The Parliamentarian 2012 Issue Two - Well-being indicators

OF EXC RY

11

19

11

LENCE EL

A CENTU

Cover_Layout 1 15/08/2012 11:53 Page 1

~ C PA ~ 2

0

TheParliamentarian Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth

2012 | Issue Two XCIII | Price £12

BETTER LIFE:

OECD well-being indicators to assess progress made by the people PAGE 116

PLUS New South Wales campaign finance reform PAGE 96

Building a free and responsible press throughout the Commonwealth

Engaging the electorate: An evolving process in Scotland

Mock Parliaments help to place more Pacific women in the House

PAGE 100

PAGE 112

PAGE 120

Inside front cover_Layout 1 15/08/2012 11:00 Page 37

Calendar of Events 2012 September 7-15

58th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference, Colombo, Sri Lanka

October 22-6

10th Annual Canadian CPA Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

TBC

Constituency Development Workshop, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

The publication of a Calendar of CPA events is a service intended to foster the exchange of views between Branches and the encouragement of new ideas. Further information may be obtained from the Branches concerned or the Secretariat. Branch Secretaries are requested to send updates of this material to the Information Officer (pirc@cpahq.org) to ensure the Calendar is full and accurate.

Sri Lanka ad_3-col feature 15/08/2012 10:21 Page 81

58

COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY CONFERENCE COLOMbO, sRI LANkA 7-15 sEPTEMbER 2012 TH

“ENsuRINg A RELEvANT COMMONWEALTH FOR THE FuTuRE”

Contents_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:14 Page 82

CONTENTS

2012: ISSUE 2

104

100

Journal of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth Vol. XCIII 2012: Issue Two ISSN 0031-2282 Issued by the Secretariat of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SWIP 3JA, United Kingdom Tel: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 Email: hq.sec@cpahq.org www.cpahq.org

COMMENT

MAIN ARTICLES

Inside Issues

Campaign Finance Reform

Resolving issues through Parliament: From conflict between peoples to conflicts with technology Page 84

View from the Chair

The Queen and the Commonwealth: An unrivalled force for unity Page 86

View from the CWP Publisher: Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General

Discrimination against women: Official and informal Page 88

Editor: Andrew Imlach Director of Communications and Research

View from the Secretary-General

The plight of children in the 21st Century Page 90

Designer and Assistant Editor: Lisa Leaño Front cover Street tradersin Delhi, India. Jorg Hackemann/Shutterstock® Printed in: England by Warners Midlands, PLC; New Delhi by Jainco Art India, and Singapore by Times Printers Private Limited

82 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Hon. Barry O’Farrell, MP Page 96

Building a free and responsible press throughout the Commonwealth Lord Black of Brentwood Page 100

Repealing Canada’s dated ban on transmission of election results

Engaging the electorate: An evolving process in Scotland Mr David Stewart, MSP Page 112

Going beyond GDP to foster “Better policies for Better lives” Ms Martine Durand Page 116

Hon. Tim Uppal, PC, MP Page 104

Mock Parliaments help to place more Pacific women in the House

Constitutional modernization for Montserrat

Parliamentary World Heritage sites

Prof. Sir Howard Fergus, KBE, PhD Page 108

Mr Eni Tekanene Page 120

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC Page 122

Contents_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:17 Page 83

120

116

PROFILE Sri Lanka: A commitment to parliamentary democracy to help rebuild society

NEWS Parliamentary news: New Zealand, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, India, and British Columbia.

Page 129

Annual subscription (four issues) UK: £34 post free.

Worldwide: £36 surface post £42 airmail Price per issue UK: £12 Worldwide: £13 surface post £14 airmail Opinions and comments expressed in articles and reviews published in The Parliamentarian are those of the individual contributors and should not be attributed to the Secretariat of the Association.

The Parliament of Sri Lanka Host to the 2012 Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference Supplement

Promoting sustainable forest management

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 83

Inside Issues_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:22 Page 84

INSIDE ISSUES

RESOLVING ISSUES THROUGH PARLIAMENT: FROM CONFLICTS BETWEEN PEOPLES TO CONFLICTS WITH TECHNOLOGY The Editor’s note

Sri Lanka’s three decades of brutal civil war are not attributed to flaws in its system of democratic representation; but reform to that system is seen by contributors to this issue as one of the keys to the country’s recovery and reconciliation process. It also emerges here in solutions to problems with representation in New South Wales, Canada and Montserrat.

The terrorism and conflict which have caused so much suffering and loss of life in Sri Lanka since the 1980s dominate the views of the country’s government and opposition Members who write in this issue’s special Profile on Sri Lanka to mark its Parliament’s hosting of this year’s Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference. Few Commonwealth countries have experienced the level of conflict that Sri Lanka has; although thankfully no terrorism has yet produced anything close to the natural destruction inflicted on Montserrat by its volcano.

A current proposition in parliamentary strengthening advocates measures to make Parliament and its Members more effective representatives of the people so they identify conflicts early and work with the people and

the government to implement effective solutions. The underlying theme of the articles in our Sri Lankan Profile shows that sometimes no amount of democratic reforms early in a dispute will satisfy a terrorist element intent on escalating a conflict. The Profile also reveals dissatisfaction with proportional representation, a voting system that its advocates say improves the representation of minorities and therefore prevents their political alienation.

Sri Lanka introduced proportional representation before the conflict began and used it again as part of its democratic reforms in 1987 which devolved some authority to elected provincial councils to satisfy the publicly avowed separatist goal of the terrorist movement. These reforms failed to stop the conflict; but Sri Lanka’s parliamentary leaders write in this issue that they remain committed to parliamentary democracy and its reform to enable the country to develop and prevent it from falling back into the violence spiral.

In New South Wales, violence was not the issue that Premier Hon. Barry O’Farrell, MP, and his government sought to correct with a reform to its democratic

84 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

system. The Premier opens this issue with an account of why election financing rules were changed so campaign financing contributions comes only from the state’s voters. He explains how the state is seeking to do this, including overcoming the challenge facing legislators and regulators dealing with money: how to control the flow of a resource that moves freely through the electronic world.

The impact of that virtual world is being felt in politics in a variety of other ways as well. In one area, the media, it has exposed certain United Kingdom media practices to highly critical parliamentary scrutiny. Lord Black of Brentwood, a Member of the U.K. House of Lords with a high-level media background, writes here on a new Commonwealth Press Union Media Trust report on legislation and other measures used around the Commonwealth to curtail freedom of expression in the media. These measures can damage the “established” media of print and broadcasting; but they can’t control the “new” media of internet-based bloggers and social networking sites against which the established media must compete.

Governments considering action against the established media risk damaging the ability not simply of

print and broadcasting to inform the people, but also of the people to have access to responsible and reliable professional sources of political and parliamentary news.

Citizens who have only bloggers and social media fanatics to rely on for news will not have a balanced – or often even accurate – perspective on their own governance.

Hon. Tim Uppal, PC, MP, Canada’s Minister of State responsible for democratic reform, tackles a particular aspect of the social media issue as he describes plans to reform part of Canada’s historic democratic process – the ban on publishing election results while voting is still going on in different time zones. The ability of Canada’s election administrators to prevent the established media from influencing election results in this way has been destroyed by the internet. Mr Uppal re-examines the issue, including whether knowing the results from an earlier time zone actually does affect the results in other parts of the country.

In Montserrat, Prof. Sir Howard Fergus, KBE, PhD, a former Speaker of the Legislative Council and de facto Deputy Governor, looks at the latest constitutional reforms introduced in a United Kingdom overseas

Inside Issues_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:22 Page 85

INSIDE ISSUES

Sri Lanka is recovering from three decades of terrorism and conflict.

territory in the Caribbean whose upheavals of late have been volcanic rather than political.

Consultations were carried out and changes made; but Sir Howard asks whether they did what they were advertised to do.

Electronic communications are also involved in the development of changes to the petitions system used by the Scottish Parliament.

Mr David Stewart, MSP, who chairs the committee handling petitions, writes here on how the Parliament’s eight-year-old e-

petitions system is being constantly adjusted to ensure it remains as an effective tool for the people to communicate with Parliament.

Ms Martine Durand, Chief Statistician and Director of the Statistics Directorate of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, reports here on an OECD initiative to help governments deal with one communication which often leaves the people wondering if their government really understands

them – economic statistics.

Traditional economic indicators – unemployment rates, changes in gross domestic product, trade figures, interest rates, et cetera – that governments use to tell people things are improving don’t tell the whole story. The OECD has therefore developed an overall quality of life assessment system to give governments, political leaders and the people far more accurate indicators of how their countries are doing. She explains the process here.

Explaining the parliamentary process to women in Kiribati could convince more of them to stand for election, so the United Nations Development Programme and the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat joined with the National Parliament in 2011 to try a new idea: a mock Parliament for Pacific women. Mr Eni Tekanene, the Clerk of the Parliament, writes in this issue about the endeavour and its results in the subsequent election to the real Parliament.

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC,

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 85

Inside Issues_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:22 Page 86

INSIDE ISSUES

completes this issue with another novel, albeit not completely new, governance idea.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designates World Heritage Sites to recognize and protect them as outstanding examples of human endeavour and nature. So far, only one Parliament carries this designation, the United Kingdom’s Palace of Westminster, and it shares it with two adjacent churches.

Two Canadian provincial legislative buildings, the homes of the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly in Charlottetown and the Nova Scotia Legislative Assembly in Halifax, were significant in the development of democracy in North America and the development of Canada as a country, so their Assemblies have applied to become World Heritage Sites. Mr Macnutt records the processes used and the justifications presented to support their applications. We join Mr Macnutt and the Parliaments concerned in encouraging Parliaments and Legislatures to seek UNESCO recognition to remind citizens of the enduring importance of their parliamentary legacy.

The importance of Sri Lanka’s democratic heritage, its ancient tradition of good governance and, more recently, of constitutional reform are a strong basis for the next step in its political development, writes the Speaker of its Parliament, Hon. Chamal Rajapaksa, MP. He opens a comprehensive Profile on the host of the 2012 Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference which provides a forthright and often critical selfassessment of Sri Lanka’s recent history, the war and the reconciliation and recovery programmes needed now.

Former Prime Minister Hon. Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka,

MP, argues that Sri Lanka’s commitment to parliamentary democracy and its tradition of mature political debate will enable it to rebuild its society, and strengthen its Parliament.

Sri Lanka’s Opposition Leader, Hon. Ranil Wickremasinghe, MP, also stresses parliamen-tary strengthening and adds that respect for parliamentary values, human rights and the rule of law must be re-asserted to lead Sri Lanka successfully out of conflict.

Hon. A.H.M. Fowzie, MP, a senior Minister, writes that Sri Lanka is now a mature parliamentary democracy able to bring peace and prosperity to a long-suffering people tired of political instability, foreign irritants, attempted coups and terrorism.

Prof. the Hon. Tissa Vitharana, MP, Minister of Scientific Affairs and a leading academic, reports that his country is now able to respond not just to social and economic issues but also to the issue that he says has placed it unfairly under Commonwealth and international scrutiny.

Another Senior Minister, Hon. Dew Gunasekara, MP, examines a political history featuring repeated constitutional reforms, the creation of ethnic power blocs and an economy heavily reliant on agricultural exports.

National Heritage Minister Hon. Dr Jagath Balasuriya, MP, raises the issue of proportional representation and notes its unpopularity with most of the country’s Sinhalese majority. He argues for electoral reform.

Two other Senior Ministers, Hon. Vasudeva Nanayakkara, MP, and Hon. Nandimithra Ekanayake, MP, examine different aspects of the reconciliation process. They write separately about programmes to rebuild Sri Lanka as a united multicultural despite the efforts of those trying to perpetuate the conflict and undermine

86 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

rehabilitation through international propaganda.

Opposition Chief Whip Hon. John Amaratunga, MP, recalls Sri Lanka’s constitutional history in arguing for changes in governance to promote unity rather than dissension.

The effects of conflict on women should never be underestimated. It may be one reason why women are now prominent in all walks of Sri Lankan life except Parliament. This year’s President of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Hon. Dr Sudharshini Fernandopulle, MP, examines why she has relatively few CWP colleagues around her in her own Parliament.

Hon. Wimal Weerawansa, MP, a Minister and a party Leader in the governing coalition, writes on the political, trade and economic development issues which must be overcome not just for reconciliation but for the development of the entire society.

In the area of parliamentary reform, Hon. Eran Wickramaratne, MP, focuses on Sri Lanka’s parliamentary committees. As a senior economist and parliamentary newcomer, he advocates significant reforms to transform the committees into effective watchdogs of the government.

A Sri Lankan MP whose professional background is in evaluation systems, Hon. Kabir Hashim, MP, advocates that the introduction of specialized evaluation and management processes will make parliamentary scrutiny more effective.

Hon. Dr Harsha de Silva, MP, has another solution: adopting aspects of American congressional politics to the Sri Lankan Parliament to improve public input and parliamentary lawmaking.

His recent experiences in Washington, D.C., convinced him that his parliamentary colleagues need to emulate the performance

of American Congress men and women.

A less enthusiastic perspective on the American system is offered

by Prof . Dr Rajiva Wijesinha, MP, who contends that combining the parliamentary and congressional systems of government has not worked for Sri Lanka.

A measure already taken to strengthen Parliament, the introduction of a new Parliamentary Council, will help Parliament to resist executive domination, says a Member of the Council with experience as both a government and opposition Parliamentarian, Hon. A.H.M. Azwer, MP. Hon. Thilanga Sumathipala, MP, suggests that Sri Lanka should not rely only on its own experiences to move successfully out of conflict. Other Commonwealth parliamentary democracies could provide valuable pointers to the most effective routes to accountability, economic growth and the involvement of disaffected sections of the population.

One of Sri Lanka’s young Members, Hon. Udith Lokubandara, MP, agrees, noting that Sri Lanka has many strengths, and one of them is its membership in the community of those who adhere to the Commonwealth’s democratic values, including the right of all sovereign nations to develop along the paths they determine.

Key to the advancement of every Parliament is the contribution of its senior professional staff. Sri Lanka is fortunate to have a strong parliamentary service with constitutional protections. Mr Dhammika Dasanayake, the Secretary-General of Parliament, concludes the Sri Lankan Profile with an account of the work of the staff who supply the administrative and procedural services necessary for the success of Parliament, its Presiding Officers and all Members.

CPA centennial book ad_Different Ads.qxd 15/08/2012 11:00 Page 87

A CPA publication ‘The Evolution of Commonwealth Parliamentary Democracy: The CPA at 100’, is a special publication from the CPA which celebrates a hundred years of the Association.

This commemorative work features articles from prominent Members, former Parliamentarians and experts in Parliament from across the Commonwealth on topics relating to the advancement of Parliamentary Democracy and Good Governance.

Contributors include former Chairs of the Executive Committee, Hon. Dato Seri Mohd. Shafie Apdal, MP, writing on “Growing up with democracy” and Dame Billie Miller on “Expanding public involvement in Parliament and politics”.

