The committee authorised a survey to seek views from stakeholders on preferred provisions for codes of conduct. The survey was sent on 21Â September 2022 to current parliamentarians, current and former parliamentarian staff, current staff of parliamentary departments, press gallery and holders of lobbyist passes. The survey was closed on 18 November 2022, and at that date had 547 responses from:
311Parliamentarian staffers (current and former)
3Parliamentarian volunteers or interns
186Employees of a parliamentary department
Participants were asked where they most frequently work:
Overall analysis
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, workplace conditions and job security.
Parliamentary Precinct Code
The survey provided the provisions contained in the UK Behaviour Code and the New Zealand Behavioural Statements for the parliamentary workplace. Some minor modifications were made on request by the committee.
Preferred provisions
The survey asked respondents to list the provisions in order of preference. The responses were:
|
|
|
|
476
|
Respect and value everyone—bullying, harassment, discrimination in any form and sexual misconduct are not tolerated.
|
|
404
|
Ensure Parliament meets the highest ethical standards of integrity, courtesy and mutual respect.
|
|
398
|
Unacceptable behaviour will be dealt with seriously, independently and with effective sanctions.
|
|
365
|
Foster an environment where people feel safe and valued.
|
|
353
|
Act respectfully and professionally.
|
|
339
|
Show that bullying, discrimination in any form and harassment, including sexual harassment, are unacceptable.
|
|
320
|
Recognise your power, influence or authority and don’t abuse them.
|
|
300
|
Behave fairly and genuinely, treating others the way we would like to be treated.
|
|
291
|
Act professionally towards others.
|
|
282
|
Create a culturally inclusive environment.
|
|
275
|
Speak up about any unacceptable behaviour you see.
|
|
263
|
Encourage diverse perspectives, and the free and frank expression of views.
|
|
260
|
Speak up if we observe unacceptable behaviour.
|
|
248
|
Think about how your behaviour affects others and strive to understand their perspective.
|
|
178
|
Use our position of power or influence to help others and avoid harm.
|
Comments on Parliamentary Precinct Code
There was a total of 138 substantive comments on the above provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
30%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
27
|
29%
|
Called for an improvement in respect and professionalism in the workplace or in parliament in general.
|
|
12
|
13%
|
Broader integrity issues outside terms of reference.
|
|
12
|
13%
|
Power dynamics and abuse of position are issues of concern.
|
|
8
|
9%
|
Alcohol should either be banned entirely from APH or that employees should not consume alcohol in connection with official duties.
|
|
7
|
8%
|
Provided feedback on clear wording – that codes should avoid vague wording, be clear and include samples of what positive behaviour looks like.
|
|
7
|
8%
|
Improved contemporary human resources practices are needed, including hiring practices and job security.
|
|
7
|
8%
|
Parliamentary culture should respect different viewpoints and robust debate.
|
|
5
|
5%
|
The need to understand/accept/celebrate diversity.
|
|
5
|
5%
|
Specific discrimination areas – four called out specific areas of discrimination such as sexism, sexual assault, racism, ageism and homophobia and one recommended that all forms of discrimination be explicitly referenced.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
Scope of the code should be broad and include social media and bullying outside of work hours.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Family friendly / work life balance issues.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code.
|
Parliamentarians’ Code
The survey provided provisions taken from codes of conduct for parliamentarians in Australian state and territory parliaments and other Westminster-style parliaments.
Preferred provisions
The survey asked respondents to list the provisions in order of preference. The responses were:
|
|
|
|
427
|
The Code of Conduct is enforceable. In other words, every Member is required to understand and comply with the Code. A breach of the Code could lead to sanctions being imposed.
|
|
404
|
Members are required to treat those with whom they come into contact in the course of their parliamentary duties and activities with respect and courtesy. Behaviour that amounts to bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct constitutes a breach of the Code.
|
|
314
|
Bullying and harassment, including sexual harassment and discrimination based on disability, race, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status are unacceptable.
|
|
306
|
Bullying may be characterised as offensive, intimidating, or insulting behaviour involving an abuse or misuse of power that can make a person feel vulnerable, undermined, denigrated or threatened.
