Page 3165 - Week 10 - Thursday, 16 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES - STANDING COMMITTEE
Report on Citizen's Right of Reply
Debate resumed from 26 August 1993, on motion by Mr Humphries:
That the report be noted.
MR DE DOMENICO (10.50): Madam Speaker, I rise to support the motion moved by Mr Humphries to endorse the recommendation of the Administration and Procedures Committee. As members know, I was a member of that committee until 23 March this year and did take part. It was on 2 December 1992 that the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedures resolved to inquire into and report on citizen's right of reply.
Madam Speaker, the Australian Senate has established a mechanism by which citizens can address allegations that have been made about them in the Senate. The resolution which provides this mechanism was passed by the Australian Senate in February 1988. It was one of 11 resolutions passed in relation to parliamentary privilege. Those resolutions covered a spectrum of issues, ranging from procedures for the protection of witnesses, the criteria relating to contempt, and the giving of precedence to a motion relating to privilege, matters constituting contempts, and protection of persons referred to in the Senate.
Of this package of resolutions, the First Assembly committee considered only that which related to the protection of persons, referred to in, I think, resolution No. 5 of the Senate. That prescribed a set of procedures by which a citizen can seek to have the President, and, in turn, the Committee of Privileges of the Senate, consider a submission which responds to comments made in the Senate in relation to that person. I believe that the Australian Senate is the only house that has adopted a formal mechanism. The ACT Legislative Assembly, if this motion is passed, will be the first State or Territory house to do so.
The committee has concluded that the potential benefits for the citizens that the Assembly serves outweigh the drawbacks that may exist in relation to the process. The committee, I understand, did consider some of the drawbacks that were described from time to time. I recall what happened in relation to Mr Gold and Mr Whalan. Any citizens who, in the future, believe that they have been hard done by in this place should have an opportunity of coming before us and expressing their concerns, at least in writing. For those reasons, Madam Speaker, I am quite happy to support the recommendation.
MR STEVENSON (10.52): I take the opportunity also to support the report. It is a valuable right for members of the public to be able to reply to allegations in this Assembly. I think the work that the Senate did initially was excellent. Indeed, the work that the members of the committee, past and present, did was also very good. I do not think a great deal needs to be said about this. One of the principles that we have in Australia is that people should have a right to reply to allegations. It may be that they cannot receive that right in the media; but, with the introduction of this principle via this motion, they will receive it in this Assembly. That would be a nice first for Australia at this level.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .