Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 5 Hansard (2 May) . . Page.. 1337 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

Mr Speaker, the obligation for all MLAs to submit an annual return would also replace the current arrangements whereby MLAs submit financial details for inclusion in the Register of Members' Interests held by the Clerk of the Assembly. Annual returns submitted by MLAs would be available for conditional public inspection. Anyone wishing to see an annual return would be required to provide proof of identity to the Electoral Commissioner, and the identity of anyone looking at an annual return would have to be passed on to the MLA concerned. The requirement to submit these detailed annual returns would impose a legal obligation on all MLAs that currently does not apply. Failure to comply with that obligation would be subject to a penalty of 20 units, currently $2,000.

Mr Speaker, in the government's view Ms Tucker's bill has several flaws, both in policy terms and in items of detail. While there is some merit in treating the disclosure obligations of all MLAs equally, the measures contained in this bill are both onerous and inconsistent with the disclosure provisions applied to political parties.

The government does not consider that the stated purpose behind this bill-essentially the public's right to know whether MLAs have any conflict of interest arising from gifts received or other financial interests-justifies the high level of disclosure required. While most of the requirements set out in this bill are intended to replace the current requirements in respect of the declarations of the private interests of members provided by MLAs to the Clerk of the Assembly in accordance with a resolution of the Assembly, elevating them to a legislative level with pecuniary penalties attached significantly changes the nature of the disclosure.

The government is of the view that it is not appropriate under the Westminster model for the Electoral Commissioner and the courts to oversee the disclosure of MLAs' detailed financial interests, as it is more appropriate for the Assembly to regulate the ethical behaviour of its members, and as the increased disclosure proposed would extend the responsibility of the Electoral Commissioner beyond matters related to elections.

Mr Speaker, the government does not consider it is appropriate to apply legislative penalties for failure to comply with the reporting requirements set out in the bill. The reporting requirements are detailed and complex, and it would not be appropriate to pursue MLAs through the court for failure to comply with what may be a relatively trivial breach. It would be more appropriate for MLAs to face censure in the Assembly for failure to comply with the existing requirements to make declarations of the private interests of members.

The provisions in the bill that would require persons viewing MLAs returns to identify themselves to the Electoral Commissioner and that would require the commissioner to make those persons' identities known to the MLA concerned would be inconsistent with other disclosure provisions in the Electoral Act. All other disclosure returns are freely made available to the public with no conditions attached. The most common form of access to existing electoral disclosure returns is through the Internet. This would not be possible under the scheme set out in this bill. Imposing these conditions on MLAs' returns could be seen as a restriction on the free communication of information legitimately on public display and could arguably be seen as a form of intimidation.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .