Mr REITH (Leader of the House)(9.35 a.m.) —I move:

That:

(1)   Where a person who has been referred to by name, or in such a way as to be readily identified, in the House, makes a submission in writing to the Speaker:

(a)   claiming that the person has been adversely affected in reputation or in respect of dealings or associations with others, or injured in occupation, trade, office or financial credit, or that the person's privacy has been unreasonably invaded, by reason of that reference to the person; and

(b)   requesting that the person be able to incorporate an appropriate response in the parliamentary record;

and if the Speaker is satisfied:

(c)   that the subject of the submission is not so obviously trivial or the submission so frivolous, vexatious or offensive in character as to make it inappropriate that it be considered by the Committee of Privileges; and

(d)   that it is practicable for the Committee of Privileges to consider the submission under this resolution,

the Speaker shall refer the submission to that Committee.

(2)   The Committee may decide not to consider a submission referred to it under this resolution if the Committee considers that the subject of the submission is not sufficiently serious or the submission is frivolous, vexatious or offensive in character, and such a decision shall be reported to the House.

(3)   If the Committee decides to consider a submission under this resolution, the Committee may confer with the person who made the submission and any Member who referred in the House to that person.

(4)   In considering a submission under this resolution, the Committee shall meet in private session.

(5)   The Committee shall not publish a submission referred to it under this resolution or its proceedings in relation to such a submission, but may present minutes of its proceedings and all or part of such submission to the House.

(6)   In considering a submission under this resolution and reporting to the House the Committee shall not consider or judge the truth of any statements made in the House or of the submission.

(7)   In its report to the House on a submission under this resolution, the Committee may make either of the following recommendations:

(a)   that no further action be taken by the House or by the Committee in relation to the submission; or

(b)   that a response by the person who made the submission, in terms specified in the report and agreed to by the person and the Committee, be published by the House or incorporated in Hansard ,

and shall not make any other recommendations.

(8)   A document presented to the House under paragraph (5) or (7):

(a)   in the case of a response by a person who made a submission, shall be succinct and strictly relevant to the questions in issue and shall not contain anything offensive in character; and

(b)   shall not contain any matter the publication of which would have the effect of:

   (i)   unreasonably adversely affecting or injuring a person, or unreasonably invading a person's privacy, in the manner referred to in paragraph (1); or

   (ii)   unreasonably adding to or aggravating any such adverse effect, injury or invasion of privacy suffered by a person.

(9)   The Committee may agree to guidelines and procedures, not inconsistent with this resolution, to apply to the consideration by it of submissions.

(10)

   This resolution shall continue in force unless and until amended or rescinded by the House in this or a subsequent Parliament.

The passing of the motion will establish a detailed procedure dealing with protection of persons adversely named in the House. In brief, the procedure envisages that any person adversely referred to in the House may make a submission in writing to the Speaker. The Speaker would then have to be satisfied that the submission is not trivial, frivolous, vexatious or offensive and that it is practicable for the House of Representatives Standing Committee of Privileges to consider the submission before referring the matter to the Committee of Privileges. The committee has to be then similarly satisfied before going ahead with its consideration of the submission.

In reporting to the House on a submission, the committee may recommend that no further action be taken or that a response by the complainant in terms agreed to by the complainant and the committee be published by the House or incorporated in Hansard.

The same procedure has been in place in the Senate since 1988 and has apparently worked well. It appears that the relatively stringent ground rules in the procedure are effective in filtering out vague complaints and guarding against rash and clumsy approaches.

All members would be aware that there is a level of concern in the community about the use sometimes made by members of the privilege of freedom of speech in the parliament. It is said to be misused on occasion. I am sure members on all sides are aware of these concerns. The matter was considered thoroughly by the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Privilege some years ago. It concluded that the privilege of freedom of speech was of fundamental importance and that it should not be circumscribed. It recommended, however, that a right of reply procedure should be introduced in each House.

In 1991, the Procedure Committee recommended that we introduce the procedure that is now before the House. The procedure will enhance the parliament's standing as, consistent with the rule of natural justice, citizens who feel genuinely aggrieved by adverse mentions in the House will have the ability to seek to reply to the comments made about them. It is my understanding that in the Senate the procedure was never exercised retrospectively when it was introduced in 1988, and now the government intends that any use of the procedure in the House will also be in relation to future proceedings after passage of this motion. This motion is long overdue. Again I thank the Manager of Opposition Business (Mr Crean) and other members of this place for their cooperation, and I commend this motion to the House.