Also included are testimonials on the value of Commonwealth inter-parliamentary co-operation and a full reference directory of all 185 CPA Branch details.

“The CPA, through its conferences and delegations throughout the Commonwealth, creates a better understanding of different countries and cultures.”

Hon. Graham Gunn, Member of the House of Assembly, South Australia, 1970 to 2010.

To purchase a copy of this book or for more information on the contents please contact CPA Secretariat, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, U.K.Tel.: (+44-20) 7799-1460 Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073 E-mail: hq.sec@cpahq.org

View from the Chair_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:23 Page 88

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

88 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

t t it Pi t

communications technology, Her Majesty is also able to When, in 1949, the first eight members of the send a personal message to Commonwealth citizens on Commonwealth signed the London Declaration, they both Commonwealth Day and Christmas Day. agreed that the British monarch would be “the symbol She has always ensured that her role remains of the free association of its independent member symbolic: the Head of the Commonwealth, which nations, and as such the Head of the embraces countries with a wide variety of constitutional Commonwealth”. This moment marked the creation arrangements, must necessarily be apolitical. Whilst it of a totally new model for a family of nations, one that would be contrary to the spirit of the Commonwealth for HM The Queen emphasized in her speech on her its Head ever to interfere in the machinery of government, accession: “The Commonwealth bears no relation to Her Majesty’s long experience must have been a valuable the empires of the past. It is an entirely new resource into which Heads of Government from time to conception built on the highest qualities of the spirit of time may have found it helpful to tap. She has always man: friendship, loyalty and the desire for freedom demonstrated equal regard and respect for every and peace.” It is my hope that it will remain so.

Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, member of the Commonwealth family.

During the 60 years of her reign so far, the Queen MP At this Diamond Jubilee milestone in the Queen’s long has been a passionate and untiring ambassador for Chairperson of the CPA career of public service, I join every Commonwealth the Commonwealth and its underpinning values of Executive Committee citizen in wishing Her Majesty many more happy and development, democracy, human rights and the rule of productive years of service to the whole Commonwealth. law. Over those years, its membership has expanded However, thoughts will doubtless turn to the future. There will naturally be to include even Francophone and Lusophone countries. Seemingly this debate about how the next Head of the Commonwealth should be chosen. free association continues to hold attractions. Regardless of domestic No automatic line of succession has been established. This will be constitutional arrangements, member states old and new have determined in due course by Heads of Government. wholeheartedly embraced Her Majesty’s position as the symbolic head of It is proper that there should be extensive consultation. Many the association. arguments will be canvassed. They may well extend to consideration of the This role has been without precedent in the history of international purpose and goals of this remarkable company of nations, a discussion associations. One of Her Majesty’s most notable and, it is to be hoped, most which has already been sparked by the 2011 report by the Eminent enduring legacies has been to mould it in accordance with the everPersons Group. Yet it is surely to be hoped that the past will inform the developing nature of the Commonwealth. future. Her Majesty has defined the role. The Head of the Commonwealth Her Majesty has travelled extensively within the Commonwealth. Her is above all a symbolic figure, not an executive. The job description visits have helped to emphasize the unifying links between countries of precludes political ambition. Whatever conclusion is reached the person diverse traditions and culture. The Queen keeps in close touch with the who follows Her Majesty will face a formidable task to discharge those Commonwealth Secretary-General, attends each biennial Commonwealth duties with as much dignity, commitment and diligence as she has Heads of Government Meeting and celebrates Commonwealth Day unfailingly shown over the last 60 years. The bar has been set very high. annually at Westminster Abbey in London. With the developments in

/P

/S

.

THE QUEEN AND THE COMMONWEALTH: AN UNRIVALLED FORCE FOR UNITY

View from the Chair_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:24 Page 89

Pictures credited to dutourdumonde/Pressurepics/Shutterstock.com

VIEW FROM THE CHAIR

Mer Majesty The Queen: top, on her way to Westminster during the Diamond Jubilee celebration in June; bottom, leaving Westminster Abbey after the Commonwealth Day Service in March.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 89

View from the CWP_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:24 Page 90

VIEW FROM THE CWP

Malgorzata Kistryn/Shutterstock.com

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN: OFFICIAL AND INFORMAL

mistaken belief that the females will marry and have families that will In my country there is a saying in our Kweyol language which goes: compete for their attention?

“Soufrance yohn famm sey soufrance tout famm.” The translation is: “The But, even where women are fortunate to live in suffering of one woman is the suffering of all women.” I countries where equality is constitutionally guaranteed to would make bold to say that women all over the world everyone, we hear of the glass ceiling. This glass ceiling share this view for, while the level of discrimination is not a figment of the imagination. It is real and I am one against women may vary from country to country, I of the many women all over the world who shout with joy have not yet heard about any country in the world every time we see or hear of a new crack in that glass where no discrimination exists. (sometimes I feel it is more like unbreakable Plexiglas!)

Discrimination takes on many guises and ceiling. disguises. And what may on the surface appear to be And nowhere has that glass ceiling seemed more benevolence by way of “protection” of the fairer sex, impenetrable than the one hanging over the benches of when the skin of reality is peeled away, it is merely courts of the Commonwealth and beyond. I am well another form of discrimination. aware that at the University of the West Indies, female I am particularly referring here to the practice in students have outnumbered male students in the Faculty many jurisdictions that purports to shield womenfolk of Law since the early 1980s, yet the female cream from the cut and thrust of politics by simply banning Hon. Alix Boyd Knights MHA simply would not rise. I believe it was stymied by the “Old them from taking part.

Chairperson of the Boys’ Network”.

And consider the position of women even where Commonwealth Women I am pleased to report, though, that things have no such “protection” exists: yes, we can join the Parliamentarians improved so well in our part of the world that two years (political) party and, yes, we will be permitted to run for ago in Antigua, the full Court of the East Caribbean Court elections; but where is the funding coming from to do of Appeal comprised of three female Justices of Appeal. so? How many women who run for elections receive Hallelujah! One glass ceiling appears to have been as much funding as their male colleagues? shattered.

And how many women are fortunate enough to be permitted to run in The corporate world, too, has not been any kinder to women. Certainly “safe” seats? in that arena the saying “women have to work twice as hard to get half as But discrimination is not only to be found in politics. I personally think far” is never more true. From time to time we do hear of women heading the worst possible area of discrimination against the female occurs at birth. the top conglomerates; but these are mere cracks in an otherwise solid Will we ever know how many babies are destroyed at birth every year in ceiling. so very many countries simply because they are female? And what about And then, too, there is the issue of women getting less pay doing the those that do survive the slaughter? What is their quality of life like? same work as men. And why do the jobs such as nursing and teaching, Discrimination against females in education is not much different. The traditionally held by women, attract such low pay? uneducated female in the 21st century is condemned to a particularly low There are still many countries within and outside of the Commonwealth standard of living and such poverty from which she is unlikely to be able to where women are not permitted to own land, to seek a divorce or to avail escape. Even here the discrimination may be manifested in very subtle themselves of social services which are readily available to men. ways. Have we not heard or read of young girls who after puberty are Even in sports and entertainment there seem to be elements of forced to miss school because they cannot afford sanitary pads? Have we discrimination. Can anyone tell me why the male tennis champion gets a not heard, too, of the many young competent women, armed with their more expensive trophy and a larger purse than his female counterpart? excellent secondary qualifications, being passed over for scholarships in And what about artistes, actors and other entertainment personalities? favour of males who are considered more likely to serve their country in the 90 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

View from the CWP_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:25 Page 91

VIEW FROM THE CWP

women that exists in the Commonwealth and the rest of the world today is capable of being “legislated away” if only there were more women in Parliaments ready and willing to bring these issues, including the informal or unofficial discrimination, to their Parliaments.

Women Parliamentarians, I know that you are suffering along with your sisters and feel their pain. I appeal to you to do what is readily within your power to ease that pain.

This, of course, includes encouraging more women to join your ranks in Parliament. The suffering women of the Commonwealth are waiting on you. DO NOT LET THEM DOWN!!!

Malgorzata Kistryn/Shutterstock.com

Thank God for television star Oprah Winfrey? That’s one way of seeing her billionaire status. But cynics may take the view that she was permitted to rise so as to appease the gods within the female and black milieu, killing two birds with one stone as it were.

Various religious sects cite their sacred texts for their stand on the status of women within their organizations and do not see this as discrimination. So be it, but at the same time one must acknowledge the fact that while some sects remain static in their view, others are slowly relenting.

I have said all of this to point out that much of the discrimination against

Uneducated females in the 21st century are condemned to a particularly low standard of living.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 91

View from the SG_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:26 Page 92

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

THE PLIGHT OF CHILDREN IN THE 21ST CENTURY It is almost 15 years since the United Nations launched the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

Among the MDGs, I was quite touched by the need to provide universal education to all children of schoolgoing age. By “children”, I refer to human beings aged between 3 and 15 years who are still dependent on parents or guardians. Although the year 2015 is the target for achieving the goals, there are still wideranging factors that impinge on children’s rights, such as basic education, mortality, pandemic diseases such as HIV-AIDS, malaria, water shortage, poor sanitation violence, conflict, child labour and a lack of immunization, as well as outright poverty. UNICEF’s 2009 report on the State of the World’s Children – Special Edition notes that: “The world has a unique opportunity to reconstruct itself – and dedicate itself afresh to safeguarding and nurturing not only the

Dr William F. Shija Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association

physical and economic spheres but also its most vulnerable citizens.” The report goes on to suggest that in all aspects of governance (legislative and administrative actions), the challenge is to assess the implications of policies, budgets and programmes on children’s rights and development.

In marking the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the report notes in part that some significant global progress has been made in the development of the survival of and the achievement of basic rights for children, to example: the global deaths of children under five years has dropped from 12.5 million in 1990 to less than 9 million in 2008; the use of insecticide-treated mosquito nets for children under five has risen sharply in Sub-Saharan Africa since 2000 (particularly when supported by the availability of vaccines), and HIV treatment for children under 15 has

The Secretary-General’s Commonwealth gallery

92 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Members of the CPA Executive Committee pictured with the King of Tonga, HM Tupou VI, during the 2012 Mid-Year Meeting in Tonga.

View from the SG_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:27 Page 93

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

the same without children, in the house, school or street. Local and international media always discourage me when they focus on children’s poverty and misery in countries where educational strides have been, and continue to be, made. If the children had an opportunity to air their views, they probably would say: “Why choose us for such negative messages and images.” In spite of the stark negative images, children in many countries continue to benefit from good parental care, teacher guidance and

Pal Teravagimov/Shutterstock.com

been greatly increased in Sub-Saharan Africa. Also, it is encouraging to note from the same report that “more than 1.6 billion people have gained access to improved drinking water sources between 1990 and 2006”. The Convention has actually helped many individuals, families and groups to better understand that the childhood period is one which requires care, protection and assistance to enable children to grow and develop their physical and mental faculties to the fullest possible levels. Therefore, the

Schoolboys in Swaziland: at least five per cent of Swaziland’s population are children orphaned by HIV/AIDS.

challenges cited in the report require further attention and action by policymakers and legislators.

The challenges cited in the anniversary report include: 2.5 billion people lack sanitation; 1 billion children lack survival services (health, sanitation, immunization and protection from violence); 148 million children are born underweight, and 101 million children (particularly girls) are missing primary school education. There are other related factors that affect a child’s development, particularly where there are no support mechanisms based on literacy. These are: poor youth educational achievement, child marriage, lack of birth registration, lack of parental care, use of drugs, child abduction and trafficking et cetera. The recent story of the “traveller” family who kept hundreds of slaves will have been very horrifying to both adults and children in contemporary times. In general terms, it is discouraging to note that, during the period under review, nearly 2 billion children were affected by violence and child labour alone. In general, the report presents more information and statistics to show that the world of children is a very sad one indeed.

Children are the wonderful flowers of humanity. Their presence and activities touch every aspect of everyday life. The life of adults would not be

community love. In countries where society is still open (mostly Africa, Asia and even Latin America), children are often cared for by almost the entire community in which they live. Where religion is established, church and other religious leaders further complement the nurturing of children as they learn to grow up as responsible and productive adults. Also, culturally, the extended family helps to maintain the bond between the old and the young; hence children are protected at all times by close and distant relatives. This is not to suggest that in these societies adults have been kind and caring to children at all times. In fact, surprises continue to emerge all over the world where children have been seriously mistreated by their own parents or close relatives.

In addition to the traditional childcare challenges, the 21st century communications revolution has ushered in several more challenges for adults and children than before. In recent years, political scientists and communication specialists have witnessed heavy exchanges of messages and data by means of the internet, particularly the social media. In the process, individuals of varied age groups have been affected, positively and negatively. The group that I find to have been negatively affected is that of children. They have the capacity to receive, process and disseminate The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 93

View from the SG_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:27 Page 94

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

information through these devices. The information, however, may be positive or negative for their growth and character formation. Parents, governments and social workers have actually raised the concern as to how far should children be left free to use the social media network without supervision.

The free use of social media has led some children to bad habits of drug abuse, sexual exploitation and outright criminal activities. Parliaments and other structured meetings have discussed the impact of the social media on children’s development to come up with guidance procedures for parents, guardians and teachers.

The problem of the effects of modern communications on children is more felt in countries with the purchasing power for such devices. It

appears to me that what we have considered as part of children’s rights has turned into parents’ or adults’ problem. The communication revolution has led our children to know too much too soon. As a parent, I am now constantly and nervously wondering what my children are processing on their computers; is it just educational information or is there more (including the unwanted information)? I also recall one parent telling me she was waiting to see the examination report for her son to find out whether the computer was being well-utilized.

In fact, the subject of computers and children reminded me of my early 1980s studies in media exposure which showed that a significant number of parents controlled their children’s television viewing to protect them from the effects of media delinquency. The problem has now shifted to

The Secretary-General’s The meeting of the CPA Working Party in Québec: (l-r:) The Chairperson of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Hon. Alix Boyd Knights, MHA; Dr William F. Shija; Working Party Chairperson Ms Moana Mackay, MP; and the Chairperson of the CPA Executive Committee, Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP.

94 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

View from the SG_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:28 Page 95

VIEW FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

computers as extensions and parts of the television set; but the parent and his/her concerns are still the same. In the same vein, the growth of rapid information and communication in the developing world has made possible the acquisition of essential knowledge by those in remote areas and isolated communities.

I wish to suggest that, while strides have been recorded in the

provision of basic rights and services for the child, the overall challenges still outweigh the achievements. As noted in the report on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (2009:9): “Greater collaboration is still required between national and international stakeholders, communities, local governments and individual citizens.

Governments must work together

with donors, non-governmental organizations, religious leaders, teachers, health providers, social workers and parliamentarians in order to meet the multiple challenges facing universal and comprehensive enactment of child rights.”

