding Officers and Clerks Conference in 2019

— meet with the Australian High Commissioner to New Zealand Ewen McDonald

I co-presented a paper with the Cierk titled ‘Reforms to sitting hours’ at Attachment D.

In addition, the Clerk presented a paper titled ‘Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees’ at Attachment E.

Indigenous Liaison Officer Brett Nutley also spoke about his role and the benefits that it brings to the Queensland Parliament.

The total costs to the Queensland Parliament of attendance at the conference is detailed at Attachment F. Attachment A - Travel itinerary

Saturday 7 July 2018 Depart CNS at 12.45pm Arrive in BNE at 2.55pm

Saturday 7 July 2018 Depart BNE at 7.00pm Arrive in WLG at 12.25am (Sunday 8 July 2018)

Saturday 14 July 2018 Depart WLG at 6.00am Arrive in BNE at 8.00am

Saturday 14 July 2018 Depart BNE at 9.40am Arrive in CNS at 12.10pm Attachment B - Conference Program

4apcx:cPRESIDINGOFFICERS&CLBa

PROGRAMME Sunday 8 July All day Arrival of delegates - all participants make their own way to, and check­ in at their booked accommodation 3.30pm-5.00pm Early registration available at Grand Hall, Parliament House 6.00pm-7.30pm Welcome reception Venue: Grand Hall, Parliament House Host: Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives

All delegates and partners along with resident High Commissioners and invited guests [Dress - Business attire/national dress]

Delegates and partners will need to proceed through security screening at Parliament House and will be greeted by Conference Liaison Officers who will provide directions to the Grand Hall Free evening Monday 9 July 9.00am Arrival at Parliament House 9.05am Briefing on the Pdwhiri Venue: West Foyer 9.15am Powhiri* Venue: Legislative Council Chamber 9.45am Morning tea and continued registration Venue: Grand Hall 10.30am Opening of conference Venue: Debating Chamber ■ Welcome from the Speaker ■ Election of Chair and Deputy Chair for the Conference ■ Opening address by Professor the Hon. Margaret Wilson DCNZM

Partners and officials are invited to watch the conference opening from the Speaker's Gallery in the Chamber 11.15am Conference photograph Venue: Grand Steps Parliament House (Galleria if wet)

Partners depart for partners programme 11.30am Conference Papers Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Theme: New Presiding Officers and representation Presenters and papers

* Programme is subject to change. Dally programmes will be provided at the conference. Events marked with an asterisk (*) are open to media 4apoccPRESIDING OFFICERS & CLERKS CONFERENCE WellingtXMi, New Zealand *2018

Hon Kate Doust, President, Western Australia Legislative Council: Frontiers of the Wild West - Progress and Possibilities

Joy Burch MLA, Speaker, Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory: You can't be what you can't see - Women in the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory

Roto Williams MP, Assistant Speaker, New Zealand House of Representatives:Becoming an Assistant Speaker: six months in 1.00pm Lunch break Venue: Grand Hall 2.00pm Conference Papers Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Theme: How a Parliament can develop and change Presenters and papers Hon Bruce Atkinson MLC, President, Victorian Legislative Council: The Council and the Crossbench - Balance of power in the 58*'' Parliament and the changing face of the Victorian Legislative Council

Rt Hon Ajiion Nasiu, Speaker and David Kusiiifu, Deputy Clerk, Solomon Islands:National Parliament Strategic Plan -A reflection on how the National Parliament of Solomon Islands governs its own development

David Wilson, Clerk of the New Zealand House of Representatives:The value of engagement ___ 3.30pm Afternoon tea* Venue: Grand Hall 4.00pm Twinned Parliament Meetings Kiribati with Australian Capital Territory Venue: Select committee room 3

Bougainville and Solomon Islands with New South Wales Venue: Select committee room 4

Niue and Northern Territory Venue: Select committee room 5

Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu with Queensland Venue: Select committee room 6 Tonga with South Australia Venue: Select committee room 7

Samoa with Tasmania Venue: Select committee room 8 4apoccPRESIDING OFFICERS & CLERKS CONFERBMCE Wellington, NewZtoland *2018

Nauru and Tuvalu with Victoria Venue; Select committee room 10

Cook Islands with Western Australia Venue: Select committee room 11

Meeting between New Zealand and Australian Federal Speakers Venue: Speaker's Lounge 5.00pm - 5.30pm Optional drinks for Presiding Officers in Speakers Lounge Free evening Tuesday 10 July 8.30am Executive Committee of the Pacific Parliamentary Partnerships Fund meeting Venue: Select Committee Room 4 9.00am Arrival at Parliament - refreshments available Venue: Grand Hall 9.30am Conference Papers Venue: Debating Chamber Theme: Committees and the House Presenters and papers Nell Laurie, Clerk, Queensland Parliament: Reforms to sitting hours

David Blunt, Clerk, New South Wales Legislative Council: Orders for papers and parliamentary committees: An update

Neil Laurie, Clerk, Queensland Parliament: Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees 11.00am Morning tea Venue: Grand Hall 11.30am Special session Celebrating 125 years of women's suffrage: women's representation in Parliament and efforts to make Parliaments family-friendly Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Panellists • Rt Hon Helen Clark ONZ SSI • Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House of Representatives, New Zealand • Kiritapu Allen MP, New Zealand House of Representatives • Dr Gill Greer, Chief Executive, National Council of Women of New Zealand (NCWNZ) Facilitator: Dr Therese Arseneau, Senior Fellow in Political Science, University of Canterbury 1.00pm Lunch hosted by Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, New Zealand Branch 4 a POCC PRESIDING OFFICERS&CLERKS CONFERBMCE Wellington, NewZ^land • 2018

Venue: Grand Hall 2.00pm Conference Papers Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Theme: Parliamentary Privilege/Procedural Flexibility Presenters and papers Hon Peter Watson MLA, Speaker, Western Australian Legislative Assembly:Misleading the House and the Privileges Committee

Kirsten Robinson, Clerk, Western Australian Legislative Assembly: Misleading the House and the Privileges Committee - The Aftermath

Hon John Ajaka MLC, President, New South Wales Legislative Council: The Aboriginal Languages Bill 2017 3.30pm Afternoon tea Venue: Grand Hall 4.00pm Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Region Meetings Pacific Region Venue: Select Committee Room 4 Australian Region Venue: Select Committee Room 3 5.00pm Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Joint Meeting Venue: Select Committee Room 4 5.45pm Return to hotels to refresh 7.00pm Presiding Officers' Dinner Venue:Shed 5 Clerks' Dinner Venue: Dockside Restaurant Wednesday 11 July 9.00am Arrival at Parliament, refreshments available Venue: Grand Hall 9.30am Conference Papers Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Theme: The Speakership Presenters and papers Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House of Representatives, New Zealand: The role of the Speaker

Tom Duncan, Clerk, Australian Capital Territory: More than just points of order-the role of a Speaker in a small legislature

Hon Tony Smith, Speaker, Australian House of Representatives:High and exacting demands - preparing for the role of Chair 11.00am Morning tea Venue: Grand Hall 4 a POCC P f ^ D 4NG O F f ICERS & CLERKS CONFERENCE Wellington, New Zealand >2018

11.30am Special session Communicating Parliament and engaging with diverse populations Venue: Legislative Council Chamber Introduction: Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House of Representatives, New Zealand Panellists: • Priyanca Radhakrishnan MP, New Zealand House of Representatives • Melissa Lee MP, New Zealand House of Representatives • Brett Nutley, Indigenous Liaison Officer, Queensland Parliament • Oki Tilaia, Pacific Youth Leadership and Transformation Council Trustee Facilitator: Phil Smith, Radio New Zealand 1.00pm Lunch Venue: Grand Hall 2.00pm Conference Papers Venue: Debating Chamber Theme: Security and stability Presenters and papers

