- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Council
- 21 June 2007
Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 38 of 56
| Next Item »
Page: 1497
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Lands, Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Regional Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [5.13 p.m.]: I move:
1. That this House adopt, for the purposes of section 9 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the following code of conduct:
PREAMBLE
? The Members of the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council have reached agreement on a Code of Conduct which is to apply to all Members of Parliament.
? Members of Parliament recognise that they are in a unique position of being responsible to the electorate. The electorate has the right to dismiss them from office at regular elections.
? Members of Parliament acknowledge their responsibility to maintain the public trust placed in them by performing their duties with honesty and integrity, respecting the law and the institution of Parliament, and using their influence to advance the common good of the people of New South Wales.
? Members of Parliament acknowledge that their principal responsibility in serving as Members is to the people of New South Wales.
THE CODE
1 Disclosure of conflict of interest
(a) Members of Parliament must take all reasonable steps to declare any conflict of interest between their private financial interests and decisions in which they participate in the execution of their office.
(b) This may be done through declaring their interests on the Register of Disclosures of the relevant House or through declaring their interest when speaking on the matter in the House or a Committee, or in any other public and appropriate manner.
(c) A conflict of interest does not exist where the member is only affected as a member of the public or a member of a broad class.
2 Bribery
(a) A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which the Member has received, is receiving or expects to receive.
(b) A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which any of the following persons has received, is receiving or expects to receive:
(i) a member of the Member's family;
(ii) a business associate of the Member; or
(iii) any other person or entity from whom the Member expects to receive a financial benefit .
(c) A breach of the prohibition on bribery constitutes a substantial breach of this Code of Conduct.
3 Gifts
(a) Members must declare all gifts and benefits received in connection with their official duties, in accordance with the requirements for the disclosure of pecuniary interests.
(b) Members must not accept gifts that may pose a conflict of interest or which might give the appearance of an attempt to improperly influence the Member in the exercise of his or her duties.
(c) Members may accept political contributions in accordance with part 6 of the Election Funding Act 1981.
4 Use of public resources
Members must apply the public resources to which they are granted access according to any guidelines or rules about the use of those resources.
5 Use of confidential information
Members must not knowingly and improperly use official information which is not in the public domain, or information obtained in confidence in the course of their parliamentary duties, for the private benefit of themselves or others.
6 Duties as a Member of Parliament
It is recognised that some members are non-aligned and others belong to political parties. Organised parties are a fundamental part of the democratic process and participation in their activities is within the legitimate activities of Members of Parliament.
7 Secondary employment or engagements
Members must take all reasonable steps to disclose at the start of a parliamentary debate:
(a) the identity of any person by whom they are employed or engaged or by whom they were employed or engaged in the last two years (but not if it was before the Member was sworn in as a Member);
(b) the identity of any client of any such person or any former client who benefited from a Member's services within the previous two years (but not if it was before the Member was sworn in as a Member); and
(c) the nature of the interest held by the person, client or former client in the parliamentary debate.
This obligation only applies if the Member is aware, or ought to be aware, that the person, client or former client may have an interest in the parliamentary debate which goes beyond the general interest of the public.
This disclosure obligation does not apply if a Member simply votes on a matter; it will only apply when he or she participates in a debate. If the Member has already disclosed the information in the Member's entry in the pecuniary interest register, he or she is not required to make a further disclosure during the parliamentary debate.
2. That this resolution has continuing effect unless and until amended or rescinded by resolution of the House.
The Government proposes to amend members' obligations under the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament. This is the last step in the consultation process that the Government began last year when it referred its then proposed amendments to the code to the Privileges Committee of each House. The Government has carefully considered the recommendations in the reports of the respective committees in finalising its changes to the code. The motion sets out a revised code, which includes a number of amendments regarding the prohibition on bribery and members' secondary employment. Other minor changes are also made to the code.
Specifically, the Government proposes to extend the prohibition on bribery to prohibit the receipt of benefits in kind, such as goods and services, in return for a member taking action in Parliament. The motion also amends the prohibition on bribery to clarify the circumstances in which action taken by a member in return for private benefits being conferred on a person who has a close association with the member is prohibited. The Government considers that members of Parliament or their close associates, such as family members, should not receive any private benefits—whether monetary or in the form of goods and services—in return for a member taking action in Parliament.
