DOCSLIB.ORG

Disorderly Conduct in the House of Representatives from 1901 to 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Disorderly Conduct in the House of Representatives from 1901 to 2013 RESEARCH PAPER, 2013–14 11 DECEMBER 2013 ‘That’s it, you’re out’: disorderly conduct in the House of Representatives from 1901 to 2013 Rob Lundie Politics and Public Administration Executive summary • Of the 1,093 members who have served in the House of Representatives from 1901 to the end of the 43rd Parliament in August 2013, 300 (27.4%) have been named and/or suspended or ‘sin binned’ for disorderly behaviour in the Chamber. This study outlines the bases of the House’s authority to deal with disorderly behaviour, and the procedures available to the Speaker to act on such behaviour. It then analyses the 1,352 instances of disorderly behaviour identified in the official Hansard record with a view to identifying patterns over time, and the extent and degree of such behaviour. It does not attempt to identify the reasons why disorderly behaviour occurs as they are quite complex and beyond the scope of this paper. • The authority for the rules of conduct in the House of Representatives is derived from the Australian Constitution. The members themselves have broad responsibility for their behaviour in the House. However, it is the role of the Speaker or the occupier of the Chair to ensure that order is maintained during parliamentary proceedings. This responsibility is derived from the standing orders. Since its introduction in 1994, the ‘sin bin’ has become the disciplinary action of choice for Speakers. • With the number of namings and suspensions decreasing in recent years, the ‘sin bin’ (being ordered from the chamber for one hour) appears to have been successful in avoiding the disruption caused by the naming and suspension procedure. However, as the number of ‘sin bin’ sanctions has increased, it may be that this penalty has contributed to greater disorder because members may view it as little more than a slap on the wrist and of little deterrent value. • Most disorderly behavior (90%) occurs during Question Time and in the parliamentary proceedings which often take place during or just after it. Such behaviour also tends to increase daily as the sitting week progresses. • Front benchers and parliamentary office holders account for about 57% of instances of disorderly behaviour. Opposition members are sanctioned 90% of the time no matter which party occupies that role. No prime minister has been sanctioned for disorderly behaviour but two deputy prime ministers and seven opposition leaders have, although not all have been ordered from the House. Christopher Pyne leads the list of members most disciplined on 45 followed by Anthony Albanese on 34. Women members have accounted for 15% of disciplinary actions since they first entered Parliament in 1943. • Members were disciplined most frequently under the Speakership of Peter Slipper followed by Anna Burke, David Hawker and Harry Jenkins. • On four measures of disorderly behaviour (number of disciplinary actions, number of sitting weeks in which a member was disciplined, number of days when four or more members were disciplined, number of different members disciplined), the Rudd/Gillard Parliaments (42nd and 43rd, 2008–2013) were more disorderly than the Howard Parliaments (38th to 41st, 1996–2007). The most disorderly Parliament was the 43rd. ISSN 1834-9854 Contents Executive summary ..................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 4 Authority of the House and the Speaker to manage disorderly behaviour ..... 4 The Constitution ................................................................................................. 4 Powers of the Speaker ........................................................................................ 4 Categories of Disorderly Conduct ................................................................. 5 Gross disorder by a member .............................................................................. 5 Grave disorder in the House ............................................................................... 5 Disorder in the Federation Chamber/Main Committee ................................. 6 Penalties for Disorderly Conduct .................................................................. 7 Matter not proceeded ........................................................................................ 7 Expulsion............................................................................................................. 8 Naming and Suspension ..................................................................................... 8 Suspension by resolution of the House .............................................................. 9 Directed to withdraw from the Chamber for one hour (‘Sin Bin’) ................... 10 Effectiveness of the sanctions on disorderly behaviour in maintaining order 11 Periods spent out of the Chamber ............................................................... 13 Removal from the Chamber by the Serjeant-at-Arms ...................................... 14 Reasons for disciplinary actions .................................................................. 14 Patterns of disciplinary action ..................................................................... 