

- Title
COMMITTEES
Privileges Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
07-03-2001
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
39
- Electorate
Victoria
- Interjector
- Page
22645
- Party
ALP
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Ray, Sen Robert
- Stage
Privileges Committee
- Type
- Context
Committees
- System Id
chamber/hansards/2001-03-07/0008
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (NEW ZEALAND CITIZENS) BILL 2001
- COMMITTEES
-
DEFENCE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (ENHANCEMENT OF THE RESERVES AND MODERNISATION) BILL 2000
DEFENCE RESERVE SERVICE (PROTECTION) BILL 2000 - TRADE PRACTICES AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 1) 2000
- MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Economy: Growth
(Cook, Sen Peter, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Economy: Interest Rates
(Gibson, Sen Brian, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Employment: Growth
(Collins, Sen Jacinta, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Small Business Innovation
(Brandis, Sen George, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Economy: Private Dwelling Investment
(Conroy, Sen Stephen, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Petroleum Industry
(Murray, Sen Andrew, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Goods and Services Tax: Beer
(Buckland, Sen Geoffrey, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
(Bartlett, Sen Andrew, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Goods and Services Tax: Prices
(Crowley, Sen Rosemary, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Gambling: Internet Ban
(Ferris, Sen Jeannie, Alston, Sen Richard) -
Education: Greenwich University
(Carr, Sen Kim, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Australian Tourist Commission: Funding
(Ridgeway, Sen Aden, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Agriculture: Importation of New Zealand Apples
(O'Brien, Sen Kerry, Alston, Sen Richard) -
Women: Government Policies
(Payne, Sen Marise, Vanstone, Sen Amanda)
-
Economy: Growth
-
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- Genetically Modified Crops: Tasmania
- Family Tax Benefit: Repayments
- Health: Radiation from Powerlines
- Aged Care: Northern Territory
- Legionella Bacteria: Department of Health and Aged Care
- Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee
- Pharmaceutical Benefits: Celebrex
- Pharmaceutical Benefits: Celebrex
- Economy: Growth
- Petroleum Industry: Pricing
- AUSTRALIAN TAXATION OFFICE
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- NOTICES
- GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS: TASMANIA
- COMMITTEES
- AUSTRALIAN GRAND PRIX: TOBACCO SPONSORSHIP
- MATTERS OF URGENCY
- COMMITTEES
- DOCUMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- ASSENT TO LAWS
- BILLS RETURNED FROM THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
-
TREASURY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (APPLICATION OF CRIMINAL CODE) BILL 2001
WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (UNFAIR DISMISSALS) BILL 1998 [NO. 2]
AIRCRAFT NOISE LEVY COLLECTION AMENDMENT BILL 2001 - COMMITTEES
-
AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL BILL 2000
AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL (CONSEQUENTIAL AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 2000 - BUSINESS
-
AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL BILL 2000
AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL (CONSEQUENTIAL AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 2000 - ADJOURNMENT
- DOCUMENTS
- QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Page: 22645
Senator ROBERT RAY (9:32 AM)
—I am surprised that the Manager of Government Business has not outlined the circumstances of this case before moving such a motion. It is probably the view of the opposition that it will not oppose this motion. But it does highlight a difference of approach in the two privileges committees of this parliament, and I think that should be noted for the record. The Senate Standing Committee of Privileges at this moment has before it a reference via this chamber to do with the corporations committee, leaks and potential contempts therein. That, of course, is a joint committee which I think has five House of Representatives members as well as four senators. Our decision was not to call any of the House of Representatives members before that privileges committee based on what we regard as the comity between the houses.
A later complication arose when it was found that the in camera submission that had been leaked to a newspaper also went to the Treasurer, Mr Costello, and to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, Mr Hockey, and that reinforced our view that it was an even less appropriate course of action to call them before the Senate Privileges Committee. We do not want to see a situation where a potential partisanship might evolve, which I must note is virtually absent from both privileges committees, where those privileges committees take action to call members of the executive before them for a partisan political reason. Therein lies a slight danger.
If I understand it correctly, there is absolutely no suspicion whatsoever that these senators being called before the House of Representatives Committee of Privileges have acted improperly. They are merely there to assist the committee with its inquiries. But I think in the long term we should look at trying to resolve this as an issue of principle. It is a fairly well accepted practice that members of parliament only appear before parliamentary committees on their own volition, and this motion does not change that. It merely gives them permission; it does not compel—I note that. Nevertheless, it is not a practice to be generally encouraged.
We should encourage the House of Representatives Privileges Committee to call senators only when it thinks it is absolutely necessary and not as a matter of form. As I said, the Senate Privileges Committee has consistently avoided calling House of Representatives members or seeking permission to call House of Representatives members before it. This in some ways can impede its inquiries, but it has always thought it was a price worth paying. I must say that is especially reinforced if the question of ministers comes up, because compelling ministers from one chamber to appear before another I think in the long run is going to be disastrous. The opposition will not oppose this motion on this occasion but just urges caution in the way these matters are proceeded with.