Hon Kezia Purick MLA, Speaker, Northern Territory Legislative Assembly: The Calm After the Storm - Comparisons of tactics: Disorder and disruption between the 12^^ and 13*^ Northern Territory Legislative Assemblies

Simon Pentanu, Speaker, Bougainville House of Representatives:Political and Procedural challenges of a post-conflict Parliament

Adam Crouch, Temporary Speaker, Parliament of New South Wales: Security at the NSW Parliament - recent improvements and future advancements 3.30pm Afternoon tea Venue: Grand Hall 4.00pm Closing session Venue: Debating Chamber Concluding remarks: Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives Address from the next POCC host: Hon Curtis Pitt, Speaker of the Queensland Parliament Evaluation 5.00pm Return to hotels to refresh 7.00pm Conference dinner Venue: Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa Tongarewa Thursday 12 July 4 a POCC PRESIDING OmCERS&CLERKS CONFERENCE Weliingtxm, New Zealand • ^ 8

9.00am Workshop Pacific Presiding Officers Venue: Select Committee Room 2 - Bowen House

Workshop Pacific Clerks Venue: Select Committee Room 1 - Bowen House 10.00am Australian delegates not involved in the Pacific workshops are invited to attend a morning tea hosted by the Australian High Commissioner. Venue: Australian High Commission 72-76 Hobson St, Thorndon, Wellington 11.30am Light lunch available for delegates Venue: Select Committee 2 Foyer - Bowen House 1.00pm Workshops for Australian and New Zeaiand Clerks and officials Parliamentary strengthening and technical assistance Venue: Select Committee 2 - Bowen House

Delegates not involved in this workshop can enjoy some free time exploring Wellington or join an organised tour to the National Archive 5.00pm Optional: refreshments at the Backbencher Gastropub Friday 13 July All day Conference excursion Departing Parliament at 9.15am. Please refer to the full excursion programme provided separately Attachment C - Australian Region Management Committee Meeting Agenda

COM MON EALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION I

Australia Region Management Committee Meeting

Tuesday 10 July 2018 4pm Select Committee Room 3, Parliament House Parliament of New Zealand Wellington, NZ

Agenda

1. Adoption of agenda

2. Apologies

3. Minutes (5 July 2017) and matters arising (not listed hereunder)

4. Proposed amendments to the Australia Region Revised Rules and by-laws fo r the Australian Region

(a) Letter from David Elder, Honorary Secretary, Commonwealth of Australia Branch, dated 9 May 2018 (b) Letter from Hon. Rene Hidding, MP, President, Tasmania Branch dated 24 May 2018.

5. Report from Regional Representatives (SA,NSW & Vic) on CPA EXCO activities

6. Forthcoming conferences and seminars

(a) EXCO Meeting 6-9 November 2018

(b) Regional Conference - Date and venue to be nominated by Pacific Region

7. Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians/Pacific Women

(a) Report from CWP Australian Steering Committee

8. CPA Trust Funds and Twinning Programme/Pacific Parliamentary Partnerships Fund (a) Report from Federal/States/Territories Education Trust Fund Executive Meeting (recommendations for assistance 2017-18)

(b) Twinning/Partnership Matters

9. Incoming Chair of Australian Region Management Committee (Victoria) (plus Regional Representative rotation - outgoing SA & incoming CWealth (if rules changed))

10. Other business

Tom Duncan Regional Secretary, CPA Australia Region Attachment D - Paper presented by Hon Curtis Pitt, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland and Mr Neil Laurie, Clerk of the Parliament, Queensland - ‘Reforms to sitting hours‘

P r e s id in g O ff ic e r s a n d C le r k s C o n fe r e n c e W e l l in g t o n 8-13JULY2018

**

Paper to be presented by Hon Curtis Pitt, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland and Mr Nell Laurie Clerk of the Parliament, Queensland

Reforms to sitting hours Reforms to sitting hours

The Queensland Tarliam ent has a history o f long sitting days. A t the commencement o f the 56*^ Parliam ent there have been reforms to sitting days and hours and speaking times.

The multiple roles of a house of parliament and the use of time

One of the principal roles of a house of parliament is to pass legislation; time must therefore be made available for the introduction, debate, amendment and eventual passage or rejection of legislation (government bills and private bills). A house of parliament also needs to gives its approval to the budget put forward by the executive; time must therefore be made available for the presentation, scrutiny, and passage of appropriation bills. In addition to its legislative and financial roles, a house of parliament also has a role to scrutinise the actions of the government; time must therefore be made available for activities such as , matters of public interest and private members’ motions. Finally, members of a house of parliament represent their electorates and time should therefore be made available for them to raise local issues and air grievances on behalf of their constituents that is not necessarily related to any other business on the notice paper.

Time is not unlimited and it is, therefore, necessary that a balance be struck between government business and private members’ time, to ensure that each house of parliament can properly undertake all of its roles. There must be opportunity for the government to legislate, but without unduly limiting the rights of Members to scrutinise government and air grievances. As regards the Legislative Assembly of Queensland striking this balance is particularly important given it is a unicameral parliament, and the Legislative Assembly is the only place in which full scrutiny of government can take place and where legislation can be properly considered and amended, if necessary.

Country and regional members

Queensland is a large, decentralised State. In the 1980s and 1990s, the number of country or regional members was between 60-70% of the total membership. Currently, just over half of the members of the Legislative Assembly are country or regional members,^ necessitating significant travel by those members to attend each sitting week and who obviously need to stay away from their home and electorates during sitting weeks. Some members travel great distances to get to and from Brisbane, necessitating almost a day of travel each way.

Historically, and largely because of the decentralised nature of Queensland, a pattern of infrequent sitting weeks with very long sitting days developed in Queensland. Indeed, the expectation of infrequent sitting weeks and long sitting days could be described as cultural. From the perspective of most of the country and regional members, infrequent sitting weeks means less time travelling and being absent from their home and electorates. Long sitting days and late sittings is seen as a justifiable sacrifice to spend more time at home and in their electorates.

The Queensland Parliament is also the only parliament in Australasia with onsite accommodation for members. The availability of onsite accommodation has, no doubt, help foster past acceptance of late sittings.

^ In this context we are including the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast as regional areas, whereas Redlands Shire, Moreton Shire and Logan are considered to be within the greater Brisbane area. Changing composition and demographic

Since the turn of the 21®‘ century both the composition and demographics of the Legislative Assembly has been changing.

Firstly, the growth in the South East corner of the State has resulted in less country and regional seats with each redistribution.

Secondly, at the 2001 election (an ALP landslide election) there were a record number of female members elected. Whilst the number of female members has fluctuated significantly at each election since, the overall trend has been for a greater number of female members this century than in the 1980s and 1990s.

Thirdly, the massive electoral swings that occurred in the 2012 and 2015 elections has resulted in: (a) the ‘corporate memory’ of the membership of the Assembly declining: (b) the average service as a member being significantly reduced (the average service at the commencement of this parliament was 4 years); and the average age of members of the Assembly is now considerably younger than parliaments of the past. These factors mean that members are less likely to hold to some of the traditions and cultures of the past. Members are also now more likely to have young families.

In the last two decades, there have been repeated calls for the parliamentary working hours to be more normal or sensible (often erroneously referred to as “family friendly”); possibly a reflection of the changing demographic of elected members and a stronger emphasis generally in the community on achieving a work/life balance.

2011 reforms

In 2011 the Legislative Assembly of Queensland’s Standing Orders were amended to reflect the reforms affected by the recommendations of the Committee System Review Committee. These changes established designated portfolio committees to consider bills, public works and public accounts of government portfolios, and set aside Wednesday mornings each sitting week for each committee to meet and conduct its business.

