Download Word

House of Representatives                                Ch 5                                                 p 142

Pecuniary interest

In the House of Representatives matters to do with the pecuniary interests of Members ¹ are governed by precedent and practice established in accordance with sections 44 and 45 of the Constitution, standing orders 134 and 231 and by resolutions of the House.

Section 44(v) of the Constitution states that any person who has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than 25 persons shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives ( see p.  137 for cases of Senator Webster and Mr Entsch).

Section 45(iii) provides that if a Senator or Member of the House of Representatives directly or indirectly takes or agrees to take any fee or honorarium for services rendered to the Commonwealth, or for services rendered in the Parliament to any person or State, the place of the Senator or Member shall thereupon become vacant. There are no recorded cases of any substantive action taken under this section.

Standing order 134(a) states that a Member may not vote in a division on a question about a matter, other than public policy, in which he or she has a particular direct pecuniary interest. Public policy can be defined as government policy, not identifying any particular person individually and immediately.

A Member’s vote can only be challenged on the grounds of pecuniary interest by means of a substantive motion moved immediately following the completion of a division. If the motion is carried, the vote of the Member is disallowed. ² There have been a number of challenges in the House on the ground of pecuniary interest and in each case the motion was negatived or ruled out of order. On this matter May states:

A motion may be made, however, to object to a vote of a Member who has a direct pecuniary interest in a question. Such an interest must be immediate and personal. On 17 July 1811 the rule was explained thus by Mr Speaker Abbot: ‘This interest must be a direct pecuniary interest, and separately belonging to the persons whose votes were questioned, and not in common with the rest of his Majesty’s subjects, or on a matter of state policy’. ³

It would seem highly unlikely that a Member would become subject to a disqualification of voting rights in the House of Representatives because the House is primarily concerned with matters of public or state interest. All legislation which comes before the House deals with matters of public policy and there is no provision in the standing orders for private bills. ⁴

A case occurred in 1923 when the Speaker, on a motion to disallow a Member’s vote, delivered a lengthy statement in which he referred to a statement in May similar to the above-mentioned reference and certain cases in the State Parliaments. He drew attention to the vital distinction which had to be made between public and private bills and quoted the opinion of a Speaker of the Victorian Legislative Assembly that the practice was correctly stated that the rules governing a matter of pecuniary interest did not apply to questions of public policy, or to public questions at all. ⁵

In 1924 the question was raised as to whether the votes of certain Members, who were interested shareholders in a company which was involved in the receipt of a large sum from the Government, should be allowed. The Speaker made it quite clear that it was not his decision to rule on the matter as the responsibility lay with the House, although he felt it his duty to point out, as he had on a previous occasion, the precedents and practice involved. The Speaker suggested that, if Members considered the matter sufficiently important, it might be debated as a matter of privilege following the moving of a substantive motion. No further action was taken. ⁶

In 1934 the Speaker was asked to rule whether certain Members were in order in recording a vote if they were directly interested as participants in the distribution of the money raised by means of the legislation. The Speaker stated that he could not have a knowledge of the private business of Members and therefore was not in a position to know whether certain Members had, or did not have, a pecuniary interest in the bill. He referred to the relevant standing order and advised that the words ‘not held in common with the rest of the subjects of the Crown’ really decided the issue. The matter was not further pursued. ⁷

In 1948 the Chair in ruling on a point of order stated that ‘the honourable Members referred to are interested financially in the ownership of certain commercial broadcasting stations, but only jointly and severally with other people. Therefore, they are entitled to vote on the measure now before the House’. ⁸ A similar case was recorded in 1951 when the Speaker ruled that a Member who was financially interested in a bill, other than as a shareholder in a company under discussion, should declare himself. The Speaker concluded his remarks by saying that it was not his duty to make an inquiry. ⁹

In 1957 ¹⁰ and 1958, ¹¹ when the House was dealing with banking legislation, the Chair ruled out of order any challenge to a Member’s vote, the ground of the ruling being that the vote was cast on a matter of public policy.

In 1998 a Member concluded that he should not vote on a bill containing, inter alia, an amendment to the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act which he understood dealt with an anomaly in respect of his own superannuation entitlements. ¹² Even in this case it could be argued that the issue was one of public policy and that the amendments in question would have effect in respect of others in similar circumstances (certainly the Member was not identified personally and immediately).

In 1984 the House resolved, inter alia, that Members must declare any relevant interest at the beginning of a speech (in the House, in the then committee of the whole or in a committee), and if proposing to vote in a division. It was not necessary to declare an interest when directing a question. In 1988 the requirement was abolished, following a report from the Committee of Members’ Interests which expressed doubt that the requirement served any useful purpose. ¹³ Members of course are still free to make such a declaration, and from time to time do so. ¹⁴

In the House of Commons declarations of relevant interests are required in debate and other proceedings, and when giving notice, including notice of questions. However, it is recognised that during certain proceedings, such as oral questions, declaration may not be practical. ¹⁵

For summaries of the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament (1974-5), ¹⁶ and the (government) Committee on Public Duty and Private Interest (1978-9) ¹⁷ see previous editions. ¹⁸

Certain additional considerations relating to Ministers are covered in the Chapter on ‘House, Government and Opposition’.

S.O. 134(b).

May , 23rd edn, p. 491.

Joint Committee on Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament, Declaration of interests , Transcript of evidence, vol. 1, 30 January - 27 February, AGPS, Canberra, 1975, p. 65.

VP 1923-24/179-80; H.R. Deb. (23.8.23) 3380-3.

VP 1923-24/405; H.R. Deb. (11.9.24) 4334-7.

H.R. Deb. (12.12.34) 1130.

H.R. Deb. (24.11.48) 3470.

H.R. Deb. (15.11.51) 2154. For a precedent of a Member declaring his interest in a bill before a division is taken see H.R. Deb. (3.11.77) 2817.

VP 1957-58/282; H.R. Deb. (21.11.57) 2447-9.

VP 1958/30; H.R. Deb. (19.3.58) 478-9.

Superannuation Legislation (Commonwealth Employment) Repeal and Amendment Bill 1998, Schedule 11. In the event the only divisions (from which the Member abstained) occurred on opposition second reading and detailed stage amendments, VP 1998-2001/110-113.

VP 1983-84/945-6; Report relating to the need for oral declarations of interests by Members , PP 261 (1988) 8; 

VP 1987-89/961.

E.g. H.R. Deb (16.12.92) 3940.

May , 23rd edn, pp. 421-3.

Joint Committee on Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament, Declaration of interests, PP 182 (1975) 46.

Committee of Inquiry into Public Duty and Private Interest, Report , PP 353 (1979).

At pp. 146-7 of the 4th edition.