I am of the view that the gadgets associated with the communications revolution of the 21st century usher in the benefits

of information for educational purposes; but parents, teachers, governments and Parliamentarians must vigilantly guide policy formulation to curb the negative use and effects of modern communications technologies to benefit mankind. In a way, I am reminded of the communication theory espoused by Marshall McLuhan in the 1960s: “The medium is the message.”

Commonwealth gallery

The SecretaryGeneral (left) with Rt Hon. Lord Anderson of Swansea.

The Director of Communications and Research, Mr Andrew Imlach (far left), with interns from the Saskatchewan Legislative Internship Programme.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 95

O'Farrell_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:29 Page 96

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM Amendments to election financing rules in New South Wales limits campaign contributions to the only people who should fund political party campaigns – the voters, says the state’s Premier.

Hon. Barry O’ Farrell, MP, in Sydney.

Mr O’Farrell has been the Premier of New South Wales since March 2011, having been a Liberal Member of the Australian state’s Legislative Assembly since 1995. He is also the Minister for Western Sydney. He was the Leader of the Opposition for four years prior to the 2011 election and previously held several shadow portfolios. He was the State Director of the New South Wales Liberal Party before entering the Legislative Assembly.

In recent years, the New South Wales Parliament has extensively examined and debated issues around the funding of election campaigns. In June 2008, the Select Committee on Electoral and Political Party Funding reported on its Inquiry in Electoral and Political Party Funding. In March 2010, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters reported on its Inquiry into Public Funding of Local Government Election Campaigns.

More recently the Parliament debated the Election Funding and Disclosures Amendment Bill 2010.

The N.S.W. Liberals and Nationals government believes that such extensive examination and debate on this important issue has been warranted. In the lead up to the New South Wales state general election in 2011, the N.S.W. Liberals and Nationals made clear our commitment to restore honesty

96 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

and integrity in New South Wales politics. A vital part of this commitment was to ban corporate political donations, on which we campaigned consistently before the election.

Accountability to the people Prior to the state general election, during debate on other election funding legislation in November 2010 I gave a commitment to introduce legislation to restrict political donations to individuals – citizens on the electoral roll, the people who decide elections. The Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Amendment Bill 2011 which was passed by the N.S.W. Parliament in February 2012 was the fulfilment of this commitment.

The N.S.W. Liberals and Nationals have insisted that this state's approach to regulating political donations and expenditure

Hon. Barry O’Farrekk, MP

must ensure that those who exercise executive power in New South Wales understand that they are accountable, that we insist on having standards and that they should operate with integrity and honesty.

The Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Amendment Bill 2011 contained two reforms that respond to the

O'Farrell_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:29 Page 97

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

Left: The Three Sisters in the Blue Mountains; Above: The vestibule of the New South Wales Parliament.

community's loud and clear demand for real change in this area.

This Bill affected a ban on political donations from all those organizations other than individuals, including: corporations, industrial organizations, peak industry groups, religious institutions and community organizations – in other words, third-party interest groups. It does this by making it unlawful for a political donation to be made or received if the donor is not an individual who is on an electoral roll for Commonwealth, state or local government elections. The Bill also linked the electoral communication expenditure of political parties with that of their affiliates to ensure that the effectiveness and fairness of campaign finance rules are not undermined. These reforms are a reasonable, measured and fair way

to inject more transparency and accessibility into the state's political processes. It invests the power to donate solely in those who have the power to vote, those with the greatest stake in the system.

Getting around the former limitations The changes provide for the aggregation of electoral communication expenditure of parties and their affiliated organizations. Under the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act, "electoral communication expenditure" comprises a subset of electoral expenditure that relates to certain campaign expenses, including advertising, accommodation and staffing costs. The Act caps the electoral communication expenditure that parties are entitled to incur in the lead-up to an

election at both a state and electorate level. It is unlawful for a party to breach the caps.

Unfortunately, these party expenditures were not affected by the expenditure of organizations that are affiliated with a political party. This led to organizations intimately involved in the governance of a political party, sometimes even with office bearers in common, campaigning on behalf of a party with no corresponding offset to the party's own ability to spend.

The government believed that this was an unfair loophole that undermined the integrity of the whole scheme. The government’s amendments to the principal Act closed this loophole by combining the electoral communication expenditure of affiliates with the expenditure of political parties for the purpose of determining

whether a party has exceeded the applicable expenditure cap. It does this by aggregating the expenditure of a political party with that of its affiliated organizations.

Under the Act, an "affiliated organization" is defined to be a body that under the rules of the party can appoint delegates to the party's governing body and/or has a role in the pre-selection of candidates for that party. An affiliated organization may be incorporated or unincorporated in recognition of the fact that a traditional corporate structure may not always be adopted by organizations that affiliate with political parties.

The new law provides that even if a political party spends less than or equal to its applicable expenditure caps, its expenditure will be treated as exceeding those caps if the combined party and The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 97

O'Farrell_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:30 Page 98

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

98 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

O'Farrell_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:31 Page 99

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

Left and this page: The indoor and rooftop gardens of the Parliament of New South Wales.

affiliate expenditure exceeds the caps. This aggregation will apply for the overall state cap on party expenditure, as well as the $50,000 electorate cap. It is unlawful under the Act for a party to incur expenditure in excess of the relevant statutory caps.

Corporate donations In relation to the government’s long held commitment to ban corporate donations, it is the New South Wales Liberal and Nationals' strong view that the only way that you can ensure that the public is going to have confidence in our electoral system is to limit political donations to the individuals who are on the electoral roll. It must be limited to those Australian citizens who are enrolled, not overseas citizens and non-residents, because of course those people do not get the vote. They do not have a stake in the system and they should not be able to influence the system – and nor should unions, third-party interest groups and corporations.

The new general ban on corporate and other donations applies to both state and local

government elections. The Act ensures that the new restrictions cannot be circumvented by corporate entities, union entities or others channelling donations through individuals.

Such conduct will be unlawful.

However, I will continue to urge the government of the Commonwealth of Australia to extend these reforms in the federal electoral context so that the same fundamental principles of accountability and transparency apply at every level of government in Australia. Such consistency will enhance the effectiveness of the reforms we are putting in place in New South Wales today.

Issue-based advertising by others The government’s amendments do not prevent third-party campaigners or other third-party organizations such as community groups from accepting corporate donations that are used to run genuine issue-based campaigns.

Such campaigns do not constitute “electoral expenditure” within the meaning of the Act. The government recognises the

importance of third parties in the democratic process and notes that the amendments do not prevent third-party campaigners from receiving donations from its individual members. It is also not designed to prevent peak bodies from levying their member bodies, provided those levies are not used to make a “political donation” or to incur “electoral expenditure” within the meaning of the Act. In this regard, peak bodies will still have the freedom to undertake issuebased campaigns as provided in the current legislation.

The new law may present thirdparty campaigners with some new issues to consider; but the government believes a ban on corporate political donations must be extended to them if it is to be effective. The ongoing risk of corruption and undue influence in political life in New South Wales will only be avoided by eliminating corporate donations, and this must include the elimination of “third party” loopholes through which such donations may be directed.

Removing undue influences It is inevitable that these laws will

trigger discussion and debate about constitutional principles. It has always been a great excuse to do nothing and a way to justify the status quo. A ban on donations other than those by individuals does not place unreasonable restrictions on the implied freedom of political communication mandated by the Commonwealth of Australia constitution. That said, New South Wales and other states have already been successful in imposing limited bans on certain types of donations. For example, in New South Wales, donations from property developers and from tobacco, liquor and gambling companies are banned. The measures in these amendments are designed to rid this state of the risk, reality and perception of corruption and undue influence. To this end, they are consistent with the principles endorsed by the High Court in the Lange case. The amendments’ symbolic and practical effect should not be underestimated.

It will not be possible, however, under the amended Act for a person to commit an offence under both the industry-specific bans and the new general prohibition on donations by non-individuals in relation to the same conduct.

The argument that the reforms somehow favor the wealthy is totally false.

The caps on donations remain at the same level set by the previous Labor government. Under the amendments, all people and organizations will maintain the right to incur electoral expenditure, such as advertising, within existing caps and subject to the rules regarding the aggregation of expenditure.

This protects the quality and diversity of political communication in New South Wales.

These important reforms are long overdue. They will support a system of democracy in New South Wales that does not operate for the benefit of organizations that have no right to elect representatives to our Parliament.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 99

Black_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:32 Page 100

FREE AND RESPONSIBLE PRESS

BUILDING A FREE AND RESPONSIBLE PRESS THROUGHOUT THE COMMONWEALTH A major new report on Commonwealth media law by the CPU Media Trust identifies the continued use of legislation and other measures to restrict the freedom of expression in the media, and it recommends steps for governments to take to protect and enhance this fundamental right, says a Member of the United Kingdom House of Lords who is also a leading U.K. media manager.

Lord Black of Brentwood, in London.

Lord Black has been a Conservative Member of the United Kingdom House of Lords since 2010. He chairs the Commonwealth Press Union Media Trust. He is also the Executive Director of the Telegraph Media Group Limited and chairs the Press Standards Board of Finance Ltd which funds the United Kingdom’s Press Complaints Commission. The CPU Media Trust report “The Test of Democracy” can be downloaded from: http://www.cpu.org.uk/ MediaLawReport2012

Media freedom is a contentious subject for many Commonwealth Parliamentarians. It is of course a paradox that when Parliamentarians are in opposition, many vociferously defend the concept of media freedom; but once they get into government, they seek ways of muzzling the media.

It’s a paradox that is as old as democracy and one that is likely always to be with us. But it should not shroud the central issue that a free media is universally recognized as one of the building blocks of a democracy – emerging or established – and therefore needs to be nurtured and encouraged if governments across the Commonwealth are not to be held up to censure. Indeed, as the Commonwealth Press Union stated in its 1999 report – the first

100 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

ever undertaken – on media freedom in the Commonwealth: “…securing the independence of the media in the Commonwealth is absolutely vital if the aims and ideals laid down in Harare in 1991 are to be adhered to.

Whether in Nigeria or Uganda, the U.K. or Canada, India or Malaysia, an independent, responsible press is the sine qua non of a properly functioning modern state.”1 Freedom of the press It is often said that a free media is not a “free” media; it is what is left of the copy by lawyers and by the law. But it is a concept which is considered to be so important that most constitutions enshrine it as a matter of course, not least the United States constitution which forms the basis of so many written

Lord Black of Brentwood

constitutions around the world today.

The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights specifically states, in Article 19: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas

Black_Layout 1 21/08/2012 14:49 Page 101

FREE AND RESPONSIBLE PRESS

through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The key words here are “without interference”.

For the Commonwealth fully to embrace the sentiments expressed in the various Declarations, from Harare onwards, a lot needs to change.

If Commonwealth countries are going to nurture independent and effective media then it is in the hands of many Commonwealth governments and Parliaments to change the laws that stifle freedom of expression.

There is no doubt that the media in some countries need to change too. Too often illresearched and poorly written stories appear which are

inaccurate or libellous. There is no excuse for this; but great strides can be made through effective and well-funded training institutes and, in the final analysis, by effective and informed media laws.

A free media is universally recognized as one of the building blocks of democracy.

Harassment, intimidation and repression That is not to underestimate the very real problems that journalists in too many Commonwealth countries face. Many suffer harassment and intimidation on a daily basis as they try to do their work, which is to inform their readers of matters of national and international concern. This harassment and intimidation is often at the hands of private The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 101

Black_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:34 Page 102

FREE AND RESPONSIBLE PRESS

A protester in Kuala Lumpur: the media law report says Malaysia still uses legislation originating in the colonial era when the primary aim was the subjugation of the population.

individuals; but also, too frequently, we are told that it is at the hands of politicians and police.

Regrettably, it is often during election campaigns that the harshest reprisals against the media are recorded. It is ironic that during the most important democratic process, the voice of the people is so often stifled.

One of the great gifts the Commonwealth brings us is a shared language, history and – most importantly – legal system.

Unfortunately, many of the laws in place today, particularly those used

against the media, are remnants of the colonial era, a legacy from the days in which a powerful colonial master was seeking to suppress a native population.

In the 21st century, this has to change. These laws, particularly criminal defamation, are inappropriate and indeed according to Geoffrey Robertson, QC, the eminent human rights campaigner: “The law of criminal libel is an unnecessary relic of the past that is now generally agreed to have no place in modern jurisprudence.”2

102 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Criminal libel is an affront to any democracy. It is a brutal relic of the past that today is only within the reach of the wealthy or the political classes. Of course a person must have the right to defend their reputation in court if necessary; but this is adequately covered by civil libel.

One of the most extraordinary issues surrounding libel generally is that, unlike any other defence, truth is not a defence, unless the defendant can convince of jury that publication is also in the public interest.

Stealth controls But other, possibly more subversive, laws are still used on a daily basis throughout the Commonwealth to keep an independent media under control.

These include such issues as: licensing journalists or newspapers, stealth taxes on newsprint, sedition, emergency powers, disseminating false news, privacy laws and contempt of court, the last of which is increasingly being used to curb the media in some jurisdictions.

Many of these laws are directly

Black_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:34 Page 103

FREE AND RESPONSIBLE PRESS

opposed to freedom of expression and are extremely detrimental to the media being able to function appropriately in a democracy.

In many countries, licensing of newspapers is standard practice under law; but in countries like The Gambia, recent amendments to their laws place practically insurmountable barriers in the path of independent reporting.

Increasing threats of criminal prosecution for publishing “seditious” material and large fines lead to self-censorship by journalists. Large fees levied for licenses also mean that publishers are imposing strict levels of selfcensorship to negate the risk of losing such large sums of money.

The continued use of both the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 and the Sedition Act should be a source of embarrassment to Malaysia as a developed nation. Both of these pieces of legislation have their origins in the colonial era when their primary aim was the subjugation of the population.

In South Africa, the Media Appeals Tribunal and the Protection of Information Bill represent a clear and present danger to the progress that country has made in the past two decades towards a free and open media and society.

Reporters Without Borders places this in clear relief, highlighting the fraught relations between President H.E. Jacob Zuma and the media who “criticize the way he governs, cover his private life and investigate such sensitive issues as corruption and crime”.

Applying diverse pressures On the surface, the situation in Sri Lanka does appear to have improved and there is certainly less direct violence against journalists.

However many of the laws that have been of concern in the past are still in operation and the government has yet to introduce amendments to reform them. Also

the emergence of new publications, which are solely a platform for the political opinions of the owners, has created a dichotomy in a once-balanced and united independent media. Sri Lanka is also one of the few remaining Commonwealth countries which still has stateowned newspapers alongside a vibrant independent press, an anachronism in today’s world.

Uganda has had a turbulent recent history. While exercising one-party rule President H.E. Yoweri Museveni was responsible for increasing socio-economic standards across health, education and the national economy; but since the reintroduction of multiparty democracy there have been reports of a drastic decline in the freedom of expression and a constriction of the legal space in which the media can operate.

The nature of this constriction has utilized both judicial and extrajudicial practices.

Much of the increasing restriction has been centred on existing institutions, primarily the Media Council and the Broadcasting Council. Both bodies are expanding their remit far beyond the original legislation intended, increasing powers and areas in which they can regulate.

One of the most worrying developments is the Press and Journalist Amendment Act, which introduces a strict licensing system.

Even the United Kingdom is not exempt from criticism. Many of the issues here surround privacy and the workings of the 1998 Human Rights Act. The current controversy surrounding phone hacking has magnified this problem, though the problems relating to privacy and the use of injunctions that arise from the Act probably have far longer-term significance.

The U.K. Human Rights Act includes a margin of appreciation clause meaning that decisions under the Human Rights Act in the U.K. must take account of

European case law in relation to the European Court of Human Rights. The ECHR combines a cross section of European judiciary, all with different jurisprudence with regards to privacy. Many jurisdictions in Europe have much tougher rules surrounding what constitutes privacy and a much lower tolerance relating to the reporting of private lives. This too could have a damaging long-term impact.

We are very conscious that what happens in the U.K. can and does have a knock-on effect in the wider Commonwealth and there is much concern that the present problems in the U.K. newspaper industry may have serious effects in other countries, particularly with regard to media regulation.

Regulation versus selfregulation and effective training Many of the problems that surround media independence stem from a single question: should the media be encouraged to regulate themselves or are statutory means of government regulation necessary? Countries with true self-regulatory bodies are in a minority in the Commonwealth; conversely, a number of Commonwealth member states have government-appointed press councils operating under more or less stringent structures of statutory regulation.

Understandably, opinion tends to be polarized, with the media supporting the former option and governments the latter. The Commonwealth Press Union Media Trust has long called for the establishment of effective and properly funded media regulation bodies, and in the case of the press, self-regulatory bodies; but many governments find it easier to constrain the media by statute rather than to find ways of helping them police themselves.

Equally, the need for effective training institutions is long overdue.

In some countries where

independent training institutes have been set up, standards of journalism have generally improved; but if governments are not prepared to allow freedom of expression, then anything learnt will fall on fallow ground. If you are attacked, then it is only human to fight back – with whatever means at your disposal.

In short, the situation with regard to media law in the Commonwealth is ambiguous.

Some countries, such as New Zealand and Canada, could be seen as models of press freedom while others, including the examples given above, are still deliberately seeking to constrain it.

Full adherence to a fundamental Commonwealth principle The newly published CPU Media Trust report The Test of Democracy sets out 10 recommendations for governments to consider that would enhance press freedom across the Commonwealth. It is hoped that these recommendations could form the basis for an informed discussion with both the Commonwealth Secretariat and individual governments to assist the process.

I commend it to all readers of The Parliamentarian.

Of course it is difficult to make substantive change overnight; but if the will is there then change can be made gradually.

This is what the CPU Media Trust is seeking. Slow but well thought through revision of those laws which are now inappropriate and whose existence on the statue books signals an unwillingness to move forward and fully embrace a free press as part of the foundation of democratic institutions.

Endnotes 1. The Independence of the Commonwealth Media: CPU: 1999.

2. Media Law, Robertson, G, and Nicol, A: London, Penguin Books:1992: p102.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 103

Uppal_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:35 Page 104

CANADIAN ELECTION LAW

REPEALING CANADA’S DATED BAN ON TRANSMISSION OF ELECTION RESULTS

W

h

/Sh tt

t k.

A Canadian law three-quarters of a century old bans disclosing national election results from one part of Canada to voters in different time zones where polls are still open. This should be repealed to reflect modern communications realities and human rights perspectives, says the Canadian Minister responsible for democratic reforms.

Hon. Tim Uppal, PC, MP, in Ottawa.

Mr Uppal is Canada’s Minister of State (Democratic Reform). A Conservative Member of the House of Commons since 2008, he was appointed as a Minister of State after the country’s 2011 general election. Born in British Columbia, he has spent most of his life in Alberta where he was a residential mortgage manager and a Senior Advisor to the Conservative Party of Canada before entering the House of Commons.

freedom to communicate with friends, family and personal networks about election results and democratic processes without considerable restriction on their fundamental right to freedom of expression.

Hon. Tim Uppal, PC, MP

The government of Canada believes that Canada’s democratic rules should, as much as possible, reflect present realities and should not unnecessarily restrict fundamental rights that Canadians hold dear.

In the era of the internet, where the use of email, Facebook and Twitter are commonplace, Canadians should have the

104 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

A restriction of another century Section 329 of the Canada Elections Act is such a restriction and it needs to be repealed. The section prohibits the transmission of election results such that “no person shall transmit the result or the purported result of the vote in an electoral district to the public in another electoral district before the close of all the polling stations in that other electoral district”.

Canada extends over six time zones. Parliament adopted the ban on transmission of election results, and its associated penalties, in

1938. At the time, voting hours were uniform across the country, representing a real-time difference of four hours between the closing of polls in Atlantic Canada and the closing of polls in British Columbia (Newfoundland was not yet a part of Canada). The intent of the ban was to prevent voters in Western Canada from knowing the formation of a government before casting their ballots. Proponents argued that knowing the results of polls from Central and Atlantic Canada influenced the way electors in Western Canada voted.

In the intervening years since the ban’s enactment, the proliferation of new media and communications technologies correspondingly increase the difficulty in balancing freedom of expression against the original intent of the ban. Not only does the ban ever more infringe upon

Uppal_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:35 Page 105

Waynehowes/Shutterstock.com

CANADIAN ELECTION LAW

infringement of the ban while using technologies that are everyday forms of 21st century communication.

During Canada’s most recent election, in 2011, more than 4,800 tweets of election results were posted to Twitter (although not all were explicit or accurate). Media reports stated that the campaign was the number one trending topic on Twitter and third in the world during the three-hour blackout period in which communication of election results is expressly forbidden.

Canadians’ fundamental right to freedom of expression, it also progressively subjects Canadians to potentially heavy penalties for

Freedom of expression While the government does not condone breaking the law, it has serious reservations about upholding a rule that limits freedom of expression while simultaneously exposing Canadians to possible

heavy penalties for infractions.

Paragraph 495(4)(d) and subsection 500(4) of the Canada Elections Act state that anyone who wilfully contravenes section 329 is guilty of an offence and liable on a summary conviction to a maximum fine of $25,000.

This is especially of concern in a climate where the line between public and private communication is increasingly blurred and democratic participation and conversation often occur is quasipublic environments. As communication technologies evolve, Canadians are more interconnected than ever before and they should not be penalized, or fear being penalized, for possible infractions of an out-of-date rule drafted in a bygone era. As the line between public and private communication is increasingly gray,

Section 329 of the Canada Elections Act is restricting Canadians’ freedom of expression by trying to ban discussions of election results in social media forums such as Twitter while some polls are still open.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 105

Uppal_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:36 Page 106

CANADIAN ELECTION LAW

Mr Uppal casts his ballot: should Canadians in one time zone be able to vote knowing how Canadians voted in other time zones?

Parliamentarians should err on the side of preserving individuals’ right to freedom of expression.

Communications advances also

correspond with increasing difficulty in enforcing the ban. In successive reports on Canada’s general elections the Chief

106 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Electoral Officer highlights difficulties associated with enforcing the ban, going so far as to question in his 2011 report the

“very intelligibility and usefulness [of the ban] in a world where distinction between private communication and public

Uppal_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:36 Page 107

CANADIAN ELECTION LAW

and fax machine, stated that the ban was “rendered obsolete by developments in broadcasting and telecommunications technology, which have made controlling the diffusion of election results more difficult”.

transmission is quickly eroding” and stating that Parliament should “consider revoking the rule.”

Even a 1991 Royal

Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing (the Lortie Report), prompted by the widespread use of the telephone

Changing realities While difficulties in enforcement should not be reason alone for Parliamentarians to repeal rules, the combined effect of escalating restrictions on freedom of expression and the threat of a heavy penalty for infringement of the rules in this case is more than sufficient to reasonably conclude that the law should be amended to reflect present and future realities.

Moreover, Parliament adopted staggered voting hours in 1996.

The implementation of staggered hours across provinces and time zones reduces the difference between polls closing on the east and west coasts from four and a half hours to three hours. Should the ban be repealed, staggered voting hours means that results from less than 10 per cent of constituencies could be available to late voters in Western Canada, since the majority of polls across Canada open and close at the same absolute time. Accordingly, it is not possible for voters anywhere in the country to know the outcome or the formation of a government before they vote.

There is also an antecedent example for repealing the ban.

Following the 2000 general election, a blogger named Paul Bryan was charged with an offence for having posted the results from Atlantic Canada on his website while the polls were still open in the rest of the country. Mr Bryan challenged the constitutionality of the ban as being contrary to his freedom of expression protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In 2003, the Supreme Court of British Columbia declared the ban unconstitutional as a result of Mr

Bryan’s challenge. Although the decision was subsequently appealed, the judgment would not be delivered until after the 2004 general election. Consistent with past practice, the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada relied on the existing state of the law and suspended the ban during the 2004 general election.

The temporary repeal of the ban in 2004 is, very much, a suitable example for the outright repeal of the ban. There was no evidence of an effect on voter behaviour.

Parliament’s right to reform In 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in R v.

Bryan. While the Court was unanimous that the ban limited freedom of expression, a majority of the Court found the limitation to be reasonably justified. Although the Court upheld the validity of the ban, it accorded significant deference to Parliament to alter or repeal the ban as it sees fit, noting that “within constitutional bounds, policy preferences of this sort remain the prerogative of Parliament, not of the courts”.

It’s now time for Parliament to assert its prerogative. Canada’s ban on early transmission of election results no longer makes sense given the widespread use of modern communication technologies, the considerable difficulty in enforcing an obsolete rule and the sizeable restriction on freedom of expression.

That is why our government has committed to introducing legislation repealing the ban. We are asking Canadian Parliamentarians to support us in this action. We aim to bring the electoral process in line with 21st century realities.

We believe there is little value in maintaining elements of our electoral system that have out-lived their relevance. This is especially true when such elements restrict fundamental freedoms that are for every Canadian to enjoy.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 107

Fergus_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:37 Page 108

CONSTITUTIONAL MODERNIZATION

CONSTITUTIONAL MODERNIZATION FOR MONTSERRAT Constitutional reform brought changes to the governance of a Caribbean island which had been focusing on its volcano-generated economic issues; but the United Kingdom overseas territory’s most experienced constitutional expert questions whether Montserrat got the constitutional change it wanted or needed.

Prof. Sir Howard Fergus, KBE, PhD, in Brades.

Sir Howard was the Speaker of the Legislative Council for 26 years from 1975. An award-winning author, he is also a published poet and a noted historian. He has been the de facto Deputy Governor, and has been Acting Governor on several occasions. He is the Extra-Mural Resident Tutor in Montserrat for the University of the West Indies, a post he has held since 1974.

The process of constitutional modernization started in Montserrat in 2010 when the government established a constitutional committee. It was tasked with making recommendations based on wide consultations.

The extent to which it has been modernized is open to debate and opposition politicians are still critical of what has been achieved.

The process and the product will be examined in this article.

The initiative came from the United Kingdom government with the publication of a 1999 White Paper Partnership for Progress and Prosperity: Britain and the Overseas Territories. A Montserrat Constitutional Commission of 1996 did recommend constitutional reform; but there has really been no local agitation for

108 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

constitutional advancement. The issue of independence has arisen and preparatory activities in the form of national symbols undertaken; but there has been no direct call for constitutional upgrading.

If anything, the economic setback caused by a sustained volcanic eruption discouraged any move towards change. There is a tendency to see a correlation between economic prosperity and political aspiration; and the eruption seriously eroded the island’s economic base.

The 1999 White Paper came therefore as a benevolent action of the imperial United Kingdom government, at least ostensibly. It however gave no idea of how progressive, radical or locally rooted these modern constitutions of its overseas territories were

Prof. Sir Howard Fergus

supposed to be; and the White Paper merely promised that the U.K. government would carefully consider the proposals. Everything was open-ended and deliberately so, as it turned out.

The status quo The Montserrat Constitutional Order 1989 vested executive

Fergus_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:37 Page 109

CONSTITUTIONAL MODERNIZATION

Opposite page: Sunset in Montserrat; This page: The island’s active volcano.

authority in Her Majesty the Queen. It provided for a Governor appointed by the Queen, an Executive Council which approximated to a cabinet and a Legislative Council elected every five years. The Executive Council, over which the Governor presided, consisted of a Chief Minister (CM), three other Ministers with the Attorney General (AG) and Financial Secretary (FS) as ex officio members.

The appointed Governor held the most powerful position in the administration. He had special responsibilities for, and discretionary authority over: a) Defence; b) External affairs; c) International financial services; d) Internal security including the police force; and e) Appointment, discipline and

dismissal in the public service (in brief).

In other words – in theory at least – although he or she was not elected, the Governor functioned as a super-Minister with portfolios for foreign affairs, justice, defence, home affairs (to an extent) and the public service. It must be noted that foreign affairs can have serious implications for economic development. The exercise of this power depends to a degree on the attitude of particular Governors and they do vary in their attitude to power. If constitutional modernization means anything, it denotes greater self-government and democratization.

Colonialism with its idea of client state and subordinate people is inherently undemocratic. So to attain any respectable modicum of modernization there has to be a

marked reduction of the democratic deficit represented in particular by the power of the governor vis-à-vis the power of the people’s elected representatives.

This is an acid test for modernization.

This is not an isolated view. Dr Phillis Flemming Banks, who spoke for civil society in Anguilla, criticized the qualities of partnership which allowed the Governor to impose legislation against the popular will.

CM Hon. Ralph O’Neale of the British Virgin Islands hoped that constitutional review would lead to a reduction in the Governor’s power and CM Hon. Michael Misick of the Turks and Caicos Islands expressed the identical view. The overseas territories generally did not initiate constitutional modernization; but they knew what constituted it.

The process The consultation was widespread even though some felt it should have been more thorough on the island. In addition to town hall meetings and radio interactions, discussions were held with the Montserratian diaspora especially in England and neighbouring islands.

Although the U.K. government called for widespread consultation, it provided a constraining checklist to provide parameters and guide the process. In its own words, it indicated “standards to which overseas territories should seek to strive, obligations which they should strive to meet and expectations of Her Majesty’s Government in key areas of constitutional modernization”. In fact, the possibility of enhancing the Governor’s power was implicit in the document. And Mr David

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 109

Fergus_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:38 Page 110

CONSTITUTIONAL MODERNIZATION

The flag of Montserrat.

Taylor, a former Governor of Montserrat, in a published article held that the power of the Governors needed to be increased to enable them to deal with certain circumstances including contingent liabilities. To this end, the process was to an extent managed by the metropolitan partner. The partnership was always intrinsically asymmetrical.

The constitutional commissioners made a number of modest changes including the

assigning of regional affairs to the elected government and an executive public service commission. Both changes would place some limitation on the power of the Governor. The report was the subject of a series of negotiations between the U.K. government team and the legislators of Montserrat.

In addition, the government staged a country-wide educative exercise in 2010 with a consultative element which meant

110 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

that there was further popular input beyond the work of the commission. Emanating from the exercise, a document entitled A Compendium of Concerns was published. The question was, how many of the recommendations and concerns would impact the final product.

The product A number of changes were introduced with the 2010 constitution which made for a more

democratic countenance. For example, regional affairs (a subset of foreign affairs) came under the purview of the local government.

For reasons already outlined this is not insignificant. In addition, the Governor is allowed to assign authority for his special responsibilities to Ministers who will act on his or her behalf. This is limited by the optional “may” as opposed to the directional “shall”.

What the section on the Governor’s special responsibilities seeks to do

Fergus_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:38 Page 111

CONSTITUTIONAL MODERNIZATION

“It is to be hoped that the new constitution has whetted an appetite for change, change rooted in some overarching vision of social and political advancement.”

is to soften the absolutist ring of the Governor’s power without significantly altering it in reality. This is the effect of mandating the Governor to keep the Premier “fully informed” of the general conduct of matters over which he has discretionary power.

Those powers are not thereby altered or shared.

The new constitution brought other useful changes. A National Advisory Committee (NAC) offers some opportunity for power-

sharing. It consists essentially of Parliamentarians including a Member of the opposition. It is however stipulated that the Governor is not obliged to act on the recommendation of the Council. So much of the efforts at modernization smacks of giving with one hand and taking with the other. The limiting provisos ensure this.

A Mercy Committee operates similarly to the (NAC) as far as power-sharing is concerned. The

institution of the office of Director of Public Prosecution relieves the Attorney General of this role which was a violation of the theory of the separation of powers. Other changes which address governmental transparency and attention to civic rights include the introduction of a Complaint Commissioner to protect citizens and an Electoral Commissioner independent of political control.

The establishment de jure of the position of the Leader of the Opposition enhances the quality of parliamentary democracy. A “belonger” (local citizen) Deputy Governor enhances the idea of self-government; and a preamble stamps a sense of ownership on the constitution and imparts an element of cultural relevance.

Some of the most obvious changes deal with nomenclature.

There is a Legislative Assembly rather than a Council; a cabinet instead of an Executive Council and a Premier instead of a Chief Minister. These give the constitution a more modern ring and a more democratic face; but in reality, they are partly cosmetic and not all systemic. For instance, the Premier is not the same position as that given to the islands which gained statehood in association with Britain under the 1967 West Indies Act; and the cabinet falls short of the Bermuda pattern where the Premier presides and not just in the absence of the Governor.

The government sees the constitution as an evolving work; but it is still necessary to ensure that many of the changes are not in part mere sweeteners to disguise the pill of enduring gubernatorial authority.

Only a first step The extent of modernization attained by the constitution is not as great as the language in which it is couched suggests. This is reflected in the contingency power of the Governor and the democratic deficit.

We have already alluded to dissatisfaction with the constitution in some quarters. The section on fundamental rights and freedom is savagely criticized by both lawyers and lay persons. Terms such as “anti- democratic”, “absolute power concentrated in a person”, “draconian and dictatorial power” and “arbitrary and one-man rule” are used, admittedly with some exaggeration. In too many cases, though, the Governor is subject to the oversight of a distant eye in the person of the U.K. Secretary of State; and that infamous phrase “not to be inquired into by any court of law” which exempts the Governor from legal scrutiny, has been condemned as antidemocratic.

There have been useful changes to the constitution, but it has not really been modernized, if that term connotes meaningful power-sharing. A sensible Governor can wield his/her power lightly and involve the Premier more integrally in governance. The constitution allows him/her to. It is to be hoped that the new constitution has whetted an appetite for change, change rooted in some overarching vision of social and political advancement.

What would be tragic is for such changes as have occurred to induce complacency in a people who have supposedly arrived.

Radical constitutional reform is still a future prospect.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 111

Stewart_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:39 Page 112

PUBLIC PETITIONS

ENGAGING THE ELECTORATE: AN EVOLVING PROCESS IN SCOTLAND Petitions systems are a useful tool for engaging with the public and involving them in the policy making process. However, in order to be effective it is important that they constantly evolve, says the Convener (Chairperson) of the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee.

Mr David Stewart, MSP, in Edinburgh.

Mr Stewart has been a Scottish Labour Party Member of the Scottish Parliament since 2007. A former social worker, he was a Labour Member of the United Kingdom House of Commons from 1997 to 2005 and served from 2005 to 2007 as an Assistant Director of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organizations.

This article is based on a presentation he gave at a Public Participation Conference in Johannesburg at the invitation of Hon. Lindiwe Maseko, MPL, the Speaker of the Gauteng Provincial Legislature.

For the many people across the Commonwealth who are alienated from the political process, public participation may seem like a hollow sentiment – a healing balm or sticking plaster which ignores fundamental inequality in many of our democracies. Yet, inaction seems a strangely inadequate response to a global participation pandemic. So I welcome the opportunity to write about a Scottish solution to ignite public participation – public petitions.

Einstein once said “learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow” and it is vital that we do indeed learn from yesterday if we are truly to engage with the people which we as Parliamentarians represent. The last few years have seen the rapid rise in social network sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Google+. We are now arguably more socially connected than at any time in our history. Yet, it is now that participation and interest in politics is at its lowest.

Simply doing what we did yesterday, what we have always

112 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

done, is no longer enough. How we engage and how we encourage participation must evolve.

An ancient tradition updated At the Scottish Parliament we are proud of our public petitions system. Indeed, in Scotland there is a long tradition of petitions dating back to the 14th century and King David II who introduced a right for every subject to petition the King.

Seven hundred years later the reestablishment of the Scottish Parliament provided an ideal opportunity to resurrect the petitions tradition.

The Scottish Parliament was founded on four guiding principles as follows: first, power sharing (between the Parliament, the Scottish government and the people of Scotland); secondly, accessibility, openness and participation; thirdly, accountability; and fourthly, equal opportunities.

The petitions system at the Scottish Parliament reflects these principles and indeed is one of the

Mr David Stewart, MSP

key ways by which members of the public can seek to have a direct influence and role in the policy development process.

The Scottish Parliament has a dedicated Public Petitions Committee whose remit is to consider petitions and take such action as it considers appropriate.

A public petition addressed to the Scottish Parliament must not request the Parliament to do anything which the Parliament clearly has no power to do.

Nevertheless, during the last 13 years this has enabled a wide

Stewart_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:39 Page 113

PUBLIC PETITIONS

Mr Stewart speaking at a conference on public participation in Gauteng, South Africa.

range of issues to be raised. Some of the petitions currently under consideration seek the following: • Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish government to carry out an immediate review of the use of insulin pump therapy and address the low and inequitable access across Scotland.

• Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish government to consider the need for new legislation and provision to protect, support and assist victims of crime.

• Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish government to investigate certain issues relating to youth football. For example, better protection for young footballers who sign with professional clubs, fewer restrictions on those young players, better facilities and better accountability for public funds paid to football governing bodies.

• Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish

government to set up a Scottish Cancer Drug Fund. While England has a specific cancer drug fund, Scotland does not.

Engagement with few limitations Many of the petitions which are considered by the committee will start with a simple phone call to the clerks. A great deal of effort goes in at this stage to talking people through the process, giving advice on wording as well as what to expect. The Scottish Parliament’s website also provides guidance for people wanting to bring a petition and explains what information they should provide and what the Parliament can consider. For example, petitions may not ask for adjudication on a personal or commercial interest which should be determined by a court or other tribunal.

The Scottish Parliament was the first Parliament in the world to have an e-petitions system. Our facility was launched in 2004 and at the time it was a great innovation

and one in which there was a lot of interest from the public, from Parliamentarians across the world and from academics. In this digital age, e-petitions enable people to promote their petition on the internet, attract a wider audience and allow the petition to gather support. It also provides the opportunity to generate debate on the topic, which in itself can help to generate and promote engagement.

Last year the United Kingdom government launched an epetitions site. At the time, there was widespread media coverage because the U.K. government had decided that any e-petition which received 100,000 signatures or more would be eligible for a debate in the House of Commons.

However, unlike the U.K. government petitions system, at the Scottish Parliament there is no threshold for the number of signatures needed before a petition can go forward. Only one signature – that of the person submitting the petition – is needed

in order for it to be lodged. All petitions which are formally lodged are considered by the Public Petitions Committee. It does not matter if the petition has only one signature or if there are thousands, the issue raised by the petition is considered on its merit. This means that anyone who has lodged a public petition really does have the potential to influence policy and see change.

Keeping up with technology Public petitions in themselves will not transform societies into dynamic, inclusive and pluralistic communities. But my experience as Convener of the Scottish Parliament‘s Public Petitions Committee is that they undoubtedly contribute, are meaningful and work best when the system is embedded in the Parliament system, truly holds government to account, is fearless, emboldened and constantly seeks to engage with the public it aims to represent.

During the course of the past

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 113

Stewart_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:40 Page 114

PUBLIC PETITIONS

Delegates consider how to improve public participation in Gauteng through the use of petitions.

13 years, the way people engage with each other, and with politics, has changed dramatically. Many of us instantly comment on what we experience via social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook and the use of smartphones means it is easier than ever to get access to the internet. Technology has moved on a great deal since the Scottish Parliament first

launched its e-petitions site. In recognition of this change, the Parliament has recently launched its new website and as part of that we hope to launch our new online petitions facility later this month. A lot of time has been spent developing both the Parliament’s new site and the new online system with the aims of being easier to use and providing better

114 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

integration with social media platforms.

I believe that online petitions will continue to provide an excellent means for petitioners to gather signatures and support. By using the online system, petitions are likely to reach a greater audience and also break down geographical boundaries meaning that people from across Scotland, no matter

where they live, can submit a petition. It is vital that our onlinepetitions system is fit for the needs of a modern digital society and by ensuring that the technology and the systems we use evolves and improves, it is easier for people to engage with us in the way they want and indeed when they want.

This technology refresh is not being carried out in isolation, it is

Stewart_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:40 Page 115

PUBLIC PETITIONS

just one way in which the Public Petitions Committee is working to ensure that it reaches as many people as possible.

Reaching out effectively to all The committee previously commissioned research to look in more detail at who our petitioners are. It discovered that the vast

majority of petitioners were white middle-class males in their late 50s. While this may be true of the people who are most likely to engage with the Parliament across all subject areas and not just petitions, it is important to recognize that there are large parts of the population who do not engage with politics or the Parliament. That is why, since I

became Convener of the Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee, I have been reflecting on the work done by my predecessors and trying to think about ways that can be built upon.

For example, we have learned that if our processes are complicated or seem out of touch, it can be off-putting. We have therefore produced simple and easy to use guidance about petitioning and the process to be followed and the committee staff are always more than happy to answer any questions a prospective petitioner might have.

We have learned that we need to try to reach those who, traditionally, may not have been interested in petitioning the Parliament. During the last session of the Parliament the predecessor Public Petitions Committee held meetings out in the community at times and places most suitable for those it was trying to reach. It met across Scotland, from the Borders to the Highlands, in schools and community centres.

This work included delivering presentations to schools to inform them of the role of the Parliament and the impact that politics has and could have on pupils’ day to day lives. It also included working with pupils to support them in preparing a petition on a subject that mattered to them.

This led to the committee considering petitions on protecting the rights of school age workers, a payment scheme to encourage blood donations and free access for school age children to publicly funded leisure facilities. I believe that by seeing their petitions considered by the committee, people, and young people in particular, see that our petition system gives a voice to individuals which can be heard right at the heart of the Parliament.

I am determined that we will continue to go out into the community. That we continue to meet in places where traditionally there have been low levels of

engagement. By doing his we can show to the people of Scotland that the Scottish Parliament – their Parliament – works for them. I want to continue to show people that they do have a voice and that no matter where they live or what their background, they can be directly involved in the policy making process.

Making a noticeable difference I feel privileged to be the Convener of the Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee which has at its heart the people of Scotland. I am also proud to say that there are many areas in which public petitions have made a real difference, where policies have been changed and where lives have improved for the better. This has included the introduction of new national guidance in response to petition seeking to ensure equity of the provision of cancer drugs throughout all National Health System boards and the introduction of new guidelines on the provision of Vitamin D supplements for children and pregnant women following a successful petition highlighting the issues around a lack of Vitamin D. The purpose of all petitions systems, from the one developed then by King David, to the one in place at the Scottish Parliament today, is to encourage participation and to allow the public, the people we seek to represent, to have a real investment in the political process.

The system has changed as the country itself has changed. The petitions system and the processes behind it have kept pace with the demands of a modern society. But we must never allow ourselves to sit back and think that the job is done. I believe that it is important that we constantly examine what more we can do for the poor, the dispossessed and the powerless and that our systems constantly evolve to meet these needs.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 115

Durand_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:41 Page 116

MEASURING WELLBEING

GOING BEYOND GDP TO FOSTER “BETTER POLICIES FOR BETTER LIVES” The “Better Life” initiative of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development provides the first collection of internationally comparable well-being indicators to assess whether progress is being made by the people not just by the economy, says the organization’s chief statistician.

Ms Martine Durand, in Paris.

Ms Durand is the Chief Statistician and Director of the Statistics Directorate of the Oganization for Economic Co-opeartion and Development (OECD). Formally the OECD’s Deputy Director of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, Ms Durand is now responsible for the OECD’s work on the measurement of wellbeing and the progress of societies.

Ms Martine Durand

For the last half-century, the mission of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), whose origins lie in European postwar reconstruction, has been to promote policies conducive to higher economic growth. However, over the decades, the

116 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

organization’s work has evolved so that its agenda now encompasses almost the full range of economic, social and environmental issues confronting developed, emerging and developing countries around the world. In recent years, the OECD has been at the forefront of a movement to rethink the way policy makers and societies at large should define and measure individual and social well-being for most of the last century, "progress" has been equated with economic growth, and GDP (a measure of the quantity of goods and services produced in a country in a given time period) has been the most widely-used measure of social welfare. While there are obvious links between the economic conditions of a country and the wellbeing of its citizens, GDP alone

provides only a partial view of what matters the most in people’s lives: GDP is, by and large, limited to the production of goods and services exchanged through markets; it includes activities that remedy some of the costs of economic development; and it ignores changes in people's attributes (e.g. their health status, their skills) that shape their well-being. Further, GDP says nothing about the sustainability or equity of prevailing conditions. The ongoing crisis has made it clear that, in order to guide the development of our societies, we need to go beyond the onedimensional focus on GDP and develop more sophisticated, multidimensional tools to measure social progress.

To this end, during its 50th Anniversary celebrations in May

Durand_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:42 Page 117

MEASURING WELLBEING

Opposite page and this page: Educational skills and income and wealth are two of the 11 dimensions of well-being identified by the OECD that have a claim to be relevant to people around the world.

The Better Life Initiative is an ongoing project aiming to supply the information necessary for governments and citizens to answer the question: “Are our lives getting better?” As such, it is an essential component of the OECD’s mission to foster “Better Policies for Better Lives”.

2011, the OECD launched the “Better Life Initiative”, combining data and research from across the organization and beyond to provide the first collection of internationally comparable well-being indicators.

Measuring progress in theory and practice The Better Life Initiative represents the culmination of almost a decade of OECD-led dialogue and debate on the role of statistics in defining "progress” in the public and policy spheres. The first OECD World Forum on “Statistics, Knowledge and Policy” – held in Palermo, Italy in 2004 – brought together representatives from civil society, academia, government and national statistical offices to discuss the meaning and measurement of “progress”.

Emerging clearly from this event was the sense that a gap existed between the statistics most commonly used to measure changing conditions, and the realities and priorities of people’s lives, which needed to be addressed. In the intervening years, two more World Fora (in Istanbul in 2007 and in Busan in 2009), as well as many projects launched by other international and national organizations, have added momentum to the drive to develop better well-being metrics.

In particular, an expert Commission established by French President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007, and led by Nobel-prize winners Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, was asked to assess the adequacy of existing measures of economic performance and social progress.

The Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi report published in 2009, to which the OECD contributed, made around

30 recommendations for statistical development, including: the need to collect more individual-level (as opposed to national aggregatelevel) data to better understand inequalities in household conditions; the need to develop better measures of economic, social and environmental sustainability; and the need to measure well-being across multiple dimensions, encompassing both subjective and objective aspects. These recommendations, along with years of dialogue with groups and individuals from all sectors of society through the OECD-hosted “Global Project on Measuring the Progress of Societies”, have provided the conceptual basis for the OECD’s current efforts to move from theory to practice in well-being measurement.

The Better Life Initiative encompasses many different work

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 117

Durand_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:42 Page 118

MEASURING WELLBEING

streams and has led to two major outputs: “Your Better Life Index”, an interactive web tool, and “How’s Life? Measuring Well-being”, a report comparing well-being across OECD countries. The conceptual underpinnings for these products, and of all work related to the Better Life Initiative, is provided by a framework that distinguishes between current well-being and its sustainability, and that describes the former through the two spheres of material conditions (i.e. people's command over economic resources) and quality of life (i.e. people's attributes, feelings and evaluations). Overall, the OECD framework identifies 11 dimensions of well-being that have a claim to be relevant to people around the world, whatever the level of economic development of the country where they live: • • • • • • • •

Income and wealth Jobs and Earnings Housing Health status Work-life balance Education and skills Social Connections Civic Engagement and

• • •

Governance Environmental Quality Personal Security Subjective well-being

The selection of indicators for each of these dimensions has been informed by a number of principles to ensure their quality and policy-relevance. Official statistical sources have been used wherever possible. However, for some dimensions (such as social connections and subjective wellbeing), where no comparable data produced by National Statistical Offices currently exist, the OECD has also relied on nonofficial statistics, which were included as “placeholders” until comparable indicators become available from official sources. A particular emphasis was put on going beyond national averages to compile data on the distribution of outcomes across households and individuals. Indicators were chosen for their ability to show information about outcomes rather than inputs and outputs (e.g. focusing on measures such as life expectancy or educational attainment rates rather than government expenditure on healthcare and

118 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

education). Finally, the selected indicators combine both objective and subjective measures. While the value of data based on people selfreports has long been recognized by official statisticians, measuring well-being also requires gathering information that only the person concerned can provide. This is the case of subjective well-being, a short-hand for people's feelings (e.g. of joy and pain) and evaluations (regarding their life as a whole and for selected dimensions). This is a new area for official statistics1 and the OECD is currently developing guidelines for statistical agencies interested in collecting such measures.

The indicators included in the Better Life Initiative have also been chosen to fulfil standard statistical requirements, such as: • Having face validity, i.e. the capacity to capture what is intended to be measured; • Being commonly used and accepted as well-being indicators within the statistical and academic communities; • Focusing on summary outcomes that can be easily understood (e.g. displaying no

ambiguity in interpretation, showing either good/bad performance or progress/regress when looking at change over time); • Lending themselves to disaggregation across population groups, allowing to assess disparities; • Being amenable to change and sensitive to policy interventions; • Ensuring broad comparability across countries and maximum country coverage; and • Being collected through a recurrent instrument.

These criteria define the characteristics of a hypothetical “ideal” set of indicators for monitoring well-being across countries and over time. In practice, finding indicators that meet all these criteria equally well is challenging and will remain so for quite some time. While the current choice of indicators represents a good approximation of the ideal concepts, the selection will be improved in the future as better statistics become available.

Your Better Life Index Your Better Life Index

Durand_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:42 Page 119

MEASURING WELLBEING

Housing and a healthy work/life balance are two of the 11 dimensions of well-being identified by the OECD framework.

(www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org) is an online interactive tool which allows people to construct their own summary index to compare wellbeing across countries. One of the main challenges in measuring a multi-dimensional concept such as well-being is that people have different views about what is most important to them. This is why it has proven difficult, if not impossible, to develop a singlenumber index combining information on all the different dimensions of well-being, each based on different metrics.

Developing such a composite index would involve making choices about the weight of these different components, choices which can be controversial. On the other hand, summary indices are useful communication tools, combining information on several dimensions in order to compare living conditions across countries or over time. The OECD has addressed this challenge in a way that allows users to create their own personalised index by rating the importance of each of the eleven well-being dimensions used by the OECD. Users can then compare well-being in the 34

OECD countries, and share their index with other people and with the OECD. Overall, close to 800,000 people have used the OECD tool since last May. How’s life?

The How’s Life? Measuring WellBeing report takes a more in-depth look at the headline indicators used to construct Your Better Life Index, as well as introducing secondary indicators for each dimension for greater contextual depth. The report considers each well-being dimension in turn, presenting information on average outcomes as well as on inequalities in these outcomes by age group, gender and, where possible, socioeconomic conditions, and exploring the determinants of each wellbeing dimensions. Each chapter ends by setting out the statistical agenda ahead. How’s Life? is an essential companion to Your Better Life Index, as it identifies the areas where more work will be needed to develop better metrics in the future.

Next steps: Strengthening the links between measures and policies Your Better Life Index has been

hugely successful at reaching a wide audience and getting analysts and members of the public interested in how to measure wellbeing. Earlier this year, Your Better Life Index was named an Official Honoree in the “Government” category of the Webby Awards, the prestigious international body recognizing excellence on the Internet. How’s Life? has also been well received by researchers and statistical agencies as an important contribution to the field of wellbeing measurement. Both of these streams of work will be regularly updated and improved.

However, the real challenge is to ensure that better measures will have an impact on policies.

For well-being measures to start making a real difference to people’s lives, they have to be explicitly brought into the policymaking process.

The current international interest in wellbeing is an opportunity that should be capitalized to bridge the gap between well-being metrics and policy interventions. Yet, to ensure that the evaluation of the wellbeing impacts of policies becomes more systematic and robust, significant research is required to better understand the causal influences at work and the ways in which well-being policies should effectively be implemented.

The OECD is developing a framework aimed at better understanding the drivers of wellbeing and interpreting the overall impact of alternative policies on people’s life.

The ultimate purpose is to bring considerations of well-being more firmly into government decisionmaking and to provide governments with advice on the well-being effects of different policy options.

Of course, the way well-being measures are used in policymaking will differ depending on the context and priorities of each country. While the focus of the

Better Life Initiative to date has been on OECD countries (and, to a more limited extent, on selected partner countries such as India, South Africa, Indonesia, China and Russia), future work will look at how to extend the well-being framework to developing countries.

It is now widely recognized that "development" constitutes more than improvements in GDP. With the 2015 deadline for the “Millennium Development Goals" approaching, discussions are now underway to develop a follow-up framework based on a more holistic view of development, with the notion of well-being at its core.

The OECD commitment to develop better indicators of people’s life is stronger than ever.

We are working in close collaboration with the many countries and organizations (in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Australia, Korea, Japan, China, as well as the European Statistical System, to name just a few) that have launched ambitious national and regional initiatives in this field.

In many ways, however, this work is still in its infancy; developing better measures of progress, and ensuring that these are used by policy makers, is an ongoing mission.

To provide impetus towards this goal, the OECD is organizing a range of high-level regional conferences in Latin America, Asia, Africa and Europe bringing together experts from governments, statistical offices, academia and the private and nonprofit sectors, culminating in the 4th OECD World Forum on “Statistics, Knowledge and Policy”, to be held in New Delhi, India, in October 2012 which will focus on measuring well-being for development and policy-making.

Endnotes 1. A few Commonwealth governments have been collecting data on subjective well-being for some time, including Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 119

Tekanene_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:44 Page 120

PACIFIC WOMEN IN PARLIAMENT

MOCK PARLIAMENTS HELP TO PLACE MORE PACIFIC WOMEN IN THE HOUSE If Youth Parliaments encourage young people to become involved in politics, why can’t a similar approach bring more women into Parliament? A Pacific Parliament finds it can.

Mr Eni Tekanene, in South Tarawa.

Mr Tekanene is the Clerk to the Parliament of Kiribati. He wrote this article in partnership with Ms Charmaine Rodrigues, the United Nations Development Programme’s Pacific Regional Democratic Institutions and Accountability Specialist, and Ms Joanne Lee Kunatuba, the Gender Officer of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.

Mr Eni Tekanene

Pacific island countries have the lowest number of female Parliamentarians in the world.

Solomon Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Nauru have no women in Parliament, and Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Tuvalu, Republic of Marshall Islands and Cook Islands had at the time of writing one female Parliamentarian each. Considerable work has been done to raise awareness with policy-makers about the need for temporary special measures to promote women’s representation, but in 2011, the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) and the

120 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Pacific Centre, in collaboration with partners at the Kiribati National Parliament and Ministry for Internal and Social Affairs, tried a novel approach to building the capacity of women candidates by running the first ever Mock Parliament for Women in the Pacific.

The idea of a mock Parliament for Women drew on the very positive experiences reported from recent Youth Parliament fora in the region, including the Youth Parliament held in Kiribati in early 2010. The idea was first proposed in 2010, at a Forum Smaller Island States Meeting on ‘Advancing Women’s Participation in Decision Making Processes’ where delegations endorsed the convening of a mock Parliament for Women in their respective countries.

Kiribati was the first country to pilot the concept in the region.

Thirteen women from Tarawa and 17 women from the outer islands of Kiribati came together at the Maneaba Ni Maungatabu

(Parliament) for a three-day parliamentary training for potential candidates in advance of the October 2011 national elections.

The training was then followed by a two-day Mock Parliament for Women from 8-9 August.

In his Keynote Address, the Speaker of Parliament, Hon. Taomati Iuta, MP, told the participants: “There is no reason why women should not aspire for political positions as it has been proven that women now, in the 21st century, are quite capable of holding positions of responsibility that were once considered to be only the domain of men. In my opinion, one of the most important barriers now is actually that women do not believe in themselves and in the things they are capable of doing. This notion must be overcome and it is hoped that this training and mock Parliament will be a first step to that end.”

During the three-day preparatory training, participants were trained on key parliamentary procedures, as well as substantive policy issues of relevance to the

Tekanene_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:45 Page 121

PACIFIC WOMEN IN PARLIAMENT

The group of participants pictured at the mock Parliament.

Kiribati people. The third day of training then focused specifically on the upcoming elections, with sessions explaining the electoral processes. The participants also then ran through a dress rehearsal in the actual parliamentary chamber. Members of the current Kiribati Parliament generously offered their time to participate as resource persons so that women participants could learn from their experiences.

The mock Parliament ran for two days. On each day, the women on the government benches faced question time in the morning, with questions ranging from issues such as the government’s policy on public transport for school children, to reserving seats for women in local and national elected bodies, to increasing the number of polling stations for voters in South Tarawa.

Following question time, Members discussed a motion put forward by Opposition Members. On day one the motion related to climate change responses while on Day two, the motion urged the government to focus on enacting and enforcing a specific law on

domestic violence.

The last order of business on both days was debating the passage of a mock Youth Reproductive Health Rights Bill, which proposed requiring free condoms to be provided in government primary and secondary schools and for sex education classes to be compulsory for students over eight years of age. Mock MPs debated the Bill in principle and on the second day, resolved into a Committee of the whole and debated their own proposed amendments to the Bill.

Reflecting on the debate and the mock Parliament more broadly, Hon. RititeTekiau, a member of the government side during the mock Parliament and the real-life Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs, reflected, “this has been a very different experience for me, but it has been very positive. I am very pleased to see that Kiribati women are ready for this type of political activity. This mock Parliament demonstrated in a real way the commitment and interest of

women both in Tarawa and in the outer islands to enter politics. The questions that the women raised in question time were excellent and really drew to our attention some issues that our government could work more actively on. Our Ministry is very grateful to see such interest because we very much want to support women’s efforts to participate in our government”.

The national elections held in October 2011 resulted in the reelection of three incumbent women MPs, namely Ms Rereao Tetaake (Teraina in the Line Islands), Ms Tangariki Reete (Betio, South Tarawa) and Teima Onorio (Arorae) who is currently the VicePresident of the republic. One new female MP, Hon. Maere Tekanene, was also elected.

Ms Tekanene won her seat after contesting national elections for the third time. She was one of the Department of Women’s organizers of the mock Parliament and she specifically acknowledged it following her win. She is now the Minister of Education.

“The Women's Mock Parliament has played a key role in

helping female candidates win the constituencies of Betio and Tarawa Teinainano, both in South Tarawa.

In the Teinainano constituency where I contested, there were five of us, all of whom had had some kind of involvement with the mock Parliament, either as an organizer or a participant…. Each was trying her best in her own way but during the second round when I became the only female candidate, they all gave a hand in advocating for me.

At workshops and social and family gatherings they attended they would say, ‘Please, give a hand to the only female contesting in the final elections’”, said Ms Tekanene.

Another positive impact was the community’s discussion on women’s capability to speak. It to a certain degree helped get rid of several stereotypes.

Ms Charmaine Rodrigues, regional parliamentary specialist with the UNDP Pacific Centre, worked with Kiribati and Marshall Islands partners, as well as the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat to support this initiative.

Reflecting on the success of the mock Parliaments, she observed: “While a range of training opportunities have been provided to Pacific women, it has been a criticism that these have not often resulted in concrete impacts in terms of leading to women actually engaging in Parliament processes. The mock Parliament seeks to directly address that concern by specifically training women on parliamentary engagement, and then immediately providing them with a forum to apply the skills they have learnt”.

Already, a number of countries elsewhere in the region have indicated an interest in similar activities prior to their elections.

The UNDP and the PIFS have produced a five-minute video of the Kiribati Mock Parliament for Women which can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =SfLDGizQbYw.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 121

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:47 Page 122

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS

PARLIAMENTARY WORLD HERITAGE SITES Two of Canada’s oldest provincial Legislatures have resolved to seek international recognition for their historic buildings as outstanding world cultural sites, a designation that surprisingly few Parliaments have been awarded by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. A former official of one of the Houses examines how the designation could become a more common, and fully justified, Commonwealth parliamentary feature.