The motion also clarifies the prohibition on bribery so that it is clear that private benefits received by members are clearly unacceptable, without affecting legitimate political activities. The Government also proposes to impose new obligations on members to disclose details of secondary employment at the start of parliamentary debate in some circumstances. This includes details of clients who have benefited from the member's services. This proposal builds upon important reforms to disclosure obligations set out in the Constitution (Disclosure by Members) Amendment Regulation 2007, which was made on 28 February 2007. The regulation imposes new obligations on members to disclose details of their secondary employment in the Pecuniary Interests Register. These measures will further enhance the public's confidence in members of Parliament.
Ms LEE RHIANNON [5.06 p.m.]: The Greens support this motion to amend the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament. We are all aware that public trust in members of Parliament is frequently damaged by unfortunate incidents. We must review the code of conduct periodically to see whether it can be tightened in order to restore public confidence in the work of individual parliamentarians and in the parliamentary process. The Greens particularly welcome the changes that tighten the sections on bribery and secondary employment but we believe the Government has missed some important opportunities. It is a shame that the review did not go further. We believe the Government has thrown away a great opportunity to clear away the rorts that are tarnishing the reputations of law makers.
I will explore those parts of the code that deal with free admission and passes and with alcohol and abuse. The Greens believe part 3 of the code should be amended to address the practice of members of Parliament receiving free tickets to concerts and sporting events. We wish to insert a new paragraph in part 3 of the code. Accordingly, I move the following amendment:
After paragraph 3 (c) insert:
(d) Members must not accept free admission to an event or facility for which an ordinary member of the public would have to pay, unless that event or facility is directly related to the responsibilities of the member.
This will mean that members who are not associated with sport or entertainment in the course of their parliamentary duties cannot take advantage of freebies. It will have no impact on the work of the Minister for the Arts or the Minister for Sport. It is understandable that people have become cynical about the political process, and freebies feed that cynicism. Members were offered freebies during the Sydney Olympic Games and are sometimes offered tickets to football matches and other events. We must clean up this area in the twenty-first century.
I also take up the issue of members' duties. The Greens have explored this matter before. We are concerned about people who drink on the job and we have endeavoured to make some quite minor changes in this regard. Unfortunately, our efforts have been resisted. Therefore, I move the following further amendment:
After paragraph 6 insert::
(b) Members of Parliament will not perform their duties as an MP while under the influence of alcohol or any other drug.
(c) Members of Parliament will carry out their duties without abusing or harming other parliamentarians or the public.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.10 p.m.]: On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party, I support the motion to adopt the Code of Conduct for members. As a member of the Legislative Council Privileges Committee, I am aware that the committee spent quite some time finalising the code, in cooperation with a similar committee of the other place. Because of that, we should leave the code as it is, without any amendment. Any amendments that the Ms Lee Rhiannon proposes should be forwarded to the respective committees so that they may consider them. However, an amendment to the Code of Conduct made in this House may not be acceptable to the committee of the other place, and that would mean we will not have a joint code of conduct. Therefore, an amendment may delay the implementation of a code of conduct, and may even prevent this Parliament having such a code. It has taken a very long time to get agreement on this code, so I believe it should remain unamended.
Dr JOHN KAYE [5.11 p.m.]: I echo the remarks of and support the amendments moved by Ms Lee Rhiannon. I ask the Minister to clarify the third paragraph of clause 7 of the code, which refers to a disclosure obligation to identify any person by whom they are employed or engaged. I refer specifically to the words:
This disclosure obligation does not apply if a Member simply votes on a matter.
My understanding is that the intention is to obviate any need to disclose a perceived conflict of interest that would arise through secondary employment or engagements in respect of a vote on a matter in this House. I understand we are only seeking to require disclosure in respect of debate within this House. I wonder whether the Minister would, in his closing remarks, address that matter. It concerns us that we are allowing people to vote on an issue in respect of which they have a conflict of interest regarding their employment, but not to enter into the debate.
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Lands, Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Regional Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [5.12 p.m.], in reply: In closing, I would reinforce the comments made by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. This proposal has resulted from considerable discussion between members of both Houses and among members of the privileges committees of both Houses. I could seek a ruling to impose the standing order that requires an amendment to be in writing, especially as I think this has been an ambush or stunt by the Greens, but I will not do so because that would waste the time of the House. On the next occasion I would suggest that the Greens do the right thing and adhere to the standing orders—a big ask, I know. However, I ask members to vote against the amendments.
Question—That the amendments be agreed to—put and resolved in the negative.
Amendments negatived.
Question—That the motion be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Message forwarded to the Legislative Assembly advising it of the resolution.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:46:52 : Update this page