Dr WOODRUFF (Franklin – Leader of the Greens) – Honourable Speaker, this report has been a watershed with the Tasmanian parliament. I thank Sarah Bolt for her work as the anti‑discrimination commissioner in bringing the Motion for Respect report to parliament in August 2022, over three years ago now. It was a report that came on the back of the Jenkins report in the federal parliament. Both of those reports, both done by women, mean we have no excuse not to have a forensic assessment of the sort of workplace that we, as members of parliament, our staff and all the members of the parliamentary services work within.
What the report laid bare for everyone was that the Tasmanian parliament had for decades been an unsafe workplace, where harassment, bullying, assaults and even sexual assault were a too‑common practice, and abusive and disrespectful behaviour was normalised. There are a lot of reasons for that but, essentially, it was about culture. Culture will remain harmful when there is a lack of leadership and a lack of systematic processes, policies and administrative practices to prescribe people’s behaviour and provide guardrails for what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. Leadership is important, but we also need the details of what happens when people don’t behave respectfully, or behave in a discriminatory or even unlawful manner. We also need guardrails within administrative practices, codes of conduct and policies that remind, direct and educate people about what appropriate, respectful behaviour in the workplace should be.
Why do we care about having a workplace that’s safe and respectful? First of all, I think everyone in this room has been involved in this journey. The Premier, the Leader of the Opposition, myself and all other members who have sat on this committee understand that we, like everybody else, must abide by the law. We have a duty to the people we employ. We have a duty to people who are employed within the Parliament of Tasmania. The Premier has a duty to people who are employed in the public service, who work or are contracted to, or are seconded into the work of ministers and elected members, our officers or any other work. We have a duty to protect them.
Higher than that legal responsibility, we have a moral responsibility to provide a safe and respectful workplace for people in this building.
It is the most unusual workplace and that’s why it has taken so many years to get to the point we are now. There might be staff or previous members who were involved in the Motion for a Respect report, who gave evidence, who have been saying, ‘Why does it take so long? What’s been going on with that committee? Are they purposely trying to stall? Why?’ We’ve gone through a process that has, unfortunately, taken years to unpack the complexity of the sort of workplace we have.
The Ministerial and Parliamentary Services workplace spans very different contract conditions. We have elected members and we have people who are paid staff of elected members. We have people who are employed in the State Service who are working in ministers’ offices. We have people who are working on contracts. We have people who are employed just for the Legislative Council and just for the House of Assembly, and we have a whole section called the Legislature-General which works to both Houses and provide services to both Houses. Within that, we have people who are on a specific contract, a Crown prerogative contract, which is just for a term of employment, and we have people on standard State Service contracts. There are reasons why there are differences, and the reasons fundamentally relate to our democracy and maintaining the Westminster system, the separation of the Houses of Parliament, the separation of parliament from the operation of the government and the management of government business of the day. These things matter. They are administratively difficult.
I commend the Premier for the fact that he has committed his time to being on the committee. There’s been a lot happening in the last two years, in particular. He has shown a personal commitment by showing up and also by putting the effort into working with the Speaker of the House, the President of the Legislative Council, the other members from both Houses who are on the committee and the clerks of both Houses to try and work through the complexity of how we come up with the pieces of paper that we have here today: a code of conduct for members; an independent complaints commissioner; and the alcohol statement.
Each of those has required a lot of conversations between two Houses that by virtue of a nearly 200‑year‑old parliament, have some pretty rigid ways of talking to each other. I feel like we’ve landed in a really good place. I’ve participated in the process and Ms Cassy O’Connor MLC participated as Leader of the Greens before me.
We’ve worked really hard with Andrew Young, the consultant, and his two fantastic staff, and I apologise to them for not remembering their names, but there were three people who supported the committee in this work. We did the work of looking around other parliaments. We didn’t just create stuff from scratch. We looked at other parliaments, and it’s my understanding that what we have in front of us, in many respects, is nation‑leading ‑ and it should be, because it’s the most recent thing that’s been adopted by a parliament. I think we should take some satisfaction in the fact that, being a smaller jurisdiction, possibly, but the nature of Tasmania, we have worked together in good faith and come up with something which has some meat on the bones. It has been a fine balance, it’s a fine dance, because we must maintain our democracy, we must maintain the separation between the Houses, and we must maintain parliamentary privilege.
Embedded within parliamentary privilege are the protections that we need as members of parliament to be able to speak without fear, on behalf of the people we speak for, on uncomfortable issues. If we don’t and can’t speak on uncomfortable issues, we can’t do our job. It’s very important that we have strong rules that guide our behaviour, but nonetheless do not shut us down. We cannot have the rules of debate in parliament being weaponised to shut down the truth that hurts other members’ ears. The Greens will always stand up and fight for the right to be able to speak the truth, as uncomfortable as it is ‑ and sometimes it is uncomfortable. The language that we use to talk to another member ‑ of course that is up for a conversation about whether that’s appropriate and whether that’s respectable, but the words and the truth ‑ we will always defend the right to say them.
We believe that this process that we have in the code of conduct does recognise some of the modern issues that confront parliamentarians and particularly around matters of social media. Social media is difficult, and our online behaviour, so we had conversations about what happens in the Chamber, what happens outside the Chamber, and how far a code of conduct for members should stretch outside the Chamber. Obviously, it’s very important that there are limitations on how that works. We move around in the community. We’ve worked in good faith together, and we will keep an eye on it to make sure that it, you know, rolls out. I think all members are looking at this period to consider how it goes.
There was quite a conversation about whether these should be enshrined in legislation, or whether they should be, as I understand they will be, essentially attached to the Standing Orders; something which stands for each term of parliament and will need to be reapproved in each new term of parliament as it commences.
I want to say that since the report has come out, and while the Workplace Culture Committee has been doing its work, we’ve already seen the tone of things change in this parliament. Honourable Speaker, I want to commend you for your role in that, and also Michelle O’Byrne before you. Both you and Michelle O’Byrne have dramatically improved the tone of debate in the Chamber.
Members – Hear, hear.
The SPEAKER – Thank you.
Dr WOODRUFF – I’m not just flattering you for no reason, but it is felt. It gives me space as a woman, and as a Greens, to be able to speak the truth without being belittled in whatever tone I get as I stand up here. It’s important. It makes a difference. I think other women feel that. We feel able to be heard and able to speak, which is really important.
I’ve thanked other people on the committee and I thank both the Clerks at both Houses, because there’s also been a structural change that’s happened. It’s not just the pieces of paper we have in front of us. There’s been administrative and policy and structural changes that have happened within Legislature-General and parliament, so there’s been a lot of stuff happening in the background, including surveys with staff, and that will continue on. The documents we have in front of us, the independent complaints commissioner ‑ establishing that body to oversee any complaints and a process for managing the code of conduct for members, and the statement for alcohol and other drugs, which is really important. It sets the tone for what is expected for a safe workplace, but also recognises, as I think everyone on the committee said, alcohol can be used both ways. It can be a powerful lubricant and can be a social good. It can also go too far and create conditions which are potentially unsafe for the user and for other people around. I think we all recognise that it’s something to manage, but we also recognise it has its place and its values as well.
On behalf of the Greens, I want to say how pleased we are to be adopting these here today. I thank other members who were involved in the process, and I look forward to this rolling out.