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC, in Charlottetown Mr Macnutt, a lawyer and former Legislative Counsel for the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly, has writen architectural histories of the Legislatures of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec.

Mr James W. Macnutt, QC

Both the House of Assembly in Nova Scotia and the Legislative Assembly here on Prince Edward Island (P.E.I.) have passed unanimously their motions endorsing the application for UNESCO designation. The Nova Scotia motion passed on 3 May and the P.E.I. motion on 24 May. If the highest and most prestigious international recognition of a building or place is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designation as a World Heritage Site, it is surprising that very few

122 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Parliaments within the Commonwealth have the designation. The most notable exception is the Palace of Westminster which shares the 1987 designation with Westminster Abbey and St Margaret’s Church on Parliament Square in London.

The criteria for designation of the British Parliament and adjacent buildings was in the category of “human creative genius; interchange of values; significance in human history”. Does it mean that others within the Commonwealth parliamentary group do not have such significance since they have not been designated? The answer is no. Some would certainly qualify, but it appears no initiative has been taken to secure the designation.

Two of the most historic and significant legislative buildings in Canada, and within the Commonwealth parliamentary group, are making an application for the designation. These two buildings are the legislative buildings in Halifax, Nova Scotia,

and Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, both known as Province House.

In this the year many are celebrating Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s Diamond Jubilee, it is fitting to commemorate the extraordinary reach of the governmental system of democracy currently in use in most Commonwealth countries. That system had its origins in medieval monarchial Britain. One of the most profound, powerful and potent legacies of the British system of government is the parliamentary system adopted in varying forms in Britain’s former areas of political and cultural influence.

The designation as a World Heritage Site would recognize the architectural, cultural and symbolic importance of the buildings both within the countries in which they are located and in a global sense.

One or more of several criteria must be met to achieve World Heritage Site designation. The criteria that most clearly would apply is the one under which the Palace of Westminster was

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:47 Page 123

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS

The north side of Province House in Prince Edward Island (PEI). Both PEI and Nova Scotia unanimously passed the resolution for UNESCO designation.

designated. The standard would not be whether other buildings are of equal significance to it, any more than the numerous churches around the world designated as World Heritage Sites are all equal; the element of similarity is inevitable but not exclusionary.

However, there must be something

unique and of significance to others outside the country of origin.

Just as the Palace of Westminster is indisputably of great importance within the terms of UNESCO’s criteria, so too are some of the creations in its image within its former colonies, modified and adapted to local conditions yet

demonstrating fidelity to the original. In fact, the original can only be fully understood both in its structural presence and in its procedural operation if it is viewed in the context of its offspring in an interconnected group known as the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. While the Parliament The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 123

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:47 Page 124

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS

The exterior of the House Assembly building in Nova Scotia.

at Westminster was originally the preeminent legislative body within the Empire, the Legislatures in the Commonwealth are now equals and operate as such within the framework of the association.

The objectives of UNESCO World Heritage Site designations are compatible with those of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Both are international in their scope, intended to broaden understanding and respect among disparate cultures, and constituted to recognize and promote high achievement at a level having standards of universal acceptance.

In its World Heritage Mission Statement, UNESCO states: “Heritage is our legacy from the past, what we live with today, and

what we pass on to future generations. Our cultural and natural heritage is both irreplaceable sources of life and inspiration... [UNESCO] seeks to encourage the identification, protection and preservation of cultural and natural heritage around the world considered to be of outstanding universal value to humanity (emphasis the author’s).”

UNESCO states the significance of a UNESCO designation is “... its universal application – World Heritage Sites belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located.”

Designation of the Palace of Westminster as a World Heritage Site established definitively that a

124 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Parliament is a cultural entity as much as it is a political entity. As such, the two Legislatures of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island are cultural institutions within the full meaning and spirit of the UNESCO World Heritage Mission.

Among the ten criteria listed by UNESCO as the criteria enabling a place to qualify for designation, in addition to those allocated to the Palace of Westminster, others also could be considered as relevant and as enhancing the opportunity for designating the Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island legislative buildings: (iii) Testimony to cultural tradition: “...to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural

tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared.” (v) Traditional human settlement “... to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land use, or sea use which is representative of the culture (or cultures) or human interaction with the environment...” (vi) Heritage association with events of universal significance “... to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance.”

The legislative buildings in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:48 Page 125

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS

qualify, I suggest, for the following reasons: • Both buildings exemplify human creative genius, both in their architectural form, decorative elements and in the procedures performed within them.

• Originating in the cultures and practices of the ancient world, as demonstrated for example in the Old Testament of the Bible but not limited to the religious standards of those espousing the Bible, certain cultural norms reflected there were prevalent in the ancient world, and were generally followed in several successive cultures, and were repeated in 18th -century British architectural neoclassicism.

The significance of “up” over

“down”, the inferiority of “left” over “right”, the precedence accorded to certain civic functions such as the ruler over those governed, the dignity and importance of public functions being expressed in structural form (buildings), and the placing of such buildings in a location and in a context which gives highest standing and honour over secondary buildings (in the language of the criteria, specific “land-use” principles). That place and context follows the practices and principles of civic processions and ceremonies.

• While the nature of parliamentary government developed in the Palace of Westminster, that development occurred in a medieval palace with limitations on the use of space to meet the principles of historic stature and protocol accorded Parliament. The development of what was to become the standard configuration of a Parliament in the British parliamentary system occurred not in London but, it appears, in the legislative building located in the city of Charleston, South Carolina, in the 1750s. The city was then the capital of one of the most sophisticated, educated and prosperous British colonies of the time.

• What made the legislative building in Charleston so significant is that it employed all the principles of protocol and precedence that had their origins in ancient history as adapted and utilized by the Greeks and the Romans. These principles were later applied in the 1850s rebuilding of the Palace of Westminster in the Victorian gothic designs created by Charles Barry and Augustus Pugin.

• The principles so adopted in South Carolina resulted in a legislative building with the following characteristics (1) a clearly defined site in the centre of the most important urban area in the colony, a site that was designed and intended to house the most important civic building in the

culture of the place; (2) a building designed to neoclassical designs speaking to the pre-eminence of the building and its association with ancient Greek city state democratic principles; (3) the principal floor (the piano nobile) being on the second (elevated) floor; (4) the internal spaces arranged to accommodate the governor, the legislative council (governor’s appointed advisory body) and the house of assembly (elective body); (5) the spaces so arranged reflect historicist protocols and precedents; for example, with the governor’s council chamber being on the right as one enters the piano nobile and the lower house on the left; (6) the principal chamber having a “throne” for the vice regal governor in the upper house and a “speaker’s chair” in the lower house, and (7) in the allocation of seating within the house of assembly whereby the government members sit to the right of the speaker and the opposition members to the left.

• The Charleston building was the culmination of experiments in earlier legislative chambers, such as at Williamsburg, Virginia, which finally reflected efficiently and symbolically a Legislature in the British parliamentary system.

• The Charleston building is highly significant to the legislative buildings in Halifax and Charlottetown because the form and protocols of the Charleston legislative building were taken by persons loyal to the British Crown who left the United States after the revolution in 1779 to other areas of the British Empire. In particular, the design appears to have been taken first by the Loyalists to Nassau in the Bahamas in the early 19th century and later to Halifax, Nova Scotia.

• The layout of spaces and protocols of the Nova Scotia legislative building was applied with a few modifications to the legislative building built later in Charlottetown.

• From this brief summary of the

history of the spacial arrangements and neoclassicism of the Halifax and Charlottetown buildings, it can be seen there is a clear continuity of form and function within the British American colonies of the 18th century and in turn continuity to the Palace of Westminster and its historicist roots.

• Part of the international significance of the Halifax and Charlottetown buildings is that they are the most perfect extant examples of 18th-century British American legislative buildings.

Virtually all United States legislative buildings of the 18th century by now have been so modified as to have destroyed their original conformation with the historicist design principles.

• The “human creative genius” element of the criteria is also embodied in the exterior and interior decorative elements of both buildings. The Halifax building was designed in the style popularized in Britain by Scottish architect Robert Adam and the Charlottetown building in the contrasting neoclassical style of the Greek Revival. That the two buildings are in the two contrasting styles is a further reflection of their significance: the Adam style was grounded on Roman architectural traditions. The Greek Revival style developed out of the intense 18thcentury philosophical reexamination and re-establishment of philosophical and architectural traditions of ancient Greece. The late 18th century witnessed passionate debates on the principles of both styles; the result was that the Greek principles of architectural style became predominant in the early 19th century.

• The interiors of both the Nova Scotia legislative building and that in Charlottetown provide continuity with the external architectural style repeated in the interiors. The interiors of both buildings are superb examples of their respective architectural styles. The Nova Scotia building was held by

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 125

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:49 Page 126

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS 19th-century observers to be the finest neoclassical building in North America; 20th-century Canadian architectural historians have evaluated the Charlottetown building as the finest Georgian building in Canada. While both points of view could be debated, the enthusiastic opinions reflect the extraordinary high standards created in both the interior and exterior design elements.

• Both buildings “exhibit an important interchange of human values....” The values reflected in the buildings as noted include ancient Greek and Roman philosophical values as well as architectural values. They also reflect 18thcentury British American philosophical and artistic values.

The connection with British values is dominant in both buildings. The interchange is profoundly reflected in the values the buildings share with their counterparts following the Westminster system of government prevalent throughout the Commonwealth of Nations.

The buildings, as currently functioning, have also blended the various cultural traditions prevailing in the two provinces.

• Do they demonstrate a uniqueness essential to meet the criteria? Yes, as the most complete examples of 18th-century British colonial legislatures they are unique. Indeed, the spacial layout in which they were built became integrated in the 1850s into Barry and Pugin’s rebuilding of the Palace of Westminster thus reflecting the cross pollination that occurred within the British parliamentary system, now known as the Westminster system of government. The two buildings are not only outstanding but are unique for the reasons advanced above.

• As to their significance in historical terms, both are exceptionally important. The Nova Scotia building is recognised to be the oldest extant legislative building in the Westminster system of government. Among its numerous claims for historical

The Palace of Westminster is one of the notable exceptions that shared its 1987 UNESCO designation with Westminster Abbey and St Margaret’s Church.

significance is its central role in hosting the trial (the buildings originally housed the Supreme Court of the colony) of journalist Joseph Howe for defamation rising from editorial comments made during a mid 19th-century election. The issue was freedom of the press. The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia established the principle of freedom of the press which became the jurisprudence for supporting freedom of the press throughout the British Empire – a huge achievement by any standard. Several governors general of Canada were sworn in at Province House in Halifax, as the first point of disembarkation for

126 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

governors general arriving from Britain. The legislative buildings in Halifax also hosted the second meeting of the Fathers of Confederation of which greater emphasis shall be given in commenting on the historical significance of the legislative building in Charlottetown.

In 1864 following a series of meetings among representatives of the British colonies of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick (named in the sequence in which they were created), it became clear that the three colonies would be unable to reach an agreement for a union.

The last of those meetings was

held in Charlottetown at Province House (known then as the “Colonial Building”) in September 1864. The Prime Minister of the federation of the United Province of Canada, (Ontario and Quebec) heard of the scheduled meeting and invited himself and representatives of the Legislature of the United Provinces to the meeting in Charlottetown. They served initially as observers outside the bar of the house until the Maritime union talks failed. Prime Minister John MacDonald invited himself and his delegates onto the floor of the legislative council chamber with the proposition that union talks continue but expand to

Macnutt_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:49 Page 127

HISTORIC PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS include the United Provinces of Canada. Prime Minister MacDonald carried the day, and during the meetings in Charlottetown agreement in principle was reached for Canadian union.

Province House in Charlottetown is recognized as the “Birthplace of Canadian Confederation”, an event of national significance and given Canada’s role on the international stage in peacetime and in wartime, the meetings and place where they were held is of universal significance.

This significance is shared with Independence Hall in Philadelphia for the same reason.

Independence Hall is the only legislative building in the United States to have been designated as a World Heritage Site.

As a measure of the culture and values expressed in the two buildings, the celebrated English novelist Charles Dickens, during a visit to Province House in Halifax, Nova Scotia, in 1842, commented that “watching the proceedings (a state opening of the legislature) was like watching the same ceremony at the Palace of Westminster, except through the wrong end of a telescope”. Dickens described how the state opening proceeded during his visit: “The military band outside the building struck up ‘God Save the Queen’ with great vigour before His Excellency had quite finished; the people shouted; the ins rubbed their hands; the outs shook their heads; the government party said there never was such a good speech; the Opposition declared there never was such a bad one; the Speaker and Members of the House of Assembly withdrew from the bar to say a great deal among themselves and do a little; and in short everything went on and promised to go on just as it does at home [in the Palace of Westminster] upon the like occasions.” Dickens referred to the building as “a gem of Georgian

architecture.”

The Legislatures of both Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island have expressed their support for the UNESCO World Heritage Site designations in resolutions of their Legislatures in language similar to the following drafted by the author of this article for the legislature of the Province of Nova Scotia: ‘Whereas the Legislature of Nova Scotia, established in 1758, has been in continuous service to its electorate for more than 250 years, is recognized as the oldest Legislature in the Westminster System of Government outside Great Britain, and has conducted its business in Province House since 1819; ‘Whereas Province House was constructed in the Scottish neoclassical 18th-century architectural style created by celebrated Scottish architect Robert Adam and is acknowledged to be the finest example of that style in North America; and whereas Province House has been the setting for numerous legal, cultural and political events having international significance including the establishment of freedom of the press in the British common law, the swearing in of numerous Governors General of Canada, the second meeting of the Fathers of Confederation which ultimately led to the creation of Canada as an independent country; and numerous events of significance in the military and political life and defence of its allies in World War I and World War II; ‘Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Nova Scotia believes its seat, Province House, is deserving of designation as a World Heritage Site by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and believes it meets various of the criteria prescribed by UNESCO for the designation, and for those reasons hereby requests the designation by UNESCO, which the Legislature of Nova Scotia would deem an honour.’

Prince Edward Island Motion Support for the designation of Province House as a World Heritage Site A Motion Tabled in the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly, 24 April 2012 Whereas the Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island, which first met on 7 July 1773, and has served the people of this Island for almost 279 years, has conducted its business in Province House since 26 January 1847.

And whereas Province House was locally designed, built and furnished, reflecting the dedication, skill and accomplishment of Island craftspersons of the midnineteenth century.

And whereas the Royal Gazette in January 1847 described the new building with its noble entrance, capacious public offices, large and convenient Court of Justice and, above all, noble Halls of Legislation, as an honour to the Island, commanding a feeling of pride and satisfaction in all who entered.