The 2011 reforms also impacted upon the Sessional Orders which determine the Legislative Assembly’s days and hours of sitting, order of business, and time limits for items of business. Reforms to Sessional Orders included:

• the Assembly still sitting for three days each week (Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday), but the setting aside of each sitting Wednesday morning for committee business; • reducing the time limit for members’ second debate of bills reported on by a portfolio committee from 20 minutes to ten (except for the relevant portfolio committee’s members); and • creating more private members’ time, to discourage members talking to bills as subterfuge for raising issues affecting their constituency.

However, despite the considerable reforms in 2011, the Legislative Assembly failed to deal effectively with its long hours of sitting in both the 54**^ (2012-2015) and 55'^ (2015-2017) Parliament. The 54*^ Parliament was one in which the LNP government had a massive majority (initially 78 of 89 seats). The 55* Parliament was one in which the ALP government needed to rely on a growing number of independents and cross-benchers for confidence and supply and was thus a hung parliament. Both Parliaments continued the pattern of late sittings. Use parliamentary time

Appendix 1 provides a statistical analysis of the activities of the Legislative Assembly between 1994 and 17 July 2015 showing sitting days and duration, the proportion of time allocated to Government Business, and the volume of different types of Government Business.

The main points to note are:

• A steady increase in the average number of hours per sitting day (in non election years) from 8hrs 18mins in 1994 to 12 hrs 18 minutes in 2009, and a steady decline after the introduction of the 2011 committee system changes and Wednesday morning dedicated committee time, to 10 hrs 25 minutes in 2014; • From February to 17 July 2015 the House sat for an average of 10 hours and 20 minutes per sitting day; • The changes to the Standing Orders in 2011 regarding the committee system provided a dedicated portfolio committee meeting time on Wednesday mornings; with the business of the House commencing at 2pm. This necessarily impacted upon the total hours spent on the business conducted by the House on sitting Wednesdays; • Government business, as a proportion of total sitting time, decreased from 66% in 1994 to 50% in 2014. However, government business, as a proportion of total sitting time for 2015 (to 17 July), was just 35%;2 • The average number of Ministerial Statements per sitting day significantly decreased from 17 in 2010 to 7.5 in 2014. However, the average number of Ministerial Statements per day had increased in 2015 (to 17 July) to 10.6; • An increase in the time afforded for private members statements, from 6 hours 54 minutes in 2010 to 18 hours 13 minutes for 2014 and 5 hours 47 minutes in 2015, to 17 July.

Graphical representations of the breakdown of the use of sitting time for 2014 and for 2015 (to 17 July) are below:

Graph 1: 2014 - Breakdown of business

□ Government business = 46% I Ministerial Statements = 4% □ Question Time = 10%

□ Private Members' business = 10 % I Other business = 14%

□ Lunch and Dinner = 16%

The main points to note are, in 2014:

^ 2015 is an election year; a proportion of the business of the House in 2015 is given over to the Address in Reply to the Governor’s opening ceremony speech (SO 47 provides for a debate of no longer than 28 hours after which the Speaker is to put the question for the adoption of the Address-in-Reply and any proposed amendments). This time is calculated as ‘Other business’. • Government business accounted for around 50% of total time, of which 8% (or 4% of total time) was given over to Ministerial Statements; • Question time accounted for 10% of total time; • Private Members’ business accounted for around 10% of total time, of which 47% was given over to private members statements, 19% was given over to private members’ bills and 34% was given over to private members’ motions; • Approximately 14% of total time was given over to ‘other business’ (comprising grievances, adjournments etc) • Approximately 16% of total time was spent on lunch and dinner breaks.®

Graph 2: 2015 - Breakdown of business to 17 July 2015

□ Government business = 30% I Ministerial Statements = 5% □ Question Time = 8%

□ Private Members' business = 7% I Other business = 33%

□ Lunch and Dinner = 17%

For the 55*'^ Parliament in 2015 (to 17 July):

• Government business accounted for around 35% of total time;"* including ministerial statements which comprised almost 5% of total time; • Question time accounted for 7.8% of total time; • Private Members’ business accounted for around 7% of total time, of which 45% (or 3% of total time) was given over to private members statements, 14% or 1% of total time) was given over to private members’ bills and 41% (or 3% of total time) was given over to private members’ motions; • Approximately 33% of total time was given over to 'other business’;. • Approximately 17% of time was spent on lunch and dinner breaks.®

^ The percentage time spent on breaks increases when the House sits past 7.30pm as this figure includes the dinner break. A possible explanation for the reduced percentage of time spent on Government business may be the time spent on the confidence motion and, particularly, address in reply; the latter being calculated as being 'other business'. ^ The percentage time spent on breaks increases when the House sits past 7.30pm as this figure includes the dinner break. Issues with the program since the 2011 reforms

Since the 2011 reforms, the time available for government business (primarily debate of government bills) decreased as a percentage of overall parliamentary time. This necessitated an increase in the average hours per sitting day, which meant that, despite starting at 9.30am (introduced in 1996) the House continued to sit until late in the evening. The issue was very acute in the 55**’ Parliament (a hung Parliament) where total time for government business had fallen to 35%.

In the five years from 2009 to 2014 the House sat after midnight on 26 occasions and for a total of 32 hours 45 minutes (an average of 5.2 occasions and 6 hours 30 per year). In the 55*” Parliament the Legislative Assembly sat more nights beyond midnight in the three years of the Parliament, than it had fin the previous decade.

20

15

10 B No. of sittings after midnight B Hours sat after n midnight 2009 2011 2013 20115 (to 17 July)

The cost of late sittings

There are a range of non-financial costs associated with late night sittings:

• Workplace health and safety - working long hours is potentially hazardous for Members and staff. Medical studies have found that working long hours can be detrimental to health. Working long hours can also be a safety hazard. For example, one of the Assembly’s own committees, the former Travel Safe Committee found in its 2005 report no. Driving 43 on Empty: Fatigue Driving in Queensland that people with long work hours have a higher risk of experiencing a fatigue-related vehicle crash.® Some staff (e.g. Hansard and Table Office) work for up to two hours after the rising of the Assembly, they and other staff (catering, attendants etc.) also have to travel home, often after having worked for around fifteen or more hours. The risk to staff working 15 hour plus days and driving home late at night cannot be overstated.

Social cost - late sitting hours are not conducive to achieving a work-life balance and are a barrier to the participation of members and staff with family or other caring responsibilities.

Public perception - there is anecdotal evidence of public criticism of iate sittings as an inefficient use of time, and a question over the ability of members to make decisions on important issues late at night

® Select Committee on Travelsafe, Report No. 43Driving - on Empty: Fatigue driving in Queensland, October 2005, pp. 31-32. Available at: httr://www, parliament. 1.114. uov.au/documents/committees/TSAFE/2004/fatiiiue-crashes/fatitiue-rLPort.ndf after a long day’s work. The question often posed is: “How can anyone make important decisions that late at night?”

Learnings from other Australian Parliaments

In a 2015 survey of houses of Australian Parliaments the majority of lower houses advised there were no sittings which extended past midnight in the 2015 year. Those houses that did sit past midnight in 2015 did so only occasionally.^ In 2015, the Queensland Legislative Assembly sat after midnight on twelve occasions.

Appendix 2 is a jurisdictional comparison of parliamentary sittings, including days and hours, and bills passed in lower houses fin Australia for the 2016 and 2017 years. Two things stand out: (a) Queensland’s Legislative Assembly had the longest average sitting days; and (b) Queensland’s Legislative Assembly had the lowest number of sitting weeks/days of all State houses.

A survey of other Australian houses of parliament in September 2015 revealed that most had fixed or automatic times for adjournment. Queensland Sessional Orders provided for the Assembly to sit until the adjournment was moved and agreed to.Appendix 3 is a jurisdictional comparison of automatic adjournments in Australian parliaments

The 2018 reforms

On 15 February 2018, after significant debate, attempted amendment and a division, the Legislative Assembly adopted new Sessional Orders for the 56'^ Parliament which attempts to address the long sitting hours.

The significant changes in relation to the sessional orders mean that:

• The Assembly will sit from 9.30 am on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday mornings and rise, after the adjournment debate, at 7.30 on Tuesday and Wednesday evenings and 6.30 on Thursday evening. (There is no dinner break because the House rises at the latest at 7.30 in the evening.) • Committees are now expected to meet and conduct their business on the Monday of each sitting week (rather than the Wednesday morning as they had been doing since 2011). • During certain times—private members’ statements, matters of public interest and adjournment debates—there will be no questions put or divisions called, allowing that time to occur uninterrupted. • The lunch breaks have been reduced from 1 hours to 1 hour and on Tuesday and Thursday, for one hour after the lunch break, no questions can be put or divisions called whilst matters of public importance and private members’ statements are being made. (This has been said to enable parliamentary committees to undertake work in the parliamentary precinct, be it public or private hearings, knowing that they can do so uninterrupted, as members will not be called to attend a division.) • Speaking times on motions and the second reading question have been set at ten minutes for all members except the relevant minister and opposition spokesperson. • There was a reduction in some private members’ time, for example three 14 hour private members’ motions have been reduced to one 1 hour motion and private members’ statements(5x3 minutes) before question time has been removed.

According to the Leader of the House and Attorney General, the Hon Yvette D’ath, who moved the motion for the new Sessional Qrders:

’ Commonwealth Senate, New South Wales Legislative Council, Tasmania Legislative Assembly and Westem Australian Legislative Assembly. We are not seeking to cut back on time. We are seeking to have a more efficient use of time in this parliament. It is not too much to ask this parliament to, over four days, work three full sitting days with committees sitting on a Monday, because that is an efficient way for this chamber to operate and it will ensure that members of the public can watch our work, rather than having important debates and decisions made at one, two or three o’clock in the morning. It is about time that we had a sensible, respectful and adult conversation about what reasonable working times are for this chamber, which is what this motion to change sessional orders seeks to achieve. It is about time that the Queensland parliament comes into line with many other jurisdictions.^

The Opposition opposed the new Sessional Orders, principally for the following reasons:

• The committees being expected to meet on Monday mornings, rather than Wednesday mornings, interferes with Shadow Cabinet. • The committees being expected to meet on Monday mornings, rather than Wednesday mornings, means that many country and regional members will need to travel to Brisbane on Sunday; not being very “family friendly” for those members. • Abolishing the three minuters before question time was a significant accountability measure that has been affected. The three minuters “seat the scene” for question time. • The reduction in private members’ motions from three to one was also removing a significant accountability measure.

The Leader of the Opposition stated:

There are major issues with the changes to these sessional orders. Firstly, they are shutting down the opposition and the crossbench’s ability to hold this government to account in this House which is exactly what we were elected by our electorates to do. The other thing is that they have made the week of parliament completely unfriendly for everyone who is from outside of Brisbane and who has to travel to Brisbane. They will now have to leave their family on a Sunday, not those members over there who live in inner-city Brisbane. We will have to leave our families on a Sunday. Mr Speaker, your cabinet even moved the time it will meet to later on a Monday so that I believe you, Mr Speaker, will be able to travel down from Cairns after spending a full Sunday with your beautiful family. That is what regional members want to do and that is what we like to do. It is hard enough to be away from our families without having to extend it to a whole week. Importantly, this motion is saying that this government does not want to be open and accountable. We should not be silenced. Neither the opposition nor the crossbench should be silenced in this place. They have taken away the ability for the opposition and the crossbench to have the three minuters before question time. They have taken away the ability for the opposition and the crossbench to have an evening debate—to debate an issue that is of relevance and importance to our side, not the government. It Is a debate to prove to the government that things should be different, as the LNP did in opposition last time when we won several six o’clock debate motions. We no longer have that option here in this House.^

Have the 2018 reforms been successful?

How have the 2018 reforms worked thus far? The honest answer is that it is too early to tell. It obviously would have been far better if there had there been a general consensus.

The reduction of the 15 minutes per day for private members’ statements before question time each day (taking away 45 minutes per sitting week) and the reduction of three private members motions to one longer motion per week (taking away V2 hour per week) with no similar off-set for ministerial statements (still about 1 14 hours to 2 hours per week) did not engender Opposition cooperation. Country and regional members are not exclusively

^Record of Proceedings Thursday, 15 February 2018 at p. 135 ® Record of Proceedings Thursday, 15 February 2018 at p.139 Opposition members, but most Opposition are country or regional members. Thus, committee meetings on Monday mornings affect most Opposition Members and are not popular with these members.

Generally the Assembly is keeping to the automatic adjournment in Sessional Orders, but the volume of bills to date has also been very low. Sessional Orders have also been suspended twice to sit late for extraordinarily controversial bills where all non-government members wished to contribute to debate (for example, the Vegetation Management Bill (tree clearing laws)).

The Opposition obviously wish to test the new Sessional Orders and the Government are reluctant to shut down debate on controversial bills for fear of adverse commentary. In addition, to the suspension of Sessional Orders, both ‘the gag' (“that the question be put’) and ‘the guillotine’ (time limit orders), have needed to be employed to get business through the Assembly within the new times.

The use of ‘the gag’ obviously puts the Speaker or Deputy Speaker in an invidious situation, as they must be satisfied that there has been sufficient debate on the matter before putting the question. Under Standing Orders the motion ‘that the question be put’ cannot be debated, but the Speaker or Deputy Speakers must deal with numerous points of order that essentially amounts to debate on the question.

In moving an allocation of time order for two revenue bills in the budget week (the last sitting week), the Leader of the House and Attorney General, the Hon Yvette D’ath, flagged further reform in the form of a regular allocation of time order each sitting week:

During the last sitting week of this parliament, the government indicated its intention to move to a new model of scheduling debates for bills. The government can confirm that, from next sitting week, it will be moving to implement the new government business program similar to the Victorian parliament’s program. Although the government chose not to introduce the new model this sitting week, allowing ail 93 members to speak to the budget bills, we believe that, for the same reason that we will be moving to the full model, we will through this motion set a time for the debate of the remaining stages of this bill.

If this reform proceeds, the challenge for the government will be to schedule reasonable time for debate of bills and not try and cram too much business into a week, thus denying members a reasonable opportunity for debate, and importantly, reasonable opportunity for amendment of bills.

10 Record of Proceedings Thursday, 15 June 2018 at p. 1806 APPENDIX 1 - LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY STATISTICS 1994-2015*

1994 1995* 1996 1997 1998* 1999 * 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004* 2005 2006* 2007 2008 2009 * 2010 2011 2012 * 2013 2014 2015 *#

Sitting days 54 45 47 44 35 56 41 46 53 46 40 49 38 43 43 40 43 43 37 40 40 17

Total sitting 447:56 339:25 497:11 486:41 362:09 665:06 486:54 hours:mins 471:51 590:56 566:14 416:49 558:30 438:04 509:49 504:59 492:00 518:34 481:22 391:02 441:58 416:42 175:48

Average hours:mins per 8:18 7:33 10:35 11:04 10:21 11:53 11:53 10:15 11:09 12:18 10:25 11:24 11:31 11:51 11:44 12:18 12:03 11:11 10:34 11:02 10:25 10:20 sitting day

Total no. government 87 58 80 83 51 90 64 103 79 96 54 73 61 59 74 53 54 46 46 64 65 9 bills passed

Average no. ministerial 1.9 1.6 6.8 6.3 7.5 7.7 statements per 7.8 10.52 12.28 16.11 16.75 19.4 17.8 21.3 17.40 15.85 17 10.9 6.21 7.62 7.55 10.6 sitting day

% o f time allocated to government 66% N/C N/C N/C 60% 48% 49% 51% 55% 55% 54% business (bills 51% 51% 50% 53% 53% 56% 47% 49% 50% 50% 35% and ministerial statements)

Ministerial statements N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 27:24 N/C 29:27 36:53 34:36 29:10 36:12 27:59 36:23 36:29 32:20 36:37 24:52 13:00 16:36 16:55 8:09 hrs:mlns

Private members' N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 9:55 N/C 6:56 5:00 4:05 3:32 4:47 statements 2:36 3:34 6:50 6:40 6:54 13:46 13:49 17:24 18:13 5:47 hrs:mins

Government N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 293:27 N/C 210:28 286:48 197:34 bills hrs:mins 276:18 250:33 196:26 217:53 229:47 227:25 254:28 201:02 178:34 205:39 190:07 53:53

Private members' bills hrs:mins N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 34:31 N/C 11:45 20:39 15:47 9:33 17:45 8:12 16:13 24:05 7:18 7:02 9:12 0:14 5:24 7:27 1:50

Question time N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 56:00 hrs:mins N/C 42:17 50:50 45:31 37:30 45:19 36:02 42:06 42:24 38:05 42:59 42:20 35:03 38:57 40:06 13:39

10 1994 1995* 1996 1997 1998* 1999 2000 2001 * 2002 2003 2004 * 2005 2006* 2007 2008 2009 * 2010 2011 2012 * 2013 2014 2015 *#

Private members' N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 13:14 17:06 16:00 12:27 16:16 14:13 15:39 15:15 13:01 15:17 13:48 11:27 12:30 13:07 5:20 motions

Other (Adjournment, grievances, condolences, N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 122:00 N/C 74:49 64:30 69:52 70:42 81:09 66:34 84:54 53:38 68:19 57:16 86:31 76:02 74:16 62:28 58:09 address-in- repiy, etc.) hrs;mins

Lunch/dinner N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 45:00 N/C 82:55 109:10 104:05 56:21 106:30 85:19 92:59 96:31 98:52 98:01 89:51 62:53 71:12 68:19 29:01 breaks hrs:mins

* Election year # Information compiled to 17 July 2015 N/C Not compiled

Effective from 1 August 2011, the Sessional orders were amended to allow Portfolio Committees to meet on Wednesday mornings of sitting weeks. The table below provides information on the average sitting hours for each sitting Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday per year from 2009 to 2015 (noting that there is usually only one Friday sitting each year during the budget week).

The table also includes an average sitting time for Tuesdays and Thursday’s of election years which excludes the swearing in of new members and the opening ceremony at the commencement of a new Parliament.

Additionally, the table provides the average sitting hours in 2011 for the year and for the periods of 2011 prior to and following the Committee system changes which were effective as of 1 August 2011.

2009 2010 2011 January to July 2011 August to 2012* 2013 2014 2015*# December 2011 (total) (Prior to committee system changes) (Following committee system changes)

Average sitting 11:46 13:33 9:44 14:28 11:12 9:03 hours per 12:45 Tuesday 12:11 11:00 12:06 13:04 13:02 (excludes (excludes opening (excludes opening opening ceremony) ceremony) ceremony)

11 2009 2010 2011 January to July 2011 August to 2012* 2013 2014 2015*# December 2011 (total) (Prior to committee system changes) (Following committee system changes)

Average sitting 12:21 12:58 12:10 8:51 8:12 7:36 hours per 8:55 8:20 Wednesday 10:30 9:33 8:10 (excludes opening (excludes opening ceremony) ceremony)

Average sitting 12:22 10:59 11:28 10:46 hours per 11:04 11:41 11:40 10:16 14:09 Thursday

Average sitting 18:47 10:30 15:00 - hours per 15:00 11:44 7:23 9:32 10:51 Friday

1 1 1 Nil 2 No of Friday 1 1 1 1 sitting days (budget) (budget) (budget) (27/3/15 and (budget) (budget) (budget) (budget) budget)

Average sitting hours prior to committee changes, from 2009 to August 2011;

Tuesday (excluding opening ceremony): 12:01 Wednesday: 12:30 Thursday: 11:34

Average sitting hours following committee changes from August 2011 to July 2015:

Tuesday (excluding opening ceremony): 12:45 Wednesday (excluding opening ceremony): 8:46 Thursday: 11:42

12 APPENDIX 2 - JURISDICTIONAL COMPARISON OF PARLIAMENTARY SITTINGS AND BILLS PASSED IN LOWER HOUSES FOR THE 2016 AND 2017 YEARS.

Total Time in Average Si tting Hours Suspensions Total Sitt ing Hours per Sitt ing Day (hrs:mins:secs) (hrs:mi ns:secs) (hrs:i mins) (ie lunch/dinner Total Sitting Weeks Total Sitting Days (incl. suspensions) (incl. suspensions) breaks) Total Bil s Passed

2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017

Queensland 14 11 43 34 500:31:00 354:48:00 11:38 10:26 76:07:00 58:57:00 65 44

House of Representatives 14 17 51 64 507:22:00 615:07:00 9:57 9:37 32:33:00 34:21:00 123 167 New South Wales 18 18 54 54 460:22:00 454:59:00 8:31 8:25 38:22:00 35:00:00 66 68

South Australia 18 16 51 47 366:00:00 369:00:00 7:10 7:51 63:00:00 65:00:00 67 71

Tasmania 15 15 45 45 415:49:00 405:15:00 9:14 9:00 64:57:00 72:39:00 60 57

Approx. Approx. Victoria 18 18 51 51 428:43:00 445:58:00 8:24 8:45 36:00 36:00 84 71 Western Australia 19 15 58 46 485:19:00 356:55:00 8:22 7:45 48:09:00 33:45:00 47 31

ACT 10 13 28 39 224:00:00 308:00:00 8:00 7:53 62:11:00 79:00:00 57 49 Northern Territory* 8 28 198:27:00 7:05 20

13 APPENDIX 3 - JURISDICTIONAL COMPARISON OF AUTOMATIC ADJOURNMENTS IN AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENTS

The following information was provided by jurisdictions in September 2015

Method Debate Time

30 minute debate 6pm each sitting day ACT Legislative Adjournment question Assembly

No debate Tuesday: 7pm Direct adjournment Wednesday: 7pm Victorian Legislative unless Minister moves Thursday: 5pm Assembly extension to sitting (rare)

1 hour debate Tuesday: 10pm Wednesday: 6:30pm Minister may move Victorian Legislative Thursday: 10pm earlier adjournment. Council

Tasmanian 1 Hour debate 6pm each sitting day Automatic adjournment Legislative Assembly Western Australian Legislative N/A Assembly Western Australian Legislative N/A Council Tuesday: 7:45pm Standing Order 46; Wednesday: 10pm unless otherwise New South Wales Thursday: at ordered, the House shall Legislative conclusion of private be adjourned without Assembly members' motion moved statements (approx 6:45pm) 30 minute debate Tuesday :7 pm Interruption to allow New South Wales Wednesday: 10pm Minister to move Legislative Thursday: end of adjournment motion Council Question Time

14 No automatic Northern Territory adjournment - Standing Legislative Order suspended for Assembly past three years.

30 minute debate Monday: 9:30pm Commonwealth Tuesday: 9:30pm Automatic adjournment House of Wednesday: 8pm Representatives Thursday: 5pm

40 minute debate Monday: 10:30pm Tuesday: 7:20pm Commonwealth Wednesday:8pm Senate Thursday: 8:40pm

SO 51 provides for an Tuesday: 7pm or 20 minute debate automatic adjournment 12am (depending on at midnight on any Wednesday:7pm or when the motion is sitting day. If the House 12am moved) has not adjourned at Thursday: 5.30pm midnight on any sitting day, the Speaker adjourns the House at midnight, without a question first being put, until the next sitting day. If the House is In Committee of the whole, South Australia the Chairman of House of Assembly Committees vacates the Chair and report to the Speaker.

