Ms O’CONNOR (Hobart) – Mr President, I’m very pleased to stand here today, after this enormous body of work has been done to improve the culture in this shared workplace, to say the Greens will be supporting the three motions which are within the order of business for today.
This work that’s been undertaken by the Workplace Culture Committee, by Andrew Young and his team, it really matters, because not only is it important that we have a safe and respectful workplace, it is also important out in the wider community that we model respectful, ethical behaviour and uphold the highest standards of integrity. We are in a position of great public trust. We have a very significant responsibility that sits on our shoulders, a responsibility to represent our communities, hold government accountable and push for legislative and policy reform in the public interest.
It’s never been so evident as it is for all of us in this place this week, the weight of that responsibility that sits on this Council’s shoulders. Despite the fact we’re in positions of trust, despite this significant responsibility and trust that voters bestow on us, it is fair to say that the profession that members of parliament represent, is not held in the highest esteem. There has been an erosion of trust in elected representatives and of course that infects people’s faith in our democracy.
It really matters that here in this place, we are seen as a safe, respectful, ethical workplace, where it doesn’t matter what role you fill in ministerial and parliamentary services, you feel safe and validated. You feel there’s a code of conduct that is agreed to and accepted. And you know that if you have an issue or see misconduct or unethical behaviour, there is somewhere for you to take that complaint.
Today we debate the establishment of an independent complaints commissioner, so I do want to just reflect only briefly on how we got here. There has over the years in this place been incidents of absolutely disgraceful behaviour. We saw through the the Bolt report the culture of this place was hurting people, harming people. If we just go to some of the findings of the number of people who responded to the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner’s callout for feedback on the culture of this place, it’s really confronting.
All of the ministerial and parliamentary workplace – all of the MPS workplace – was surveyed. More than half of people who were surveyed responded: 56.5 per cent. Nearly a full quarter, 24 per cent of people, who responded to the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner’s survey said they had experienced discrimination in this workplace. In the survey, 15 per cent of people who responded experienced sexual harassment in this workplace, while 40 per cent, not that far from half of respondents, had experienced bullying in the ministerial and parliamentary services workplace, and only 11 per cent of those who witnessed these behaviours intervened. That is a terrible failure of bystander principles.
Importantly, in the survey 82 per cent of respondents expressed general dissatisfaction with the complaints processes. The commissioner found that bullying was the most common form of inappropriate conduct in the MPS workplace. The commissioner made a number of recommendations which have brought us to this place today. There was a 10‑point list of recommendations, and I’m really pleased to say, as someone who was in the other place when this report came down, and was the leader of the Greens at that time, that following receipt of the Bolt report, immediate steps were taken to address those recommendations.
One of the first steps saw the Premier; the Leader of the Opposition; me; I believe the honourable member for Nelson, Ms Webb, was there after doing so much work to bring us to this place; and we made a public statement accepting responsibility for the cultural failings of ministerial and parliamentary services. Then this place worked through these 10 steps.
It was a deeply confronting body of work. I think it showed those of us who had not been mistreated or affected by bullying in this workplace what it’s really been like for a lot of people who work in here. Let’s be frank about this, it will mostly be staff, whether it’s in a ministerial office or another political office, who are experiencing or who have experienced the fallout of a toxic and unsafe culture. The reason for that is because within this place, by its very nature, there is a power imbalance.
I agree with the honourable member for Rumney in her comments on the alcohol and drugs members statement, and some members who’ve been here for some time will know that while it’s not perfect now, it’s very different from what it was 10 years ago: particularly different from what it was 15 or 20 years ago. In my experience, there was a lot more heavy drinking here in the past.
I will tell a short story about the former leader of the Labor Party, Bryan Green, who had, and it was his own fault, been busted for drink driving. It became the subject of a media story. We were in government at the time. I remember we were sitting on the government side of the benches and Mr Green, having been downstairs in the bar for dinner and no doubt a glass or three of wine to go with it, knew he had to apologise for his conduct, and apologised for getting caught. In those days drinking a fair bit in the dining room was reasonably normal; it’s certainly not considered so now, and that’s a good thing.
I came from an old journalistic family and my father used to spend a lot of time at the pub; he always said as a journalist that’s where he found his best stories. Thankfully, I don’t think that’s the way journalists think now, but we’ve come a long way from where we’ve been. It doesn’t mean that the behaviours and practices here now in relation to alcohol and other drugs are exemplary, but this is quite a nuanced members’ statement where it is on each of us to take responsibility for our consumption of alcohol in this workplace, knowing that the consumption of alcohol can lead to inappropriate behaviours, aggression, bullying, uninhibited behaviours, and that’s exactly the sort of behaviour we don’t want or need in this place, which is the heart of our democracy. Isn’t it a shame that we had a code of conduct for members of parliament that was brought into place in 2018 that sounds great. It has so much in it that is good. Even the opening preamble:
Members of parliament recognise that their actions have an impact on the lives of all Tasmanian people. Fulfilling their obligations and discharging their duties responsibly requires a commitment to the highest ethical standards to maintain and strengthen the democratic traditions of the state and the integrity of its institutions.
