Referral of the inquiry
46th Parliament
1.1
In February 2022, in response to Recommendation 21 of Set the Standard: Report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces (Set the Standard report) the House of Representatives and the Senate established the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards (committee). The committee was tasked with conducting an inquiry into the development of codes of conduct for Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces (CPWs).
1.2
In the period between the appointment of committee members and the dissolution of the House of Representatives in April 2022 (at which time the committee ceased to exist), the committee agreed to call for submissions to the inquiry (with the expectation that the committee would be re-established in the 47th Parliament).
47th Parliament
1.3
At the commencement of the 47th Parliament, the committee was appointed by resolution of the House of Representatives (on 26 July 2022) and the Senate (on 27 July 2022). The committee was re-established to inquire into, and report on, matters relating to the development of codes of conduct for Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces. The terms of reference for the inquiry were the same as those that had been referred to the committee in the previous parliament.
Committee resolution
1.4
The resolution for the establishment of the committee in the 47th Parliament was as follows:
That a Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards be established to inquire into and report on matters relating to the development of codes of conduct for Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces.
Terms of reference
1.5
In conducting its inquiry, the committee was given the following terms of reference:
(a)
develop a code or codes of conduct for Commonwealth parliamentarians, parliamentary staff, and parliamentary workplaces to ensure safe and respectful behaviour;
(i)
equivalent codes of conduct in other, particularly Westminster, parliamentary systems;
(ii)
how any proposed code can prevent bullying, harassment, sexual harassment and sexual assault;
(iii)
reasonable expectations of respectful and professional behaviour;
(iv)
the views of Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplace occupants, in particular staff employed under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984, parliamentarians, and other workers in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces;
(v)
the applicability and enforcement of any proposed code in relation to other legislation, including statutory obligations under relevant workplace and anti‑discrimination legislation;
(vi)
the findings and recommendations of the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Review, Set the Standard: Report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces;
(vii)
the terms under which an alleged breach of any proposed code may be referred for review;
(viii)
appropriate appeal mechanisms for findings made under any proposed code; and
(ix)
the context of any enforcement body established by the Parliament;
(c)
recommend options for:
(i)
the enforcement of any proposed code; and
(ii)
mechanisms for reviewing the operation of any proposed code; and
(d)
consider any other related matter.
1.6
The reporting date for the inquiry was 1 November 2022. By resolution of the Senate (on 7 September 2022) and resolution of the House of Representatives (on 8 September 2022), the reporting date was extended to no later than 1 December 2022.
Conduct of the inquiry
Stakeholder consultation
1.8
During the initial stages of the inquiry, the committee considered the sensitive nature of the issues under discussion and acknowledged that the implementation of proposed behaviour codes would have an impact on all stakeholders. The committee recognised that broad support of the codes across the Parliament was necessary to ensure that proposed codes of conduct help drive long term cultural change in CPWs. It was agreed, therefore, that it would be essential to provide stakeholders with an appropriate level of information, consult with as many members of CPWs as possible, and seek evidence from a wide range of stakeholders.
1.9
The committee was mindful of the difficulties some witnesses may have in providing evidence to a parliamentary committee. It was also aware that parliamentary inquiries are required to maintain an appropriate level of transparency. Processes were therefore put in place to ensure that witnesses felt comfortable in sharing their views and their feedback, and were supported throughout that process. In addition to providing a written submission or attending a public hearing, witnesses were given the option of providing a confidential, or ‘name withheld’ submission, giving evidence during an
in camera hearing (either individually or as part of a group) or providing their feedback by completing a confidential, online survey.
1.10
Witnesses who provided evidence at in camera hearings were briefed about the process prior to attending a hearing. Witnesses also had access to the services of a professional counsellor from the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service (PWSS) during the hearings and were contacted by a member of the secretariat staff after giving evidence.
1.11
As part of the consultation process, during the final stages of the drafting process, the committee sought confidential feedback on draft versions of the codes from the Sex Discrimination Commissioner (Ms Kate Jenkins), the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce, the Set the Standard Implementation Group, the Presiding Officers (Speaker of the House, the Hon. Milton Dick, MP and President of the Senate, Senator the Hon. Sue Lines) as well as the Clerk of the Senate (Mr Richard Pye) and the Clerk of the House of Representatives
(Ms Claressa Surtees).
Submissions and hearings
1.12
In addition to detailing information about the inquiry on its website, the committee contacted relevant government agencies, individuals and organisations to notify them of the inquiry. In line with the committee’s decision to consult widely, it invited submissions from a wide range of stakeholders including current parliamentarians, Leaders of Parliamentary Parties, Heads of Parliamentary Departments, state and territory parliaments, members of the Parliamentary Press Gallery, representatives of overseas parliaments, the Human Rights Commission and other relevant agencies and government departments, academics, Indigenous organisations, women’s advocacy groups, and disability and migrant groups.