15 When disorder most occurs ............................................................................. 15 Disciplinary actions across the sitting fortnight ............................................. 15 Who receives disciplinary action for disorderly behaviour ............................ 15 Number and list of members disciplined ......................................................... 15 Disciplinary actions by gender .......................................................................... 17 Disciplinary actions against parties in Government and Opposition ............... 18 Position/office of members disciplined ............................................................ 19 Disciplinary actions against members by each State and Territory ................. 20 External factors which may affect disorderly behaviour ............................... 20 Televising of Parliament ................................................................................... 20 Relocation of Parliament .................................................................................. 21 Size of the House of Representatives ............................................................... 21 Role of the Speaker .................................................................................... 21 Extent and degree of disorderly conduct ..................................................... 22 Disorderly conduct by Parliament .................................................................... 23 Frequency with which disciplinary actions were taken against members ....... 25 Concentration of disorderly conduct ................................................................ 26 Most Disorderly Parliament ........................................................................ 26 Appendix A: Standing Orders relating to the disciplining of Members of the House of Representatives ........................................................................... 29 Appendix B: Removal from the Chamber by the Serjeant-at-Arms ................ 35 ‘That’s it, you’re out’: disorderly conduct in the House of Representatives from 1901 to 2013 2 Appendix C: Number (%) of disciplinary actions by weekday ........................ 36 Appendix D: Comparison of disciplinary actions taken in the first and second weeks of a sitting fortnight, 1990–2013 ....................................................... 37 Appendix E: Members listed by the type and number of disciplinary actions taken against them ..................................................................................... 38 Appendix F: Proportion of disciplinary actions by state and territory compared to the proportion of seats ........................................................... 45 Appendix G: Disciplinary actions by Speakership ......................................... 45 Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Cathy Madden, Deirdre McKeown, Mary Anne Neilsen, Peter Fowler and Leo Terpstra for providing constructive and very useful feedback on this paper. Thanks also to Jessica Butler, Penny Branson, Peter Branson, Sharon Bryant, Catherine Cornish, Naomi Swann and Susan Dinon from the Chamber Research Office who were always willing to verify and clarify the information upon which this paper is based. Thanks to Maryanne Lawless for negotiating the intricacies involved in the presentation of this publication. A special thank you to Donald Giorgio for his patient and expert statistical advice which made the analysis of the data so much easier than it would otherwise have been. ‘That’s it, you’re out’: disorderly conduct in the House of Representatives from 1901 to 2013 3 Introduction From 1901 to the end of the 43rd Parliament in August 2013, 300 different members and two senators have been disorderly enough during proceedings of the House of Representatives as to result in disciplinary action1 by the Speaker.2 This study outlines the bases of the House’s authority to deal with disorderly behaviour, and the procedures available to the Speaker to act on such behaviour. It then analyses the 1,352 instances of disorderly behaviour recorded in Hansard with a view to identifying patterns over time, the extent and degree of disorderly behaviour, and answering questions such
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BBC Guide to Parliament (Updated to 2021)
    BBC Guide to Parliament (Updated to 2021) There has been a parliament at Westminster since the 13th Century. Today it remains the centre of British government, boasting a colourful history and frequently adding new chapters. Parliament is the place where politicians meet to decide laws and make decisions on running the UK, although some issues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are now dealt with by their respective parliaments and assemblies. Decisions on setting taxes to fund the government's policies are also FACT: MPs and made in Parliament. Lords do not refer to The business of Parliament takes place in two "houses": the elected each other's debating chambers House of Commons and the House of Lords, whose members are by name - instead mostly appointed. they refer to "the Their work is similar: making laws (legislation), checking the work of other place”. the government (scrutiny), and debating current issues. Generally, the decisions made in one house have