Sessional Order 2 as of 1 Feb 2015 provides: Where an extension to extend the sitting beyond 6pm is agreed to, the house will automatically adjourn at 7pm without a question put.______

15 Attachment E - Paper presented by Neil Laurie, Cierk of the Pariiament, Queensiand - ‘Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees’

49™ P r e s id in g O f f ic e r s a n d C le r k s C o n f e r e n c e W e l l in g t o n 8 -1 3 JULY2018

**

Paper to be presented by Nell Laurie Clerk of the Parliament, Queensland

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees

2 0 1 8 celebrates the 30th anniversaiy o f the re-introduction o f parliam entary committees in the Queensland Parliament. Committees went into abeyance in the Queensland Parliament from 1922 when the legislative Council was abolished and it became unicameral until 1988 with the introduction of a Public Works Committee. The Committee system was overhauled in 2011 into a comprehensive, modem system. F urther reforms in the S F’' Parliam ent have moved Queensland closer to entrenching committees as an integral pa r t o f the parliamentary process; especially as regards the consideration o f legislation.

Some history re the Queensland committee system

From its commencement in 1860 the Queensland Parliament had a very active committee system. Bills were regularly considered by committees and other issues, such as state development projects, were the subject of extensive inquiry."'

From the commencement of the 20^'^ century, coinciding with the rise of political parties, committees went into decline. Only a handful of select committees (excluding domestic committees) were established after 1904 (apart from a brief period of increased committee use from 1912 to 1914, during the 19th Parliament). There were no select committees established after 1915.

In 1922 the Legislative Council was abolished. This was also the effect death-knell for committees. Apart from domestic committees (the Library Committee, Refreshment Room Committee, Privileges Committee and Papers Committee etc.) there was not a single select committee established between 1915 and 1974. A Subordinate Legislation Committee was established in 1975 (and continued in successive parliaments) and there was an Education Committee during 1978 and 1979.

It Is noted that this period saw long term governments from both sides of the political divide. Governments of both persuasions did not want committees.

In 1983 the Government (National Party and Liberal Party) split. One of the significant issues underlying the split was attempts by a reform group (“ginger group”) within the Liberal Party to establish a Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

On 4 August 1983 Ian Prentice MP moved a motion to bring forward debate on motions to establish a PAC. While the establishment of the committee had been approved by resolution at a Liberal Party convention, it was strongly opposed by then Premier Hon Jo Bjelke-Petersen MP. Liberal Party Leader and Deputy Premier, Hon Lew Edwards MP did not want a PAC voted on out of a concern that the vote would damage the coalition. Hon Terry White MP, a Liberal minister of the government, crossed the floor to vote against the government in favour of debating the establishment of a PAC and was

^ For a full history see Committee System Review Committee Report:Review of the Queensland Parliamentary Committee System December 2010 hiip://www. parliament. >.ild.'j ov.au/documents/committees/C SRC/2010/(.)ldParlCtteeS\ stemReview/rot- 15Dec2010 .pdf Particularly Appendix F - Historical list of committees of the Queensland parliament

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 1 subsequently sacked by Sir Llewellyn Edwards. Soon after White successfully contested the Liberal Party leadership. Despite White’s appointment Bjelke-Petersen refused to work with him on the grounds of his previous record of disloyalty to the government. An early election was called in October 1983 after which the Nationals (with the aid of some liberal defectors) governed in their own right.

Government did not want parliamentary committees.

The modern committee system in Queensland has its origins in the matters uncovered by the (1978-1989). For those unfamiliar, the Fitzgerald Inquiry started as an inquiry into police misconduct (essentially whether police were involved in protecting illegal prostitution, gambling etc.) and ended in reviewing the accountability of government generally. The Fitzgerald Report was tabled in July 1989. In relation to parliamentary committees, the report stated:

“There is a need to consider introducing a comprehensive system of Parliamentary Committees to enhance the ability of Parliament to monitor the efficiency of Government.”^

The first PAC was actually established before the before the Fitzgerald Report was tabled, the Public Accounts Committee Act 1988 being introduced by Hon Mike Ahern, the Premier who succeeded Hon Jo Bjelke-Petersen, and was Assented to on 18 November 1988. The establishment of this committee essentially marks the commencement of the development of the modern parliamentary committee system.

From 1988 to 1995 there were a number of “function-oriented” committees created or continued:

• Public Accounts Committee • Public Works Committee • Parliamentary Criminal Justice Committee/Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee • Parliamentary Committee for Electoral and Administrative Review / Legal, Constitutional, Administrative Review Committee • Travelsafe Committee • Scrutiny of Legislation Committee • Members’ Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee • Standing Orders Committee

However, it cannot be said that at this time the Fitzgerald Report’s vision for a “comprehensive system of committees” had been fulfilled. There was no committee system that covered the field of Government activity. For example, there was no ‘health committee’ or ‘education committee’, yet health and education accounted for well over 50% of government budget expenditure. Indeed, the Health Systems Review in September 2005 proposed that a parliamentary committee established under the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001, oversee the operation of a Health Commission.^These recommendations were not followed by government.

^ Fitzgerald report, page 371. ^ Queensland Health Systems Review tabled September 2005 hlip://www. 1 wliament. old, aov.au/documents/tableoffice/tabledpapers/2005/5105t4447.pdf

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 2 Queensland still failed international benchmarks for democracy in relation to its committee and legislative system. For example, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Associations Benchmarks included:

• 3.2.1 There shall be a presumption that the Legislature will refer legislation to a committee, and any exceptions must be transparent, narrowly-defined, and extraordinary in nature. • 3.2.2 Committees shall scrutinise legislation referred to them and have the power to recommend amendments or amend the legislation.

The reality is that the committee system that was in operation until 2011, whilst doing some valuable inquiries, had very little connection with the Assembly. For example, in the decade between 2000 and 2010:

There were 502 committee reports There were 20 referrals by House to committees • Only 4 bills were scrutinised by committee beyond “technical scrutiny” by the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee (Fundamental Legislative Principles “FLPs”) There was only 45 minutes of formal consideration in the Legislative Assembly of 3 of 191 “inquiry reports” (less than 2%)

In 2009 some new select committees were established that moved Queensland closer to a more comprehensive committee system. Four select committees were established: - Economic Development Committee - Environment and Resources Committee - Law, Justice and Safety Committee - Social Development Committee

in 2009, in response to some integrity issues regarding lobbyists and a former Minister, the Premier’s integrity and Accountability Review was established. There were many submissions to this review that called for the reintroduction of Upper House. There were other submissions that called for a new committee system. As a result, in 2010 the Parliamentary Committee System Review Committee was established. That committee recommended a new committee system that became the foundation for Queensland’s current portfolio based committee system.

Former legislative system

It is now necessary to digress to talk about the former legislative system in Queensland.

Prior to 2011, the process of considering legislation in the Legislative Assembly was antiquated and inadequate. Essentially the steps in considering bill in the Legislative Assembly were as follows:

1. Bills were introduced and underwent their First Reading (no debate) 2. The Minister would then move the Second Reading, making their introductory speech and immediately moving the adjournment of debate 3. A bill could not, absent an urgency order, be further debated for seven calendar days

Committee System Review Committee Report: Review of the Queensland Parliamentary Committee System December 2010 hitp://www.parliament.ald.uov.au/documents/committees/C SRC/2010/(.ddParlCtteeS ^ stemReview/rpt-15Dec2010.pd f Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 3 4. The second reading debate would then recommence. Given the limited time available between the introduction of the bill and the second reading, and the overall quantity of legislation, It was hardly surprising that members generally were not as across the detail of the bill as they should have been. Much fell to the Shadow Opposition Spokesperson to talk to stakeholders and get a grasp on the policy inherent in the bill. There was no transparency in the system, stakeholders spoke to Shadow Ministers, Ministers or the relevant Department in the ‘back rooms’. Second reading debates consisted of long speeches, often irrelevant to the bill. In reality Bills were largely used by members as vehicles for talking about local issues. 5. Following the second reading there was Consideration in Detail where the bill was considered clause by clause. It was not unusual at this stage for both the Opposition and relevant Minister to put forward amendments. 6. The third Reading. 7. Title agreed to.