1.13
The committee received 45 public submissions, including one which was accepted as ‘name withheld’. A list of public submissions is included at Appendix 3. The committee also received, and accepted, three submissions as confidential.
1.14
In order to receive evidence, and consult with as wide a range of stakeholders as possible, the committee held five public hearings (totalling nearly 25 hours) and three in camera hearings (totalling 15 hours). Hearings were conducted online from Canberra to allow for the participation of witnesses from any location. The details of these hearings is follows:
Public Hearing19 September 2022Canberra
Public Hearing20 September 2022Canberra
Public Hearing29 September 2022Canberra
Public Hearing30 September 2022Canberra
In camera Hearing20 October 2022Canberra
Public Hearing 4 November 2022Canberra
In camera Hearing 2 November 2022Canberra
In camera Hearing 4 November 2022Canberra
1.15
A list of witnesses who provided evidence at the public hearings is available at Appendix 4.
1.16
The committee held in camera hearings and received evidence from individuals, groups and organisations. As part of these in camera hearings were a number of sessions during which individuals (including current and former CPW staff and current and former parliamentarians) provided feedback to the committee regarding draft versions of the codes of conduct.
1.17
Submissions, and the Hansard transcripts of hearings may be accessed on the committee’s website. References to the Hansard in this report may be to the proof transcript, noting page numbers may vary between proof and official transcripts.
Survey
1.18
As noted previously, the committee took the view that long term cultural change in CPWs will require broad support. In undertaking its inquiry, therefore, the committee made the conscious decision to canvass the views of as many stakeholders and as many members of CPWs as possible.
1.19
The committee agreed, therefore, that it was important to take the views of all stakeholders into account during the inquiry and during deliberations.
1.20
As noted previously, in an effort to encourage participation, the committee provided a number of ways for people to get involved in the inquiry. These included: providing a written submission, giving evidence at a public or an in camera hearing, participating in confidential focused group discussions or completing an online survey.
1.21
The survey was designed specifically as a means to canvass – anonymously – the views of all members of CPWs. The committee’s survey was developed with input from the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service (PWSS) and the Behavioural Economics Team at the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The committee thanks these groups for their valuable feedback and assistance.
1.22
The survey was distributed by sending emails to the following groups:
current parliamentarians;
current and former staff of parliamentarians;
staff of parliamentary departments;
members of the press gallery.
1.23
Those who received the survey were provided with background information, outlining the committee’s inquiry into matters relating to the development of codes of conduct for workplace behaviour within CPWs. It was noted that the development of a specific set of codes was a recommendation of the Set the Standard report and that in addition to developing a draft code of conduct for CPWs, the committee had also been tasked with developing codes for both parliamentarians and their staff.
1.24
The preamble to the survey also advised that:
participation in the survey was voluntary, and any questions could be skipped;
responses were anonymous, and could not be linked to a name or email address;
any free text responses would be reviewed for identifying information and de-identified before being provided to the committee;
the survey would take less than 10 minutes to complete;
the responses provided would help the committee to identify what the codes of conduct should look like, what they should include, and how they should work.
1.25
A few key areas of agreement emerged from the survey responses on ranking preferred provisions for each code, as well as captured in comments made by participants:
Set clear standards for respect and professionalism towards everyone in the parliamentary community.
Clearly outline prohibited behaviours outlined in relevant antidiscrimination and workplace laws.
State within the code that it is enforceable with sanctions for breaches.
Codes of conduct should not:
Allow for vexatious or politically motivated complaints.
Stifle robust discussion of different views.
Include a strong system for independent investigation and sanctions.
Provide training for parliamentarians and staff on respectful workplaces.
Provide underpinning policies that clearly define bullying, harassment and discrimination in all its forms with case studies.
Be accompanied by an improvement in human resources practices, including hiring, workplaces conditions and job security.
1.26
The committee received 547 responses to its survey. The majority of respondents were current and former staff of parliamentarians and employees of parliamentary departments. Survey responses identified several key areas of agreement, particularly in relation to the preferred provisions to be included in each code. A more detailed outline of the survey, and an analysis of its results can be found at Appendix 5.
Acknowledgements
1.27
In completing the survey, several respondents provided details in relation to their personal stories, some also made allegations regarding their experience of various forms of inappropriate behaviour, including bullying, harassment and sexual harassment. Given that all responses to the survey were strictly confidential, the committee was unable to reach out to individuals to offer support. The survey itself did, however, provide the contact details for counselling services such as the PWSS, Beyond Blue and 1800Respect.