|
|
298
|
Harassment is any unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct that has the purpose or effect of either violating a person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
|
|
298
|
Sexual misconduct incorporates a range of behaviours including sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking, voyeurism and any other conduct of a sexual nature that is non-consensual or has the purpose or effect of threatening, intimidating, undermining, humiliating or coercing a person.
|
|
289
|
Persons at all levels and in all roles are accountable for their actions and share a responsibility to ensure that conduct not conducive to a culture of respect is addressed promptly, fairly, and effectively.
|
|
272
|
Members, as employers, commit to a healthy and respectful work environment free from harassment and violence.
|
|
259
|
Members must not behave in a manner towards any individuals they are in contact with in their capacity as Members that involves bullying, harassment (including sexual harassment) or any other inappropriate behaviour.
|
|
248
|
Members will address and resolve reported occurrences of workplace harassment and violence in an objective, unbiased and timely manner.
|
|
232
|
Members have an important role to play in fostering an environment where people feel safe and valued.
|
|
221
|
Members should observe the principles set out in the Parliamentary Behaviour Code. These principles will be taken into consideration when any allegation of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct is under investigation.
|
|
189
|
The purpose of policy is to: ensure a respectful work environment; provide a process for resolving reported incidents; and, meet requirements of employment laws and regulations.
|
|
184
|
These statements set Parliament’s expectations for how we behave towards each other, while still allowing for free speech in Parliament and freedom of the press, which are essential for a functioning democracy.
|
|
182
|
The code seeks to ensure public confidence in the standards expected of members and in the commitment of the Parliament to uphold the rules.
|
|
163
|
The code establishes standards and principles of conduct expected of members in their duties.
|
|
154
|
Employees, interns and volunteers are expected to contribute to a healthy and respectful work environment and are encouraged to report any occurrences of harassment and violence in the workplace.
|
|
147
|
Members should use their position of power or influence to help others and avoid harm.
|
|
143
|
Members have a role in fostering and respecting diversity in the workplace.
|
Comments on Parliamentarians’ Code
There was a total of 85 substantive comments on the above provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
29%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
9
|
11%
|
Called for an improvement in respect and professionalism in the workplace or in parliament in general.
|
|
9
|
11%
|
Provided feedback on clear wording – that codes should avoid vague wording, be clear and include samples of what positive behaviour looks like and explicitly reference relevant employment law.
|
|
8
|
9%
|
Discussed the need for contemporary HR practices to protect staff employment conditions, citing issues of family members being hired, lack of breaks, overwork, after hours requirements and abusive language.
|
|
8
|
9%
|
Discussed alcohol or drug abuse as a problem.
|
|
5
|
6%
|
Discussed the need for parliamentarians to take a leadership position on appropriate behaviours in the workplace.
|
|
5
|
6%
|
Discussed the impact of power dynamics on behaviour.
|
|
3
|
4%
|
Discussed the potential conflict between codes of conduct and parliamentary privilege.
|
|
3
|
4%
|
Discussed scope issues, such as including senior public servants, family members of parliamentarians and after hours bullying.
|
|
3
|
4%
|
Recommended sexual relations between staff and parliamentarians be explicitly banned, or otherwise covered by underpinning policy.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Discussed broader integrity issues.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Parliamentary culture should respect different viewpoints and robust debate.
|
|
1
|
1%
|
Recommended specific forms of discrimination be explicitly named.
|
Parliamentarian Staff Code
The survey provided provisions taken from codes of conduct for parliamentarian staff in Australian state and territory parliaments and other Westminster-style parliaments.
Preferred provisions
|
|
|
|
392
|
Treat those with whom they come into contact in the course of their parliamentary duties and activities with dignity, courtesy and respect. Behaviour that amounts to bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct is a breach of this Code.
|
|
371
|
Observe the principles set out in the Parliamentary Behaviour Code of respect, professionalism, understanding others’ perspectives, courtesy, and acceptance of responsibility. These principles will be taken into consideration when any allegation of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct is under investigation.
|
|
327
|
Treat all people with dignity, courtesy, honesty, fairness and respect at all times.
|
|
322
|
Co-operate at all stages with any investigation into their conduct, or that of their sponsoring Member, by or under the authority of the House.