to be approved by the other, but the Commons is by far the more powerful of the two chambers. No longer 646; now 650 Now between 700 - 800 Term Definition Minister Backbencher Whip Crossbencher Law Lord Opposition Shadow Government The government is normally formed by the leader of the party that wins the most seats in the general election. If the party wins an overall majority (more than half – i.e. at least 326) of the seats, the government will comprise some of the elected members belonging to that party - and possibly some of its members in the House of Lords. If the leading party does not have an overall majority, its leader may have to approach other parties to enable it to form a minority government (Recent example: in 2017 Theresa May’s minority government was supported for 2 years by the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) from N.Ireland) or form a coalition and allow the coalition partners to have representation in the government( e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • A Diachronic Study of Unparliamentary Language in the New Zealand Parliament, 1890-1950
    WITHDRAW AND APOLOGISE: A DIACHRONIC STUDY OF UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE IN THE NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT, 1890-1950 BY RUTH GRAHAM A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Applied Linguistics Victoria University of Wellington 2016 ii “Parliament, after all, is not a Sunday school; it is a talking-shop; a place of debate”. (Barnard, 1943) iii Abstract This study presents a diachronic analysis of the language ruled to be unparliamentary in the New Zealand Parliament from 1890 to 1950. While unparliamentary language is sometimes referred to as ‘parliamentary insults’ (Ilie, 2001), this study has a wider definition: the language used in a legislative chamber is unparliamentary when it is ruled or signalled by the Speaker as out of order or likely to cause disorder. The user is required to articulate a statement of withdrawal and apology or risk further censure. The analysis uses the Communities of Practice theoretical framework, developed by Wenger (1998) and enhanced with linguistic impoliteness, as defined by Mills (2005) in order to contextualise the use of unparliamentary language within a highly regulated institutional setting. The study identifies and categorises the lexis of unparliamentary language, including a focus on examples that use New Zealand English or te reo Māori. Approximately 2600 examples of unparliamentary language, along with bibliographic, lexical, descriptive and contextual information, were entered into a custom designed relational database. The examples were categorised into three: ‘core concepts’, ‘personal reflections’ and the ‘political environment’, with a number of sub-categories. This revealed a previously unknown category of ‘situation dependent’ unparliamentary language and a creative use of ‘animal reflections’.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Representation and Reform in the House of Lords
    Our House: Reflections on Representation and Reform in the House of Lords Edited by Caroline Julian About ResPublica ResPublica is an independent, non-partisan UK think tank founded by Phillip Blond in November 2009. In July 2011, the ResPublica Trust was established as a not-for-profit entity which oversees all of ResPublica’s domestic work. We focus on developing practical solutions to enduring socio-economic and cultural problems of our time, such as poverty, asset inequality, family and social breakdown, and environmental degradation. ResPublica Essay Collections ResPublica’s work draws together some of the most exciting thinkers in the UK and internationally to explore the new polices and approaches that will create and deliver a new political settlement. Our network of contributors who advise on and inform our work include leaders from politics, business, civil society and academia. Through our publications, compendiums and website we encourage other thinkers, politicians and members of the public to join the debate and contribute to the development of forward-thinking and innovative ideas. We intend our essay collections to stimulate balanced debate around issues that are fundamental to our core principles. Contents Foreword by Professor John Milbank and Professor Simon Lee, Trustees, 1 The ResPublica Trust 1. Introduction 4 Caroline Julian, ResPublica 2. A Statement from the Government 9 Mark Harper MP, Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform A Social Purpose 3. A Truly Representative House of Lords 13 The Rt Hon Frank Field, MP for Birkenhead 4. Association and Civic Participation 16 Dr Adrian Pabst, University of Kent 5. Bicameralism & Representative Democracy: An International Perspective 23 Rafal Heydel-Mankoo 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance of Power Senate Projections, Spring 2018
