APR 2016-07 Winter Text FA2.Indd

Printer to adjust spine as necessary Australasian Parliamentary Review Parliamentary Australasian Australasian Parliamentary Review JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALASIAN STUDY OF PARLIAMENT GROUP Editor Colleen Lewis Modernising parliament for future generations AUTUMN/WINTER 2016 Minority government: a backbench and crossbench perspective Parliamentary committees connecting with the public • VOL 31 NO 1 31 VOL AUTUMN/WINTER 2016 • VOL 31 NO 1 • RRP $A35 AUSTRALASIAN STUDY OF PARLIAMENT GROUP (ASPG) AND THE AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW (APR) APR is the official journal of ASPG which was formed in 1978 for the purpose of encouraging and stimulating research, writing and teaching about parliamentary institutions in Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific Membership of the Australasian Study of (see back page for Notes to Contributors to the journal and details of AGPS membership, which includes a subscription to APR). To know more about the ASPG, including its Executive membership and its Chapters, Parliament Group go to www.aspg.org.au Australasian Parliamentary Review Membership Editor: Dr Colleen Lewis, [email protected] The ASPG provides an outstanding opportunity to establish links with others in the parliamentary community. Membership includes: Editorial Board • Subscription to the ASPG Journal Australasian Parliamentary Review; Dr Peter Aimer, University of Auckland Dr Paul Reynolds, Parliament of Queensland • Concessional rates for the ASPG Conference; and Dr David Clune, University of Sydney Kirsten Robinson, Parliament of Western Australia • Participation in local Chapter events. Dr Ken Coghill, Monash University Kevin Rozzoli, University of Sydney Rates for membership Prof. Brian Costar, Swinburne University of Technology Prof. Cheryl Saunders, University of Melbourne Dr Jennifer Curtin, University of Auckland Emeritus Prof. Marian Sawer, Australian Please contact the Treasurer/Secretary of the relevant Chapter for information on individual Dr Gareth Griffith, NSW Parliamentary Library National University and corporate membership fees. Prof. John Halligan, University of Canberra Emeritus Prof. Roger Scott, University of Queensland Assoc. Prof. Graham Hassall, Victoria University Prof. Marian Simms, Deakin University of Wellington Dr Robyn Smith, Parliament of the Northern Territory To join the Australasian Study of Parliament Group please contact the Treasurer of the Chapter Dr Richard Herr, University of Tasmania Dr Rodney Smith, University of Sydney you wish to join through the relevant Parliament and pay direct to the Chapter. Dr Michael Hogan, University of Sydney Dr David Solomon, Queensland Chapters are: Prof. Bryan Horrigan, Monash University Integrity Commissioner Prof. Helen Irving, University of Sydney Dr Katrin Steinack, University of Melbourne Australian Capital Territory covering the Australian and ACT Parliaments Dr Rosemary Laing, Australian Senate Dr Elaine Thompson, University of New Zealand New South Wales (retired) Dr Clement MacIntyre, University of Adelaide New South Wales Dr Isla Macphail, Parliament of Western Australia Wayne Tunnecliffe, Parliament of Victoria Northern Territory Prof. Elizabeth McLeay, Victoria University Ken Turner, University of Sydney Queensland of Wellington Prof. Anne Twomey, University of Sydney Assoc. Prof. Raymond Miller, University of Auckland Dr June Verrier, former Head Aust. Parlia mentary South Australia Dr Harry Phillips, Parliament of Western Australia Information & Research Services Tasmania Dr Stephen Redenbach, Parliament of Victoria Prof. George Williams, University of New South Wales Victoria Western Australia Acknowledgements The ASPG wishes to express its gratitude to the Department of the House of Representatives and the Department of the Senate for their generous support of the Group. 1 Australasian Parliamentary Review AUTUMN/WINTER 2016, VOL. 31, NO. 1 Table of Contents FROM YOUR EDITOR 3 From Your Editor 3 Colleen Lewis ARTICLES 7 Reviewing the Standing Orders—How to Make Dreams Come True 8 David Bagnall Guiding Principles for Modernising Parliament 26 Kennedy Graham How Well Do Parliamentary Committees Connect with the Public? 42 Martin Drum Petitioning the Australian Parliament: Reviving a Dying Democratic Tradition 60 Daniel Reynolds and George Williams Minority Government: Non-ministerial Members Speak about Governing and Democracy 80 Brenton Prosser and Richard Denniss Portfolios, Departments and Agencies: Tinkering with the Machinery-of-Government Map 98 Roger Wettenhall AM These papers have been double blind reviewed to academic standards. AUTUMN/WINTER 2016 • VOL. 31 NO. 1 2 Electoral Reform and Party System Volatility: The Consequences of the Group Vote Ticket on Australian Senate Elections 117 Nick Economou The New South Wales Legislative Council’s Oral History Project 131 David Blunt and Alexander Stedman CHRONICLES 139 From the Tables 140 Liz Kerr NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS 147 These papers have been double blind reviewed to academic standards. © Australasian Study of Parliament Group. Requests for permission to reproduce material from the Australasian Parliamentary Review should be directed to the Editor. ISSN 1447–9125 Edited by Dr Colleen Lewis, Adjunct Professor, National Centre for Australian Studies, Monash University. Designed and typeset by Keep Creative, Canberra. Printed by Instant Colour Press AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW From Your Editor 3 From Your Editor Colleen Lewis I am writing this as Australia prepares to elect a new federal government. Regardless of the outcome of the election in the House of Representatives and Senate, many of the issues raised in this edition of Australasian Parliamentary Review (and in previous editions) are relevant to the efficient and effective running of parliament, including its legislative and representative functions, and on the community’s perception of parliament and members of parliament (MPs). Contributors to this edition have examined several matters that are highly pertinent to all Australian parliaments, the New Zealand parliament and other parliaments in the democratic world. These include: modernising parliament; standing orders; petitions; and electoral reform. Some articles use interviews with former parliamentarians to better inform our understanding of how parliaments work in practice. The first three papers relate to the Australasian Study of Parliament Group’s (ASPG) conference “Modernising Parliament: Rethinking parliament for the next generation”, held in New Zealand in 2015. David Bagnall, Principal Clerk (Procedure) in the House of Representatives, New Zealand, examines standing orders and the work of the standing orders committee. He makes the important point ‘that only parliament can modernize parliament’. Because of this reality, Bagnall advocates creating opportunities for MPs to work together to achieve meaningful reform, which includes the ‘need to consider how to connect the House with today’s rapidly changing world’. Dr Kennedy Graham, a member of the New Zealand Parliament addresses, among other things, the need for greater innovation in the running of parliament, achieving an appropriate balance between the three primary functions of parliament, establishing a prescriptive code of conduct for MPs, issues pertaining to international relations and the need for New Zealand to establish a formal constitutional framework. Two consistent themes underpin the arguments raised in this paper: responsibility and integrity. Associate Professor Martin Drum’s particular interest is in ‘how well parliamentary committees connect with the public’. Drum points to the unifying nature of parliamentary committees, which despite the adversarial environment of parliament often bring together opposing sides of politics to formulate effective policy. While AUTUMN/WINTER 2016 • VOL. 31 NO. 1 4 Colleen Lewis acknowledging that the deliberations of a committee may not always translate into policy implementation, Drum explains that the information gleaned from the committee process often informs parliamentary debates. His article is particularly concerned about improving the relationship between parliamentary committees and the public. Drawing on a pilot study of Western Australian parliamentary committees, Drum examines the methods used by committees to engage the public in the committee process and asks whether they could be improved so as to encapsulate more diverse points of view. The other articles in this edition of APR are not based on presentations delivered at the 2015 conference, rather they reflect contributors’ interests in particular aspects of parliament and parliamentary processes. The article “Petitioning the Australian Parliament: Reviving a Dying Democratic Tradition”, authored by Daniel Reynolds (researcher at the Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, University of New South Wales (NSW) and Professor George Williams, Dean, Faculty of Law, University of NSW), notes that the right to petition parliament is an old tradition designed to allow people to bring their concerns ‘directly before parliament for consideration and debate’. Despite this avenue for input, petitioning has not been commonly used in the Australian federal parliament. Reforms implemented in 2008 to improve the petitioning process included the creation of a petitions committee, accompanied by the expectation that ministers would ‘respond to petitions within 90 days’. This desirable outcome has not always been achieved. Reynolds and Williams argue that overseas jurisdictions and several Australian

Load more