The above legislative process produced poor outcomes. There was no formal, detailed examination and consultation within a formal parliamentary process. The public, stakeholders and peak groups were left to speak unilaterally to Government and Opposition in short timeframes. There was limited transparency and consideration of alternative policy. Bills which had been in developed over months or years in a department were passed after only weeks or days In Parliament. Parliament was essentially seen as “rubber stamp”.

Often bills would be passed and within a few months an amending bill would be introduced to fix errors or issues not picked up in its original passage.

The 2011 Reforms

The Committee System Review Committee (CSRC) recommended^ that a new “portfolio committee system” be created and that the new committees have the ability to report on all aspects of government activities, including investigating and reporting on events, incidents and operational matters of the government.

The CSRC recommended that all legislation go to a committee for consideration and that members of the public gain an unprecedented opportunity to comment on government legislation in a formal parliamentary process before it is debated and voted on in the parliament.

The CSRC hoped that the process would allow members of parliament to better understand the implications of legislation and focus more of their attention on their role as legislators. The Committee emphasised that hearings of the committees be open and broadcast so that interested members of the public have the opportunity to become part of the process.

Currently there are seven portfolio committees and three other statutory committees.

^ hiip.7/www.parliament.qld.*iov.au/documents/committees/CSRC/2010/01dParlCtteeSvsteniReview/itit- 15Dec2010.pdf

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 4 The Committee of the Legislative Assembly (OLA) has responsibility for; the ethical conduct of members by setting the Code of Ethical Standards for members;® reviewing the standing rules and orders about the conduct of business by, and the practices and the procedures of, the Assembly and its committees; any other matters for which the committee is given responsibility under the standing rules and orders; and any matter referred to the committee by the Speaker.

Initially and controversially the CLA had assumed many of the management responsibilities of the Speaker. The management responsibilities of the Speaker over the precinct and the Parliamentary Service have now been restored. Now, Speakers tend to use the CLA as a consultative body for decisions that may affect members. Today, the Speaker and the CLA work cooperatively. It is for this reason viewed (technically erroneously) by Members as a “Board of Management”; but in reality the Speaker decides its agenda and makes final decisions regarding administrative matters.

The Parliamentary Crime and Corruption Committee (PCCC) is established under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001. The committee is a continuation of the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee (PCMC) which was established under the Crime and Misconduct Act 2001 and the Parliamentary Criminal Justice Committee (PCJC) which was established under the now repealed Criminal Justice Act 1989.

The principal functions of the committee are:

• to monitor and review the performance of the functions, and the structure of the Crime and Corruption Commission (CCC or the Commission); • to report to Parliament on matters relevant to the Commission; and • to participate in the appointment of Commissioners and the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission.

The Ethics Committee’s areas of responsibility is to deal with complaints about the ethical conduct of particular members and deal with alleged breaches of parliamentary privilege by members of the Assembly and other persons.

® Under section 104C(2) of theParliament o f Queensland Act 2001, a complaint about a particular member not complying with the code of ethical conduct for members may be considered only by the Assembly or the Ethics Committee. Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 5 Committee of Ethics Parliamentary Crime the Legislative and Corruption C o m m ittee A ssem bly Committee

Board of Management Investigate Established under the complaints regarding Crime and Corruption Business of the House ethical conduct and Act 2001 breaches of privilege Timetable of Bills Monitors and reviews (if less than default six the Crime and months) Corruption Commission

Review of Standing and Sessional Orders

Rules for Code of Conduct and Registers of Interests

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 6 Currently there are seven portfolio committees whose operation is set out in the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001, but whose area of responsibility are set out in a schedule in Standing Orders agreed to each parliament.

e ami Etariiunm it Conimjitte

Education, Tourism, Innovation and Small Business Committee

Admicrtg

Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee

Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee

The functions of portfolio committees are contained in Chapter 5, Part 3 ofParliament the of Queensland Act 2001 and Standing Orders. For their portfolio areas each Committee has the function to consider and report on the following: • Legislation - Both Bills and subordinate legislation - Technical scrutinyand scrutiny of policy Public accounts Public works Oversight of independent bodies Estimates (Appropriation Bills) Other matters referred by the Parliament Matters within its portfolio area that the committee seif-refers

There are varying rules apply regarding the membership (composition) and operation (quorum, voting) of portfolio committees. Essentially the composition and rules are determined by a formulae in the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 and the determinative factor under the formulae is the number of non-Government members in Legislative Assembly.

The current rules for portfolio committees are: 6 Members:

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 7 - 3 Government; 3 Non-Government • Chair nominated by the Leader of the House • A quorum is 4 If a tied vote, Chair has a casting vote

The rules for the last Parliament (the Parliament) were the same, except that the Chair did not have a casting vote.

An unexpected and curious outcome since the introduction of the portfolio committee system is the propensity to refer policy matters to portfolios committees by the Assembly (moved by the government). Inquiries have included:

• The long-term financial sustainability of local government • How to improve health and safety outcomes for combat sports contestants In high risk professional and amateur contests in Queensland • Laws governing termination of pregnancy in Queensland • Hendra virus (HeV) EqulVac® vaccine and its use by veterinary surgeons in Queensland • The impacts of invasive plants (weeds) and their control in Queensland

The Assembly has also continued to establish Select Committees as required. For example, last Parliament a Select Committee to inquiry into the re-emergence of Coal Workers’ Pneumoconiosis amongst coal mine workers in Queensland was established.

Goals of 2011 Reforms

The overall vision of the 2011 reforms could be described as attempting to improve the performance of the Queensland Parliament by using committees to enhance its various functions (legislation, scrutiny et..).

The goals of the 2011 reforms can, in my opinion, be summarised as follows:

• To ensure a better informed Parliament and individual Members • To ensure better engagement with community/stakeholders in a “formal” process • To ensure a more vigorous legislative process by the Parliament where Bills are tested and ensure better legislative outcomes overall.

What remains to be considered is whether the goals have been achieved and what issues are remaining.

Have the goals been achieved? Activity since 2011 Reforms

There can be no doubt that the 2011 reforms have increased the overall activity of committees.

The number of public briefings, public hearings and private hearings of all parliamentary committees is approximately six to seven times the activity prior to the reforms, as demonstrated by the table below:

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 8 New committee system commenced in August 2011 Engagement since the 2011 Reforms

There can also be no doubt that the 2011 reforms have increased the overall engagement between the parliament, the public service, the public and stakeholders.

A total of 3,324 people appeared at portfolio committee hearings during the 54*'^ Parliament*: • 1,727 public servants • 661 representatives of peak organisations • 580 members of other groups • 356 individual members of the public

Persons appearing at portfolio committee hearings and briefings during the 55th Pariiament (March 2015 to September 2017) was as follows:

• 1603 public servants • 1664 representatives of organisations • 726 individual members of the public Outcomes - Biils

Activity is one thing, outcomes another. There is evidence that the Government and the Legislative Assembly are responding to the legislative scrutiny undertaken by the portfolio committees. Bills amended as a result of committee recommendations during the 54**^ Pariiament (May 2012 - January 2015) are set out in the following table:

Bills examined and Legislative Legislative Percentage accepted debated Amendments Amendments recommended accepted 157 53 308 162

Other Other Percentage accepted recommendations recommendations made accepted 83 242 202

Bills amended as a result of committee recommendations during the 55‘^ Parliament (for the period March 2015 to September 2017) are set out in the following table:

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 9 Bills examined and Legislative Legislative Percentage accepted debated Amendments Amendments recommended accepted 135 86 130 112

Other Other Percentage accepted recommendations recommendations made accepted 86 171 147

There is observable evidence that there are less “amending bills” being introduced to fix errors or oversights in the original bill.