1.28
The committee would like to thank all the individuals and representatives of agencies, groups and organisations who engaged with the committee and participated in this inquiry. The committee appreciates the effort made by those who made written submissions, completed the survey, gave evidence at hearings, and provided feedback on the drafts of proposed codes of conduct.
1.29
The committee would also like to thank the PWSS for their expert assistance and support throughout the inquiry. The assistance of those PWSS staff who made themselves available during committee hearings and offered support to witnesses was very much appreciated.
Structure and scope of the report
1.30
The report is divided into five chapters. This first chapter outlines the resolution for the establishment of the committee, the referral and conduct of the inquiry and the scope of the report. It also provides some initial background regarding the issue of workplace culture in the Australian Parliament and how it has become the focus of significant public attention over recent years.
1.31
Chapter 2 discusses the work that has been undertaken over recent years in response to concerns about the Australian Parliament’s workplace culture, including allegations of misconduct, and reports of bullying, harassment, sexual harassment and sexual assault. The chapter provides a summary of the Commonwealth’s legal framework which governs workplace conduct (particularly in relation to parliamentary workplaces), workplace law, and anti-discrimination law.
1.32
Chapter 2 also provides a detailed outline of the Australian Human Rights Commission’s independent report on CPWs, Set the Standard: Report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces (Set the Standard report). The findings and recommendations of the Set the Standard report form an integral part of the framework for the committee’s inquiry. Chapter 2 details the conduct and findings of several other relevant reviews, including:
the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Respect@Work: National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (Respect@Work review);
the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s Review of the Parliamentary Workplace: Responding to Serious Incidents, July 2021 (Review of the Parliamentary Workplace 2021); and
the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s Review of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 (MoP(S) Act review).
1.33
Chapter 3 provides an overview of the committee’s examination of the codes of conduct developed and used in other parliaments. The committee looked at the codes of conduct that exist in Australian state and territory parliaments, and in comparable overseas parliaments. The chapter outlines the general features of these codes, as well as their legislative and regulatory context. It also details the reasons for the codes, the provisions contained in the codes, the current support mechanisms around the codes, as well as the investigative regimes, appeals process and sanctions contained in the codes.
1.34
Chapter 4 provides an overview of the evidence received in relation to the committee’s terms of reference. The chapter outlines submitters’ responses to recommendations, including support for their implementation, concerns about particular proposals, and suggestions for improvements to processes, structures and administration. It also provides a summary of the feedback received in relation to the proposed codes of conduct the committee was tasked with drafting.
1.35
Chapter 5 presents the Behaviour Standards and Codes the committee has drafted. It provides the committee’s views in relation to the proposed codes of conduct, including how they align with the Jenkins review’s recommendations on the standards and codes. The chapter also provides the committee’s recommendations regarding how these codes will be presented, implemented, embedded, and reviewed over coming years.
Parliamentary codes of conduct
1.36
The idea of a code of conduct for CPWs is not new. Proposals for a Commonwealth parliamentary code of conduct have been deliberated as far back as 1975.
1.37
The primary issues of concern and the focus of proposed codes of conduct have changed over the years and have ranged from parliamentarians’ conflicts of interest, ministerial responsibilities, registers of members’ and senators’ interests, as well as broader ethical considerations.
1.38
Over recent years, allegations of misconduct, workplace bullying and harassment, sexual harassment and sexual assault in several Australian parliaments have attracted considerable public attention. They have also sparked debate about the need for a Commonwealth parliamentary code of conduct.
1.39
Since 2018, there have been several inquiries which have influenced public debate around workplace bullying and harassment, sexual harassment and parliamentary standards. As noted at the start of this chapter, it was Recommendation 21 of the Set the Standard report which led to the establishment of this committee:
Recommendation 21: Codes of Conduct
To establish clear and consistent standards of conduct:
the Houses of Parliament should:
(e)
establish a Joint Standing Committee on Parliamentary Standards, within six months, to oversee standards and accountability, including developing:
(iii)
a draft Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians
(iv)
a draft Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians’ Staff
(v)
draft Standards of Conduct for the Parliamentary Precincts
(f)
adopt a Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians, within 12 months, in the Standing Orders of both Houses of Parliament
(g)
adopt Standards of Conduct for the Parliamentary Precincts, within 12 months, in the Standing Orders of both Houses of Parliament
The Australian Government should ensure that, within 12 months, the Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians’ staff is included in the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 (Cth).
1.40
In addition to the Set the Standard report, the findings of the Respect@Work review, the Review of the Parliamentary Workplace 2021 and the MoP(S) Act review have been central to the committee’s inquiry.
1.41
The following chapter will provide some background to these reviews and outline both their findings and recommendations. It will also provide an overview regarding the progress that has made to date toward implementing the recommendations.