    Balance of power Senate projections, Spring 2018 The Australia Institute conducts a quarterly poll of Senate voting intention. Our analysis shows that major parties should expect the crossbench to remain large and diverse for the foreseeable future. Senate projections series, no. 2 Bill Browne November 2018 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. We barrack for ideas, not political parties or candidates. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining. Environmental neglect continues despite heightened ecological awareness. A better balance is urgently needed. The Australia Institute’s directors, staff and supporters represent a broad range of views and priorities. What unites us is a belief that through a combination of research and creativity we can promote new solutions and ways of thinking. OUR PURPOSE – ‘RESEARCH THAT MATTERS’ The Institute publishes research that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful society. Our goal is to gather, interpret and communicate evidence in order to both diagnose the problems we face and propose new solutions to tackle them. The Institute is wholly independent and not affiliated with any other organisation. Donations to its Research Fund are tax deductible for the donor.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Redistribution of Victoria Into Electoral Divisions: April 2017
    Proposed redistribution of Victoria into electoral divisions APRIL 2018 Report of the Redistribution Committee for Victoria Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 Feedback and enquiries Feedback on this report is welcome and should be directed to the contact officer. Contact officer National Redistributions Manager Roll Management and Community Engagement Branch Australian Electoral Commission 50 Marcus Clarke Street Canberra ACT 2600 Locked Bag 4007 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone: 02 6271 4411 Fax: 02 6215 9999 Email: [email protected] AEC website www.aec.gov.au Accessible services Visit the AEC website for telephone interpreter services in other languages. Readers who are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment can contact the AEC through the National Relay Service (NRS): – TTY users phone 133 677 and ask for 13 23 26 – Speak and Listen users phone 1300 555 727 and ask for 13 23 26 – Internet relay users connect to the NRS and ask for 13 23 26 ISBN: 978-1-921427-58-9 © Commonwealth of Australia 2018 © Victoria 2018 The report should be cited as Redistribution Committee for Victoria, Proposed redistribution of Victoria into electoral divisions. 18_0990 The Redistribution Committee for Victoria (the Redistribution Committee) has undertaken a proposed redistribution of Victoria. In developing the redistribution proposal, the Redistribution Committee has satisfied itself that the proposed electoral divisions meet the requirements of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act). The Redistribution Committee commends its redistribution
    [Show full text]
  • The Most Vitriolic Parliament
    THE MOST VITRIOLIC PARLIAMENT EVIDENCE OF THE VITRIOLIC NATURE OF THE 43 RD PARLIAMENT AND POTENTIAL CAUSES Nicolas Adams, 321 382 For Master of Arts (Research), June 2016 The University of Melbourne, School of Social and Political Sciences Supervisors: Prof. John Murphy, Dr. Scott Brenton i Abstract It has been suggested that the period of the Gillard government was the most vitriolic in recent political history. This impression has been formed by many commentators and actors, however very little quantitative data exists which either confirms or disproves this theory. Utilising an analysis of standing orders within the House of Representatives it was found that a relatively fair case can be made that the 43rd parliament was more vitriolic than any in the preceding two decades. This period in the data, however, was trumped by the first year of the Abbott government. Along with this conclusion the data showed that the cause of the vitriol during this period could not be narrowed to one specific driver. It can be seen that issues such as the minority government, style of opposition, gender and even to a certain extent the speakership would have all contributed to any mutation of the tone of debate. ii Declaration I declare that this thesis contains only my original work towards my Masters of Arts (Research) except where due acknowledgement has been made in the text to other material used. Equally this thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit as approved by the Research Higher Degrees Committee. iii Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge my two supervisors, Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    PARLIAMENT OF VICTORIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FIFTY-FIFTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION Tuesday, 12 September 2006 (Extract from book 12) Internet: www.parliament.vic.gov.au/downloadhansard By authority of the Victorian Government Printer The Governor Professor DAVID de KRETSER, AC The Lieutenant-Governor The Honourable Justice MARILYN WARREN, AC The ministry Premier and Minister for Multicultural Affairs ....................... The Hon. S. P. Bracks, MP Deputy Premier, Minister for Environment, Minister for Water and Minister for Victorian Communities.............................. The Hon. J. W. Thwaites, MP Minister for Finance, Minister for Major Projects and Minister for WorkCover and the TAC............................ The Hon. J. Lenders, MLC Minister for Education Services and Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs................................................. The Hon. J. M. Allan, MP Minister for Transport............................................ The Hon. P. Batchelor, MP Minister for Local Government and Minister for Housing.............. The Hon. C. C. Broad, MLC Treasurer, Minister for Innovation and Minister for State and Regional Development......................................... The Hon. J. M. Brumby, MP Minister for Agriculture........................................... The Hon. R. G. Cameron, MP Minister for the Arts and Minister for Women’s Affairs................ The Hon. M. E. Delahunty, MP Minister for Community Services and Minister for Children............ The Hon. S. M. Garbutt,
