Chapter 1 About petitions
Introduction
1.1
Petitions are essentially requests by citizens or residents for action
by the House of Representatives. Petitions may ask the House to:
n introduce legislation,
or repeal or change existing legislation;
n take action for a
certain purpose or for the benefit of particular persons; or
n redress a personal grievance
such as the correction of an administrative error.
1.2
Petitioning is an ancient practice with roots in many different systems
of government. In parliaments following the Westminster tradition the practice
may be traced back to the reign of King Edward I in the 13th century.
The present form of petitioning was developed at Westminster during the 17th
century when the rights of petitioners and the power of the House of Commons to
deal with petitions were affirmed by two resolutions in 1669.[1]
The House of Common’s traditions of petitioning were inherited by the new Australian
parliament in 1901 via the colonial legislatures. More details on the history
of petitioning are in Appendix B.
Current petitioning practice
1.3
The current petitioning process in the House of Representatives
encompasses the following:
n Petitions (like other
documents) may only be presented to the House by a Member—though in practice
they are ‛lodged’ by a Member (or in the name of a Member) and in the
majority of cases the terms are read out to the House by the Clerk.
n Members may
personally present petitions in the Chamber or Main Committee during ‛statements’
and they can use the opportunity to comment on the petitions. In theory, they may
also present a petition in person if it relates to a matter coming before the
House though this does not happen in practice.
n Members have certain
administrative duties regarding the petitions they lodge (for example, counting
the number of signatories) but they cannot personally sponsor a petition or
petition the House in their own right.
n There are a number of
rules set out in the standing orders and the Clerk or Deputy Clerk checks
petitions for compliance before they are presented to the House. Those which do
not comply with the rules are ‛out of order’ and they are not registered
in the official records of the House. These rules were revised and simplified
in 2001 but many petitions are still found to be out of order.
n Once petitions are
presented to the House the terms of the petitions are recorded in Hansard. It
is possible for petitions to be referred to a particular committee though this
is not done in practice.
n The Clerk then refers
a copy of the petition to the Minister responsible for the administration of
the matter raised in the petition. It is rare that any further action is taken,
though Ministers may respond by lodging a written response to the Clerk. The
Clerk then announces responses to the House (also very rare).
Enhancing the status of petitions
1.4
Petitions are the only means by which the individual can directly place
a matter before the House and therefore have been described as ‛a
fundamental right of the citizen.’[2] While other avenues for
redress of grievances now exist, ranging from formal approaches to the
Commonwealth Ombudsmen or the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, to seeking media
coverage of issues, only petitioning facilitates a direct link between the
public and the House.
1.5
Petitions foster a sense of unity and purpose within a community which
is publicly demonstrated when the petition is presented to the House. It has
been said that petitioners tend to sign ‛for community reasons, rather
than for personal gain.’[3] In this sense, a petition
provides a measure of a community’s strength of feeling on an issue, and in
turn, provides Members of Parliament with a ‛sounding board for concerns experienced
by the voting public.’[4]
1.6
Petitions are presented to the House on a very wide range of matters. So
far this year petitions have been received relating to every Commonwealth
ministerial portfolio, although certain portfolios such as foreign affairs and
health and ageing tend to attract more petitions than others (see Appendix C
for the list of petitions received in 2007).
1.7
While petitions clearly have great democratic potential, the reality is
that petitions have been far more effective in strengthening community views on
an issue than in actually having that issue heard and considered by the House.
1.8
In the course of this inquiry the committee has come to appreciate that
over time, petitions have become less than effective mainly because of
deficiencies in responding to the issues raised (by the House and/or the
relevant Minister). In addition, the rules for petitioning remain a difficulty
and result in an unacceptable number of petitions being ‛out of order’.
1.9
Not surprisingly, serious concerns have been raised with the committee
about the status of petitions. The submissions received to this inquiry commonly
expressed the belief that, under current processes, petitions have lost the
respect of the House and its Members.[5]
1.10
Although the committee is deeply concerned by this underlying message,
it is heartened by the response to this inquiry and the encouragement it has
received to reform the petitioning process. Submissions clearly saw the
establishment of this inquiry as ‛a real step
towards ensuring that petitions play their true democratic role in involving
the public in the government of Australia.’[6]
1.11
The committee is keen to see the status of petitions enhanced so that
they may fulfil their potential as an important avenue of communication between
the public and the House. This report reflects the committee’s views on the way
forward.
The committee’s principles of petitioning
1.12
For the committee, the path ahead is underpinned by the following principles
of petitioning:
1) Petitions belong to the public
1.13
Petitions are the most direct form of communication between the public
and the House. Despite the growth of alternative forms by which matters may be
raised and grievances aired, petitions continue to serve as a community building
process underpinned by the key objective of having the public voice heard. This
process is important to our democratic system.
2) Petitions sent to the House should be addressed by the House
1.14
Given that the standing orders require petitions to be addressed to the
House of Representatives and to seek action by that House, the role of the
House in facilitating a response should be strengthened. The House should have
the capacity to respond to petitioners and advise them on the progress or
outcomes of their petition.
1.15
The committee considers the most effective way for the House to act in
relation to petitions is to establish a dedicated petitions committee.
3) Governments should respond
1.16
Petitioners expect and deserve a response to the matters raised in their
petition. The rules should be changed to encourage greater efforts by Ministers
and their departments to consider the terms of petitions which are referred to
them by the House, and respond to them in a timely fashion.
4) Members’ involvement should be enhanced and streamlined
1.17
To improve the effectiveness of petitions their status must be enhanced.
Members have an important role to play in raising and debating the issues and
grievances contained in petitions, and facilitating a response.
5) Rules should be relevant and fair
1.18
Preparing a petition should not be excessively difficult and the rules
governing petitions should not prove unnecessarily onerous. The House (both
Members and House staff) must provide clear and accessible information and
advice on the petitioning process.
1.19
While the rules themselves should be reviewed, the committee believes
that a redesigned proforma, accessible from the House of Representatives
website and from all Members’ electorate offices, would reduce the number of
petitions considered ‛out of order’.
6) Information technologies should be used more effectively
1.20
Historically, the essence of the petitioning process was the ancient
right of people, irrespective of their numbers, to express serious concerns to
the King. This ancient tradition can and should be modernised to reflect
advances in information communication technologies.
1.21
In particular, the committee accepts that in the 21st
century, the House can no longer ignore electronic petitions. The House of
Representatives website itself also requires redesigning to make it more
accessible.
1.22
The application of these six principles will be addressed in this report,
though not in the above order.