Page 1961 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 5 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There are a number of options when it comes to developing a lobbying register. The first issue is whether it should be legislated or not legislated. Obviously this path today is a version that is not legislated. Instead, it will take the form of a register with accompanying guidelines for lobbyists and public officials. That is probably right at this stage. Given the history in the ACT, which both Mr Hanson and Ms Gallagher have spoken to, it is right to start off with this style of approach. If we find down the line that it needs a stronger basis or a further basis then that is something we can evolve the system to. I think at this stage the approach that is being proposed is a good starting point.
One of the other areas of discussion, the second key area I intended to touch on, is whether it should apply to all members of the Assembly or just the executive. This was certainly something that had some discussion in the committee. I am of the view that, while in some parliaments provisions may only apply to the executive, in reality the size of the Assembly and the size of this town perhaps means that all members of the Assembly and their officials are susceptible to lobbying and can easily find themselves in a position where people seek to influence them. So in that context I think it is quite appropriate.
Stephen Skehill supports that there is a strong case that any lobbyist register should cover both the executive and the non-executive. Whilst the executive performs the day-to-day functions of government, non-executive members engage in activities that lobbyists may be keen to exercise some influence over. They vote in the chamber, they participate in committees, they raise questions of the government and, of course, they formulate policies that they take to the next election.
In addition to all of the generic issues we need to also consider the history of the ACT Legislative Assembly. Given the fact that, bar the Sixth Assembly, there has never been a majority government in this place, we have had a strong tradition in the Assembly of private members being able to pass motions and legislation. I think this moves us into a slightly different category as well where we are simply saying that it is only the executive that has the ability to influence a range of important matters. It does not tell the full story of the ACT Legislative Assembly. So for me that is a key issue. The nature of this Assembly means that all members should be included and I am pleased that that is the version that is being brought forward.
One of the other questions we need to consider in establishing such an approach is: who constitutes a lobbyist? In other regimes, a lobbyist register has only ever covered third-party lobbyists who are paid by the client they are representing. This is what is being proposed here in the ACT. For me, this issue raises questions about the effectiveness of a regime such as this in the territory. In my own experience, I am quite certain that I can count on one hand the number of times I have been lobbied by a paid third-party lobbyist. Again, we had some discussion about this in the committee and, while some other members had slightly more extensive experience, we agreed that there were very few recognised paid lobbyists in town. Most often, we are approached directly by a representative of a company, a non-government organisation or even a community group.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video