|
|
313
|
Treat co-workers, clients and members of the public with courtesy and respect and without harassment, and be appropriate in our relationship with them.
|
|
291
|
Staff in leadership roles also have a duty to ensure contemporary human resource, and workplace health and safety practices are observed.
|
|
285
|
Comply with any sanction imposed by the Conduct Committee. Any failure to do so shall constitute a breach of the Code of Conduct.
|
|
280
|
Actively discourage any form of bullying, sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination. Refer to: Anti Discrimination Act 1991 and Federal Human Rights legislation.
|
|
245
|
Treat others with respect, courtesy and with proper regard for their human rights.
|
|
233
|
Avoid offensive, abusive and discriminatory language and behaviour.
|
|
228
|
Staff in leadership roles also have a duty to promote the benefits of equity and diversity in the workplace including through integrating these qualities into everyday management practice.
|
|
210
|
Ensure our conduct reflects our commitment to a workplace that is inclusive and free from harassment.
|
|
181
|
Staff in leadership roles also have a duty to ensure that rights, including those rights detailed in the Human Rights Act 2019 are observed.
|
|
176
|
Respect and be sensitive to an individual’s cultural and ethnic background.
|
|
172
|
Support their employing Member’s compliance with any code of conduct that applies to that Member.
|
|
164
|
Staff in leadership roles also have a duty to promote cultural and disability awareness.
|
Comments on Staff Code
There were 59 substantive comments:
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
20%
|
Discussed scope issues, recommending that all staff and parliamentarians should adhere to the same code provisions.
|
|
10
|
17%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
9
|
15%
|
Called for an improvement in respect and professionalism in the workplace or in parliament in general.
|
|
7
|
12%
|
Provided feedback on clear wording – that codes should explicitly reference relevant employment law or should provide definitions.
|
|
6
|
10%
|
Discussed the need for senior staff or parliamentarians to take a leadership position on appropriate behaviours in the workplace.
|
|
3
|
5%
|
Discussed the need for contemporary HR practices to protect staff employment conditions, citing issues of overwork, work/life balance and unreasonable after-hours requirements.
|
|
4
|
7%
|
Discussed alcohol or drug abuse as a problem.
|
|
2
|
3%
|
Parliamentary culture should respect different viewpoints and robust debate.
|
|
2
|
3%
|
Recommended specific forms of discrimination be explicitly named, being disability and age.
|
|
1
|
2%
|
Discussed the conflict between codes of conduct and parliamentary privilege.
|
|
1
|
2%
|
Recommended sexual relations between staff and parliamentarians be explicitly banned.
|
|
1
|
2%
|
Discussed broader integrity issues.
|
|
1
|
2%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code.
|
Defining work and workplace
The survey asked whether people agree with the Jenkins Review definition of where and what work would be covered by the code:
... parliamentarians and staff in the course of their official role/employment and to any conduct that may bring the relevant House into disrepute.
… each of the Codes should apply to conduct engaged in by any means, including in-person, via phone or text message, online or via social media.
... includes Parliament House and the Parliamentary precincts, ministerial, parliamentary and electorate offices and any other place where work is carried out for, or in connection with, a Commonwealth parliamentarian, whether paid or unpaid.
... includes, but is not limited to, work related travel and events, engagements, functions and any other work carried out by a person, in any capacity, in connection with the work of a Commonwealth parliamentarian.
Survey responses showed strong agreement with the Jenkins Review proposed definitions, while noting the blurred lines for both staff and parliamentarians as to what constitutes ‘official duties’:
Code review
The majority of survey respondents indicated that codes should have an initial review after 12 months and thereafter reviewed every two years:
The majority of respondents indicated that participants in a review should include Parliamentarians and their staff as well as staff of other parliamentary departments:
Implementation support
Survey participants were asked if they agreed with the Jenkins Review recommendations for implementation support or whether they had additional items or comments. 462 respondents indicated they were satisfied with the list, 74 people indicated more could be done, with 57 of those people making additional substantive comments:
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
33%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code and should be mandatory with regular refreshers, should give case studies, include cultural awareness and unconscious bias.