Outcomes - other inquiries

As outlined above, the Legislative Assembly is referring other inquires to the portfolio committees. The statistics for the outcomes of those inquiries are also encouraging. The results of other inquiries conducted during the Parliament are set out in the following table:

Total completed Legislative Legislative Percentage accepted Inquiries Amendments Amendments recommended accepted 11 57 72 41

Other Other Percentage accepted recommendations recommendations made accepted 78 275 215

The results of other inquiries conducted during the Parliament (March 2015 to September 2017) are set out in the following table:

Total completed Legislative Legislative Percentage accepted Inquiries Amendments Amendments recommended accepted 12 87 15 13

Other Other Percentage accepted recommendations recommendations made accepted 92 64 59

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 10 Timeframes for Bills

The time available for the proper scrutiny of Biils by portfolio committees has been an issue since their introduction.

The table below indicates the average duration (weeks) of committee inquiries for the 54*'^ Pariiament and the 55**^ Parliament (from March 2015 to September 2017) have improved:

Total completed Government Bills Private Members Biils Other Inquiries inquiries

150 (147) Average duration Average duration Average duration (weeks) (weeks) (weeks) 8.5 25.4 32.4 (9.2) (22.1) (22.7)

i submit that the ideal referral period for bills is 12 weeks. This is a timeframe that would allow for stakeholders to prepare properly formulated submissions and the committee to undertake briefings, hearings and report.

2016 reforms - a step towards entrenching committees

On 19 March 2016 Queenslanders voted in favour of fixed four-year terms for the Legislative Assembly.^ This was a historic result, being the first state referendum question to have been supported in Queensland since 1910.

The four-year term proposal had been developed during an inquiry by one of the portfolio committees, the Finance and Administration Committee (FAC).® The existence and extent of the parliament’s committee system was an issue raised during the Finance and Administration Committee’s inquiry into four-year terms and the fixed term and referendum biils.

As a result of the FAC’s inquiry report, the Legislative Assembly referred to the Committee of the Legislative Assembly an inquiry into the parliament’s committee system and to further consider the FAC’s recommendation to entrench elements of the committee system.

’ Queenslanders supported the Constitution (Fixed Term Parliament) Amendment Bill 2015 previously passed by the Legislative Assembly but which could not receive Assent until supported in a referendum * Inquiry into the introduction of four year terms for the Queensland Parliament, ineluding consideration of Constitution (Fixed Term Parliament) Amendment Bill 2015 and Constitution (Fixed Term Parliament) Referendum Bill 2015, Report No. 16, 55th Parliament, Finance and Administration Committee, November 2015 hup://www. parliament, eld. LLOv.au/documents/committees/FAC/2015/I4-Intro4\ earterms/I4-1 pt-016-9Nov2015.pdf

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 11 The CLA’s report on this inquiry, tabled in February 2016,® contained a series of recommendations about the parliament’s committee system. The report was bipartisan with government, opposition. Independent and cross bench members of the CLA all agreeing on the recommendations.

On 21 April 2016 the Premier, Hon Anastasia Palaszscuk introduced theConstitution of Queensiand and Other Legisiation Amendment Biii 2016. The bill sought to statutorily recognise the ‘core matters’ of the parliamentary committee system in theConstitution of Queensland 2001 (the Constitution)] and provide that the Parliament’s portfolio committees are able to initiate inquiries within their area of responsibility on their own motion.

The Bill amended the Constitution to provide that:

• The Legislative Assembly must at the commencement of every session establish at least six portfolio committees which collectively cover all areas of government activity; • every Bill introduced into the Assembly must be referred to a committee for a minimum review period of six weeks, but that the Assembly can declare a Bill urgent by ordinary majority under the Standing Rules and Orders of the Legislative Assembly; and • the annual Appropriation Bills must be subject to the budget estimates process.

The Bill also entrenched the Constitution, providing that it can no longer be amended by a bill passed without an absolute majority of members.

The Premier in introducing the bill stated:

Queensland’s parliamentary committee system has been an evolutionary process since the time of the Fitzgerald inquiry in the late 1980s. Indeed in his inquiry report Mr Fitzgerald outlined the need to consider introducing a comprehensive system of parliamentary committees in Queensland to enhance the ability of pariiament to monitor the efficiency of the government. Mr Fitzgerald went on to say that ‘the committees could examine the expenditure and administration of government departments and associated public bodies, as well as the policies they administer’ and ‘the useful roles they can play are varied and diverse’.

Queensland’s parliamentary committee system has evolved significantly since the Fitzgerald report. This has been especiaiiy the case since the reforms initiated in 2011, which have seen the vast majority of biils, with some notable exceptions under the former government, referred to committees for inquiry. In giving their support for fixed four-year terms, Queenslanders, in my view, rightly expect that there should be more certainty around the continued existence of the parliament’s powers, through its committee system, to scrutinise government activity and to hold the government of the day to account.

9 Report No. 17 of the Committee of the Legislative Assembly titled Review of the Parliamentary Committee System. hU[v//www.parliament.old.ttov.au/Documents/TableOffice/TabledPairers/2016/5516T248.pdf Record of Proceedings hnp ://www.[wliament.old.i:ov.au/documents/tableOffice/BillMaterial/160421/Constitution.pdf

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 12 Conclusion - overall outcomes and the work to do

It is submitted that the goals of the 2011 reforms have largely been successful. There can be no doubt that members are better informed, which is reflected in the debate in the Legislative Assembly. There is no doubt a more transparent and engaging decision making process for Queenslanders, including public servants. In some ways the committees are bringing the community and the Queensland Parliament closer.

The activity and outcomes detailed above clearly indicate the committees are undertaking the work expected and the Legislative Assembly is responding to the committees’ recommendations.

Significantly, the amendments in 2016 have finally moved towards a legal entrenchment of parliamentary committees. Perhaps more importantly, the work of the committees since 2011 and the large change-over in the membership since 2011, at both the 2012 and 2015 elections, have resulted in a “cultural” entrenchment of committees.

But we cannot rest on our laurels, work remains.

Unfortunately, the Constitutional entrenchment of portfolio committee review of legislation for at least six weeks has become a “default”, rather than a minimum. There have been examples where bills have been referred to portfolio committees for six weeks, only for those bills to languish on their return to the notice paper for more than six months. It is submitted that the ideal referral period for bills is 12 weeks.

An accidental victim to the legislative and financial roles of the portfolio committees and the surprising number of policy referrals has been neglect of the public accounts and public works powers. The frequency of bill inquiry referrais in the period after the portfolio committee system was introduced made it difficult for the portfolio committees to find the time to conduct pubiic accounts and public works inquiries. Now I am concerned that the paucity of such inquiries has engendered an avoidance of them by the committees. At the commencement of the system, I used to say “we do not have a public accounts committee, we have seven public accounts committees”. I made similar comments re public works committees. Now I do not comment. We need to better on this matter.

Finally, the ability of the Assembly to set aside the requirement of committee examination of bills (urgent bills) needs to be caveated by a requirement that it needs more than a simple majority. If a bill Is truly urgent, not simply politically expedient, then the government should need the support of more than its own members.

Moving towards the entrenchment of parliamentary committees Page 13 Attachment F - Statement of travel costs

The aggregate estimated costs of attendance for the Queensland delegation was $12,825.72