It says:
Members are expected to promote and support this code by leadership and example.
It reminds us of the values that we are to embody in this place. We are, it says, ‘to value the public interest and the fundamental objective of public office to act solely in the terms of the public interest’. Some people’s perception of what the public interest is will be different from others. I might stand here and argue it is manifestly against the public interest to build a $2 billion stadium at Macquarie Point because of the impact that that will have on the people of Tasmania. Another person in here speaking for government may genuinely believe it is in the public interest to build that stadium. So again, there are subjective tests sometimes to these good intentions. It reminds us that we have to carefully manage and declare conflicts of interest, not to misuse our positions or public resources. It says:
A member must only make statements in parliament and in public that are, to the best of their knowledge, accurate and honest.
That is not what happens in this place. It’s not what happens every Question Time in the House of Assembly. I watched it again only this morning to see wilful misleading happening in the other place in Question Time, in the face of facts and information that is there from a statutory authority in black and white. So, my point here is you can have the best‑written and agreed‑upon code of conduct in the Westminster system, but unless there is an acceptance of the need to change and an embrace of reform, clearly a written code of conduct like the one we’ve had in place here for seven years doesn’t hold much water, and it is highly regrettable that we have had to go through what became a collectively traumatic experience of the Bolt report, which laid the failings of this place bare, to rewrite a code of conduct that has enforceable provisions in it, because the previous code of conduct couldn’t improve the culture of this place, Mr President. Highly, highly regrettable. It’s a strong body of work. I know it’s taken a lot of work and a lot of conversations and testing of ideas within the committee, but also talking to people outside the committee to put forward a code of conduct, an alcohol and drug member statement, and the process and the structure for the Independent Complaints Commissioner, but I believe what we have here is something quite close to best practice.
The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association prepared a paper detailing standards for codes of conduct for members of parliament and the parliamentary workplace, and the motions that we are debating today reflect a significant amount of the CPA’s work on what is best practice ‑
Ms Forrest – They have a similar author.
Ms O’CONNOR – Is that right?
Ms Forrest – Correct.
Ms O’CONNOR – No wonder it’s so well done. A similar author says the member for Murchison, which means that the person who we’ve been able to rely on these past 18 months, two years, Mr Andrew Young, obviously had previous experience in working across the parliament on developing what is the best ‑
Ms Forrest – It’s such an excellent point because of that.
Ms O’CONNOR – Such a set of best practice standards for parliament. In a way, I’m sorry we’re here. We’re here because not enough people within this workplace, when they signed on to the code of conduct, lived it and manifested it in their professional life, but what we have here is something good, but it’s also strong and there should be sanctions for any breach of this code. As we know, at a certain point it will be to the Houses, through the privileges committees, to determine how to deal with those breaches of expected ethical and behavioural standards but that, of course, is as it should be because each House needs to be the manager of its own business and its own people, in a democratic system.
I hope that the result of this, and we’ve seen some cultural change already, just through this process, and I too want to acknowledge the work of the clerks and the people who work with the clerks, but the result of this needs to permeate this whole place, both Houses, all of ministerial and parliamentary services, and when we sign on to this code of conduct it has to be with the understanding that it comes with a responsibility, but also it comes with very clear expectations that we will attend ethics training, that we will accept the fact that we can’t know at all, and even those of us who think we are good, ethical people will have things to learn about appropriate behaviours in the workplace, changing standards because in this workplace, we attract some of the finest people across politics.
We attract, whether it is working to the parliament or to an MP or to a minister, we know that we attract some of the best and the brightest because it’s a great place to work, but for too many people, historically, and hopefully not to this day, it has not been a safe place to work. If we want to continue to attract those amazing people who come to work with us; if we want to continue to attract people to run for political life who are there to do the right thing, we have to understand that culture begins with each of us and when you lift the culture of a place, you lift everything about it. It makes for a happier, more productive, more effective workplace, which is much more likely to make decisions solely based on the public interest.
I thank everyone who has been part of this journey, and I want to acknowledge again the work of the member for Nelson in bringing us to this point, because it was through the member for Nelson’s work to raise these issues that the Bolt report was initiated, and I always believe in giving credit where it is due. I thank the committee and everyone who sat on the committee, from the chair to the President to the Speaker of the other place to the leaders of the three political parties.
Ms Forrest – It has been changed over the journey because of changing positions.
Ms O’CONNOR – I did wonder that because I have seen faces change on the committee, but regardless of that, the committee did a great job and we should all be thankful for the work that has gone into these motions and we should all support them wholeheartedly.