    [Show full text]
  • JOSEPH MAX BERINSON B1932
    THE LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA J S BATTYE LIBRARY OF WEST AUSTRALIAN HISTORY Oral History Collection & THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT PARLIAMENTARY ORAL HISTORY PROJECT Transcript of an interview with JOSEPH MAX BERINSON b1932 Access Research: Restricted until 1 January 2005 Publication: Restricted until 1 January 2005 Reference number 0H3102 Date of Interview 14 July 1993-7 July 1994 Interviewer Erica Harvey Duration 12 x 60 minute tapes Copyright Library Board of Western Australia The Library Board of WA 3 1111 02235314 6 INTRODUCTION This is an interview with Joseph (Joe) Berinson for the Battye Library and the Parliamentary Oral History Project. Joe Berinson was born to Sam Berinson and Rebecca Finklestein on 7 January 1932 in Highgate, Western Australia. He was educated at Highgate Primary School and Perth Modern School before gaining a Diploma of Pharmacy from the University of Western Australia in 1953. Later in life Mr Berinson undertook legal studies and was admitted to the WA Bar. He married Jeanette Bekhor in September 1958 and the couple have one son and three daughters Joining the ALP in 1953, Mr Berinson was an MHR in the Commonwealth Parliament from October 1969 to December 1975, where his service included Minister for the Environment from July to November 1975. In May 1980 he became an MLC in the Western Australian Parliament, where he remained until May 1989. Mr Berinson undertook many roles during his time in State Parliament, including serving as Attorney General from September 1981 to April 1983. The interview covers Mr Berinson's early family life and schooling, the migration of family members to Western Australia, and the influence and assistance of the Jewish community.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Representatives By-Elections 1902-2002
    INFORMATION, ANALYSIS AND ADVICE FOR THE PARLIAMENT INFORMATION AND RESEARCH SERVICES Current Issues Brief No. 15 2002–03 House of Representatives By-elections 1901–2002 DEPARTMENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY ISSN 1440-2009 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 2003 Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means including information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior written consent of the Department of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties. This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the paper is written using information publicly available at the time of production. The views expressed are those of the author and should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services (IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an official parliamentary or Australian government document. IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with members of the public. Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 2003 I NFORMATION AND R ESEARCH S ERVICES Current Issues Brief No. 15 2002–03 House of Representatives By-elections 1901–2002 Gerard Newman, Statistics Group Scott Bennett, Politics and Public Administration Group 3 March 2003 Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Murray Goot, Martin Lumb, Geoff Winter, Jan Pearson, Janet Wilson and Diane Hynes in producing this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Canberra Press Gallery: Life in the Wedding Cake of Old
    INSIDE the CANBERRA PRESS GALLERY Life in the Wedding Cake of Old Parliament House INSIDE the CANBERRA PRESS GALLERY Life in the Wedding Cake of Old Parliament House Rob Chalmers Edited by Sam Vincent and John Wanna THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY E PRESS E PRESS Published by ANU E Press The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at: http://epress.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Author: Chalmers, Rob, 1929-2011 Title: Inside the Canberra press gallery : life in the wedding cake of Old Parliament House / Rob Chalmers ; edited by Sam Vincent and John Wanna. ISBN: 9781921862366 (pbk.) 9781921862373 (ebook) Notes: Includes bibliographical references and index. Subjects: Australia. Parliament--Reporters and Government and the press--Australia. Journalism--Political aspects-- Press and politics--Australia. Other Authors/Contributors: Vincent, Sam. Wanna, John. Dewey Number: 070.4493240994 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU E Press Back cover image courtesy of Heide Smith Printed by Griffin Press This edition © 2011 ANU E Press Contents Acknowledgments . vii Foreword . ix Preface . xi 1 . Youth . 1 2 . A Journo in Sydney . 9 3 . Inside the Canberra Press Gallery . 17 4 . Menzies: The giant of Australian politics . 35 5 . Ming’s Men . 53 6 . Parliament Disgraced by its Members . 71 7 . Booze, Sex and God .
