Senator STOTT DESPOJA (Leader of the Australian Democrats) (4:58 PM) —The Australian Democrats would have been quite happy for this vote to proceed today. We acknowledge what Senator Brown is hoping to achieve through his motion. However, we do not agree with the notion of a five-year cooling-off period. On behalf of the Australian Democrats, I have just introduced a private members bill, the Ministers of State (Post-Retirement Employment Restrictions) Bill 2002, in the name of Senator Murray and in my name, which seeks to legislate for an enforceable, two-year cooling-off period. We have heard in the recent remarks of Senator Faulkner the policy position of the Labor Party and I acknowledge it is a 12-month cooling-off period. I seek clarification as to whether or not that is a legislative requirement; that is, is it enforceable? Is it not simply a code of conduct that has been proposed by the opposition? Senator Brown talks about five years. We do not believe that is a particularly reasonable scenario. We say that because you have heard of international precedents that have been referred to in the Senate this afternoon.

Senator STOTT DESPOJA —Thank you, Senator Faulkner. The Democrats have put forward a private senator's bill that is based on international precedents, including the UK, Canada and the United States. We have heard very little if nothing at all from the government. I am still waiting to hear strong, rational reasons from the Prime Minister and the coalition as to why there should not be an enforceable cooling-off period for former ministers and also former senior ministerial advisers before they can take up work—that is, a consulting or lobbying position—in an area for which they were directly and previously responsible.

There are a couple of issues at stake here, some of which have been recognised already, related to accountability. The recent examples, to which people have referred, have raised serious ethical questions not just among members of parliament but particularly among the public. As legislators, I think we have to work particularly hard to reinstall the faith of the public and the community in politicians and in our political institutions. Recent examples do very little to ensure that. There is an issue in relation to accountability, ethics and public confidence.

Senator Murray —And urgency.

Senator STOTT DESPOJA —And urgency. I guess that goes to the heart of the debate, Senator Murray, you are right. We have heard very little from this government as to why we should not meet the standards set in other industrialised countries. There has been no rational argument come forth from the Prime Minister except that he believes that people should have the right to go out and pursue a career in the private sector, make money and utilise the skills that we apparently acquire through public office and in our service as politicians.

No-one is saying that former ministers cannot go out and be involved in lobbying or consultancy and utilise those very general, maybe even specific, skills that they pick up as a consequence of being a minister or member of parliament, but they cannot exercise those skills in that particular area for which they were previously responsible. We know all too well in this place that ministers and, indeed, increasingly, senior ministerial advisers do have access to secretive and sensitive information. They do have information that the rest of us, and certainly the public, are not privy to. I think we have to recognise that they are charged with a particular responsibility and we should expect nothing less than the highest standards of accountability from these men and women.

I think the time has come for the cooling-off period and the accountability provisions—certainly the ones that the Democrats have suggested. The community recognises that fact. Increasingly, politicians in the parliament recognise that fact. Once again, the Democrats, with a keen interest in accountability, have decided to act on this issue and put forward what we believe is a moderate proposal which relates to the postretirement employment opportunities of ministers and senior ministerial advisers. There are some notable exemptions. I commend this bill to members of the Senate for reading. If people have better ideas on this—and certainly Senator Brown has put forward his idea; the Democrats disagree that the opposition's proposal is the way to go—they can raise them. At least we are starting this debate. It is now time for some action from the government. We are quite happy to proceed with the motion before us, but even better we have a private senator's bill on the Notice Paper with which we could proceed now. (Time expired)