|
|
2
|
4%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
8
|
15%
|
Provided feedback on a simple and clear regime, with a digital platform of information that is easy to access and understand, with clear reporting pathways.
|
|
5
|
10%
|
Disagreed with the implementation elements entirely or in part, citing the need to protect different viewpoints and robust debate and that the complaints regime could be politicised to make vexatious complaints to stifle free and open discussion of contentious issues.
|
|
4
|
8%
|
Stated that outcomes of individual complaints and overall OPSC data should be published.
|
|
3
|
6%
|
Discussed employment vetting to track repeat offenders.
|
|
4
|
5%
|
Disagreed with mandatory reporting for witnesses to misconduct.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
Stressed the need for appropriate counselling services for staff.
|
|
2
|
3%
|
Discussed the need for senior staff or parliamentarians to take a leadership position on appropriate behaviours in the workplace and should be provided training to do so.
|
Individual comments included:
The need for sitting days to accommodate work breaks.
Discussed scope issues, highlighting that senior public servants also engage in bullying against parliamentary staff.
Stressed need for targeted assistance for people of colour.
That witnesses may align evidence with a need to keep their jobs.
That implementation elements should be part of regular code review.
Harmonisation with other codes of conduct, such as public service, so that everyone who works at Parliament House is held to same standard.
Preventative measures
There were 111 substantive comments on preventative measures:
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
26%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code, including people management training.
|
|
17
|
15%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
11
|
10%
|
Improved contemporary human resources practices are needed, including hiring practices, workplace conditions and job security
|
|
8
|
7%
|
Parliamentary departments are not doing enough to protect their staff, or are themselves sources of bullying, misconduct or poor HR practices.
|
|
6
|
5%
|
A lack of job security means staff cannot make complaints.
|
|
5
|
5%
|
Stated that outcomes of individual complaints and overall OPSC data should be published.
|
|
4
|
4%
|
Disagreed with the need for change.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
Called for an improvement in leadership culture from parliamentarians and senior staff.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
Highlighted the need for a clear regime of advice and complaints reporting that is easy to navigate.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
The need to increase diversity.
|
|
3
|
3%
|
Stressed the need for a broad culture change within parliament to effect real change.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Cited alcohol in the workplace as a problem.
|
|
2
|
2%
|
Stressed need for regular performance review of the code regime.
|
Twelve other individual issues were raised including the need for more training for public servants seconded to work at Parliament House, closer links with ACT Policing for reporting and mandating exit interviews as a standard.
Final comments
174 survey participants made final comments which are summarised below:
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
20%
|
Highlighted the need for a strong regime of complaints investigation and sanctions to underpin a code of conduct.
|
|
16
|
9%
|
Stressed the need for a broad culture change within parliament to effect real change.
|
|
15
|
9%
|
Improved contemporary human resources practices are needed, including hiring practices, workplace conditions and job security.
|
|
8
|
5%
|
Parliamentary departments are not doing enough to protect their staff, or are themselves sources of bullying, misconduct or poor HR practices (3 of these were new comments).
|
|
6
|
3%
|
Disagreed with the need for change.
|
|
6
|
3%
|
Needs to be protection against system being misused for vexatious complaints.
|
|
5
|
3%
|
Scope issues: that all measures are available at electorate offices (1), that media and senior public servants are sources of bullying (2 each).
|
|
5
|
3%
|
Concern that code will be misused and damage capacity for robust and open debate.
|
|
5
|
3%
|
Training is a necessary part of support for the code.
|
|
4
|
2%
|
Stressed need for regular performance review of the code regime.
|
|
3
|
2%
|
A clear regime of advice and complaints reporting that is easy to navigate.
|
|
3
|
2%
|
High workloads create an environment ripe for abuse.
|
A number of individual comments were made, which included:
Comcare is inappropriately denying mental health injury claims.
Oversight should be provided by an external board that includes community members.
Standards for parliamentarians should be in an Act, or in resolution of continuing effect.
System should be retrospective.
System should encourage people to apologise, learn and move on.
MPs may stop hiring women to avoid complaints.
More emphasis on psychological safety.
Emphasised that Parliamentary Departments (which already have codes of conduct) are not immune from poor behaviour that is not addressed by managers.