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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 04 Hansard (Tuesday, 30 March 2004) . . Page.. 1248 ..

The particular assignment of the committee was to resolve whether Mrs Dunne’s conduct amounted to an improper interference with the free exercise by the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment of its authority or functions or with the free performance by a member of his or her duties as a member under the Parliamentary Privileges Act. To do so, the privileges committee studied the speeches made by members of the planning committee in referring this matter and obtained evidence from all members of that committee as well as information from the staff.

The members of the planning committee, other than the chair, Mrs Dunne, felt that the committee had to take some action so that the inquiry could be continued unimpeded by perceptions of bias and committee members were concerned that the community would believe that the investigations of their committee had a predetermined outcome. Mrs Dunne indicated to the privileges committee that she thought the flyer could be seen by some as implying that it was an official statement which could have carried the implication that the committee might have already made up its mind, but Mrs Dunne felt that the matter hung substantially on the question of intent.

The privileges committee looked particularly at this question and the evidence and did conclude that, although Mrs Dunne may have confused her role as an individual representative from Ginninderra and the chair of the committee, the intent clearly was to produce a particular outcome for her committee’s inquiry, that intent clearly determined by the words of the pamphlet or the brochure, and the recommendations of the committee reflect this conclusion.

Basically, the committee did find that the production of this brochure was in contempt. We did not recommend that any further action be taken because we were of the view that the whole process of a contempt inquiry is in itself an action, a penalty. It is a public examination of the performance of the member and a finding of contempt itself is obviously something that can be regarded as undesirable for any member. We believe that this process in itself was adequate to deal with the matter.

But the committee certainly was of the view that it was a wake-up call for everyone in this place, that it is very important for members to understand and distinguish between their roles as members and their roles on committees. We have recommended that there be some form of continuing professional development in parliamentary procedures and conventions and that it be introduced for members in addition to the new members seminar.

The recommendation is for continuing professional development for all members, in fact, because the pressure of the work here can mean that not enough time is taken by members to understand the conventions and procedures of parliament. While we have occasional opportunities through Commonwealth Parliamentary Association work, on the whole it just does not happen. That does not apply just to new members. For example, members who have been in government and who then go into opposition and who have never really experienced committee work would be equally vulnerable to these misunderstandings. So it is really important that we do have support for members and their staff to understand these conventions.

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