    [Show full text]
  • PM Will Rue Yet Another Bad Call
    PM will rue yet another bad call BY:DENNIS SHANAHAN, POLITICAL EDITOR From: The Australian October 10, 2012 12:00AM PETER Slipper has demonstrated better political judgment in apologising for his actions and resigning as Speaker than Julia Gillard has in digging in to defend him. Only hours after the Prime Minister voted to keep him in the chair and launched a ferocious personal attack on Tony Abbott for misogyny, she sat as a stony witness to Slipper's tearful resignation for the same failing and degradation of women. Rather than taking the initiative and leaving Slipper to fall on his sword, Labor went to full- blooded battle and tried to make political gains in its obsessive war on the Liberal leader. When it was obvious to everyone that the new trove of degrading sexual texts unearthed in court meant Slipper's career was over and that Labor should take the lead in his removal to justify its high moral stance on sexism and denigration of women, the Prime Minister dug in. Labor's defence of Slipper involved an offensive launched against Abbott as being as bad as the Speaker when it came to attitudes towards women. Although there was no moral equivalence with Slipper's sex texts to his adviser and jokes about jars of "pickled c . ts" and an ignorant bitch of an MP, Anthony Albanese and Gillard threw the allegations against Abbott to deflect the Coalition's efforts to remove the Speaker. Blind to public concern and outrage, Labor tried to hold on to Slipper to back its brilliant coup last year in getting him to defect and keep that precious one-seat buffer it lost when Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie dropped his guaranteed support after being dudded on a deal over limiting poker machines.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Annual Report.Pub
    Field and Game Australia Annual Report 2011-12 guide to annual report This is the annual report of Field and Game Australia Inc, for the year ending June 30, 2012. The report provides information for the board, branches and stakeholders of Field and Game Australia about the organisation’s operations and performance. Field and Game Australia can not be held liable for any printing errors in this document. inside Part 1 contains an address from FGA Chairman Mr Bill Paterson and FGA contents CEO Mr Rod Drew. Part 2 gives a description of the organisation’s values, stakeholders, Chairman’s Address ...... 4 patrons, life members and management structure, as well as significant appointments and sub-committees. Part 3 details FGA’s membership statistics from this year and in CEO’s Address ...... 6 comparison to other years figures. Part 4 reports on the organisation’s achievements and performance and outlines the challenges that lay ahead. About FGA ...... 8 Part 5 recognises the achievements of various members and branches who have contributed to the overall success of the organisation. Membership ...... 11 Part 6 contains the audited financial report for the 2011-12 financial year. Part 7 reports on the game management sector, including game management, pest and vermin, and waterfowl count data. Partnerships ...... 12 Part 8 includes target participation figures and reports and results from the 2011 National Carnival. Part 9 reports on the progress of the WET Trust. Highlights ...... 13 acknowledgements FGA Awards ...... 15 Front cover image: Stockvault Contributors: Alison O’Connor, Shelley Gough, Tom Chick, Bill Paterson, Peter Rice, Noreen Sloan, Rod Drew, Rob Treble.
    [Show full text]