And whereas today Province House is widely recognized as one of the finest parliamentary buildings in the Commonwealth, and continues to have a special place in the hearts and minds of the people of Prince Edward Island as a living symbol of our democracy.

And whereas over the past 165 years, Province House has been the location for many important legal, cultural and political events having local, regional, national and international significance, including the first meeting of the Fathers of Confederation in 1864 which ultimately led to Canadian Confederation in 1867.

And whereas Province House was designated as a National Historic Site in 1966 as the site of the Charlottetown Conference in 1864; as a fine example of the neoclassical architectural style; and as representative of the judicial institution of Prince Edward Island.

Therefore be it resolved that Province House, seat of the Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island, is deserving of recognition by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a World Heritage Site.

Therefore be it further resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island requests the Government of Canada to nominate Province House for inscription on the World Heritage List, which it would deem an honour to the people of Prince Edward Island.

Mr Sonny Gallant, MLA, Government House Leader Mr Steven Myers, MLA, Opposition House Leader

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 127

CPA Centennial goods advert_Layout 1 15/08/2012 11:01 Page 128

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS

CPA Centennial Globe: £30 each plus £7.50 postage and handling.

Total: £37.50

CPA Centennial Mirror: £12 each plus £7.50 postage and handling..

Total: £19.50

The CPA Centennial Post it Note Holder: £8 each plus £7.50 postage and handling: Total: £15.50

The CPA Centennial pin specially designed to mark the 100 years milestone: £5 each plus £2.50 postage and handling. Total: £7.50

The CPA Centennial globe and post-it holder in their boxes

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:50 Page 129

Parliamentary Report NEWS AND LEGISLATION FROM COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTS BRITISH COLUMBIA: Auditor-General for Local Government Act Page 131

NEW ZEALAND: National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill Page 136

AUSTRALIA: Minerals Resource Rent Tax Act 2012 Page 141

INDIA: The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2012 Page 144

INDIA: The Export Import Bank of India (Amendment) Bill Page 146

AUSTRALIAN SPEAKER STEPS ASIDE Page 138

JUBILEE WINDOW COMMEMORATES QUEEN ELIZABETH II’S 60-YEAR REIGN Page 132

WAITANGI LAND SETTLEMENT LEGISLATION PASSED Page 135

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS SETS OUT CHALLENGES FOR THE GOVERNMENT Page 143

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 129

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:40 Page 130

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

CANADA

GOVERNMENT CONTINUES EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT CONSERVATIVE LAW As the government of Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, MP, celebrates the first anniversary of its “majority status,” the Harper government is continuing its efforts to implement its conservative law and order proposals and budgetary measures.

For over six years, the Harper government has had to compose with a minority situation in the House of Commons. As a result, many of the proposals at the core of the Conservative political platform were constantly frustrated. The May 2012 general election and the Conservative elected majority gave a second wind to the Harper Government. Within the first 100 sitting days of the new parliamentary session, the government succeeded, as promised during the electoral campaign, in having Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, enacted by Parliament. Bill C-10, also known as the Omnibus Crime Bill, included a series of government bills presented in previous sessions that the opposition had delayed or refused to adopt in the House of Commons. Another proposal adopted in the early days of the new Parliament was the Budget Implementation Act for the budget presented on 6 June 2011 to the House by the Minister of Finance. The lack of support from the opposition parties for these budgetary measures had, in part, 130 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Rt Hon. Stephen Harper, MP

contributed to the defeat of the Harper Government on 25 March 2011, and triggered the general election that followed.

The Conservative government is, after a year, continuing its efforts to tackle crime, and implement a Conservative budgetary policy.

Protecting elderly Canadians On 15 March 2012, Bill C-36, the Protecting Canada's Seniors Act, was introduced in the House of Commons. On that day, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Hon. Rob Nicholson, MP, said: “Our government has a responsibility to protect elderly Canadians and to ensure that crimes against them are punished appropriately. This legislation will help ensure tough sentences for those who take advantage of vulnerable members of our society.” Bill C36 would amend the Criminal Code to add vulnerability due to age as an aggravating circumstance for sentencing purposes.

Another legislative initiative aimed at amending the Criminal Code was introduced on 24 April 2012. Bill C-37, the Increasing Offenders' Accountability for Victims Act, would change the rules governing victim surcharges.

Mr Nicholson explained in the House of Commons “today we introduced legislation that will make convicted offenders more accountable to the victims of crime. We will double the federal victim surcharge that offenders must pay and ensure that this surcharge is automatically applied in all cases. The revenue from this surcharge is used to provide direct services to victims of crime. We believe this sends the right message to criminals: they must pay for the harm that they caused their victims”.

Victim surcharges are additional penalties imposed on convicted offenders at the time of sentencing. They are collected by the provincial and territorial governments, and fund programmes and services for victims in the province or territory where the crime was committed.

Nuclear Terrorism Act On 27 March 2012, the government introduced Bill S-9, the Nuclear Terrorism Act, in the Senate. The Bill would create new offences related to and that would deter nuclear terrorism.

However, the legislative

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:51 Page 131

CANADA

initiative which received most of the media and Parliamentarians’ attention recently was Bill C-38, the Budget Implementation Act (2012). Early each spring, the Minister of Finance tables in the House of Commons the annual budget. Shortly thereafter, a bill or a series of bills is presented with the aim to implement the necessary amendments to

committee were given 20 days to examine the Bill. In the Senate, the Bill has been referred for pre-study to six different parliamentary committees “notwithstanding any normal practice”.

The Conservative majority in both Houses of Parliament leaves no doubt as to the disposition of the Bill, which

should normally be adopted before the 2012 summer recess. However, the opposition vowed to do anything it could to delay its passage.

As the Harper government can, at last, with its majority, succeed in having all of its legislative proposals adopted

by Parliament, it also changed

the government’s approach towards private members’ bills.

On every sitting day, the House of Commons debated, for one hour, a legislative proposal introduced by a private member. As there was no cap on the number of bills private members could introduce, a complex procedure involving a random draw at the beginning

THIRD READING: BRITISH COLUMBIA Hon. Rob Nicholson, MP

existing legislation. These budget implementation bills have constantly grown in size, and Bill C-38 was no exception to this trend. The Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act (as by its short title) is a 452page long legislative proposal containing 753 clauses; it aims at amending more than 60 different statutes, some of them have limited or no connection to budgetary matters. It would, for example, increase the retirement age from 65 to 67 years, and implement changes to environmental and immigration law.

The New Democrat Official Opposition attempted to have the Bill split into different bills according to subjects and have them referred to separate subject-matter parliamentary committees. They did not succeed. In the Commons, the study of the Bill was entrusted in part to a subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance, the subcommittee and

Auditor General for Local Government Act The Auditor General for Local Government Act received Royal Assent on 29 March 2012.

Appointed for a fixed term of five years, with the possibility of one renewal, the Auditor General for Local Government (AGLG) is selected by the Lieutenant Governor in Council upon recommendations from audit council, a newly formed body responsible for overseeing the work of the office.

At the Second Reading stage, the role and responsibilities of the provincially funded office of the Auditor were outlined. They include: conducting value-for-money audits of local governments, providing objective advice to local governments on how to improve effectiveness, and identifying and reporting on best practices.

Under the Act the AGLG will identify the local governments to be audited and, subject to resources, can enter into special agreements with local governments on specific audits. The performance audits will result in public reports containing non-binding recommendations on how local government can maximize efficiency. The Auditor cannot call into question the merits of policy decisions or the objectives of local governments.

The performance of the AGLG will be monitored by an audit council made up of a minimum of five members who are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council in consultation with the Union of BC Municipalities, business representatives, taxpayers and local government professionals.

In Committee Stage debate, Opposition members voiced concerns about the independence of the AGLG, stated that the new role may be replicating audit requirements already in place. They also questioned the Auditor’s role in assessing local government’s policy decisions.

The Act will come into effect by regulation and will be reviewed five years after coming into force.

The positions of the AGLG and audit council were advertised on the BC Public Service website in early 2012 and in April 2012 the first five-member audit council was named.

Metal Dealers and Recyclers Act In the fall of 2011 Canada’s first metal theft law was passed unanimously in the British Columbia House.

The Metal Dealers and Recyclers Act were designed to curb the growing problem metal theft and the serious public safety concerns it raises. It establishes a new regulatory regime for metal dealers and recyclers in the province and introduces tighter controls on scrap metal transactions.

Metal dealers are now required to collect personal information and information on the source of the metal from all metal sellers and this data must be reported daily to local police. Unregistered metal dealers or dealers found in violation of new regulations are subject to administrative penalties or possible jail time. The regulations, released on 8 May 2012, provided for a six-week phase in period and come into effect on 23 July 2012.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 131

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:40 Page 132

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

of every Parliament was in place to designate the Bill (or motion) to be debated during the private members’ hour on any given day. Private members’ business had traditionally been less partisan in the Canadian Parliament, where political parties did not impose party lines on votes for private members’ initiatives.

This began to change with a series of minority Parliaments where private members’ bills

CANADA/UNITED KINGDOM were oftentimes used as another tool by the opposition parties to destabilize government. It now appears that practice towards private members’ bills is again evolving.

The government is now openly supporting private members’ bills introduced by members of the Conservative caucus. Some commentators have criticized this approach towards lawmaking. Private

members’ bills are the object of less scrutiny before and after their introduction before Parliament. At the preliminary stages, they are not scrutinized

by Department of Justice officials, and no costs-benefit analysis is conducted. Before the House of Commons, debates on Privates members’ bills are limited to a maximum of four hours (two hours at second reading, and two hours at the combined report and

third reading stages). Private members’ bills that received government support includes, for example, Bill C-309, the Concealment of Identity Act, which would make the concealment of one’s identity during a riot an offence under the Criminal Code. Bill C-394, that would prohibit recruiting or encouraging a person to join a criminal organization, also received the support of the government.

JUBILEE WINDOW COMMEMORATES QUEEN ELIZABETH II’S 60-YEAR REIGN On 20 March 2012 both Houses of Parliament met together in Westminster Hall to present to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, humble addresses

Baroness D’Souza

commemorating her 60 years on the throne. They also unveiled a stained glass window, emblazoned with the Royal Coat of Arms, which was

mounted in Westminster Hall and paid for by subscriptions from MPs and Peers.

Presenting the address from the House of Lords, the Lord Speaker, Baroness D’Souza, spoke of Her Majesty having “personified continuity and stability while ensuring that your role has evolved imperceptibly, with the result that the monarchy is as integral a part of our national life today as it was 60 years ago”.

The Lord Speaker focused on Her Majesty’s work as Head of the Commonwealth, saying “for we must remember that your Jubilee will be celebrated with joy in your other realms and territories, and throughout the rest of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth as we know it today is of course one of the great achievements of your reign and under your

132 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:52 Page 133

UNITED KINGDOM

leadership continues to flourish, with a membership of 54 countries. It is still growing. It is a tremendous force for good in the world and we are aware of its special personal significance to you.”

She went on to talk of the work of Parliamentarians in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, saying “We work to share our experiences, to learn from one another, and to promote democracy. But our efforts are as nothing compared with those of Your Majesty in the service of your beloved Commonwealth. Over the years you have visited all but two Commonwealth countries-some, many timesand attended all Heads of Government meetings since 1997. We look on with admiration and pride at the triumphs of some of your recent tours and it is significant that members of the royal family are representing you this year at the Jubilee celebrations being held in all those lands in

Rt Hon. John Bercow, MP

which you are Head of State.”

Presenting the address from the House of Commons, the Speaker of the House, Rt Hon. John Bercow, MP, told Her Majesty: “We your faithful Commons are honoured to be here to commemorate and celebrate the 60 years of your reign. We too are pleased to have contributed to the Jubilee

window to be revealed shortly and which will mark this occasion permanently. Time is better preserved in this historic place than in fallible human memory.”

He went on to talk of Her Majesty as a force of continuity in a time of change, observing the differences between the United Kingdom of 1952 and the country of today and commenting “it has been your singular accomplishment, your unique capacity, to hold together that which could have been torn asunder. You have moved with the times and allowed the times to move around the rest of society”.

He went on to say: “We are in so many ways a much bigger, brighter and better United Kingdom [than in 1952]. This is a land where men and women today are equal under the law and where your people are respected, regardless of how they live, how they look or how they love. This is a nation of many races, faiths and customs, now beginning to be reflected in Parliament. All this progress has occurred during your reign.” Finally he concluded with: “Gandhi also observed that “in a gentle way, you can shake the world. Your Majesty, in a gentle way you have shaken this United Kingdom and the world for six decades. On behalf of all the members of the House of Commons, may I thank you wholeheartedly for all that you have done, are doing and will do for the good of our country.”

Responding, Her Majesty expressed her gratitude for the words of the Speaker and Lord Speaker.

She spoke of the importance of Parliament: “This great institution has been at the heart of the country and the lives of our people throughout its history. As Parliamentarians, you share with your forebears a

fundamental role in the laws and decisions of your own age.

Parliament has survived as an unshakeable cornerstone of our constitution and our way of life.” She went on to say that she had had “the pleasurable

Mr John Whittingdale, MP

duty” of treating with 12 Prime Ministers.

Her Majesty spoke of the importance of the Commonwealth to her, saying “my own association with the Commonwealth has taught me that the most important contact between nations is usually contact between its peoples.

An organization dedicated to certain values, the Commonwealth has flourished and grown by successfully promoting and protecting that contact”.

She spoke of her family, describing their support as being “beyond measure” and praising Prince Philip for being throughout her reign, “a constant strength and guide.”

She spoke of her pride in the armed forces saying: “Much may indeed have changed these past 60 years but the valour of those who risk their lives for the defence and freedom of us all remains undimmed.”

Her Majesty talked of the “happy relationship” she had shared with Parliament during her reign, a relationship beyond the “more than three and a half

thousand” Bills she had signed into law. She expressed her gratitude for the gift of the commemorative window, saying “Should this beautiful window cause just a little extra colour to shine down upon this ancient place, I should gladly settle for that.”

Her Majesty concluded her speech by saying: “We are reminded here of our past, of the continuity of our national story and the virtues of resilience, ingenuity and tolerance which created it. I have been privileged to witness some of that history and, with the support of my family, rededicate myself to the service of our great country and its people now and in the years to come.”

Report published on phone hacking allegations The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee published its long-awaited report into the allegations of phone hacking surrounding News International on 1 May 2012.

The report was launched at a press conference attended by the Committee’s Chair, Mr John Whittingdale, MP, (Con), and

Ms Louise Mensch, MP

other Members of the Committee – some of whom, such as Mr Tom Watson, MP, (Lab) endorsed its contents, and others of whom, such as Ms Louise Mensch, MP, (Con), did not.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 133

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 14/11/2012 14:25 Page 134

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

The report concentrated primarily on the question of whether the Committee had, in the last Parliament, been misled by witnesses during its inquiry into Press Standards, Privacy and Libel.

Mr Jeremy Hunt, MP

The Committee accused three News International executives of misleading it. It also concluded that “corporately, the News of the World and News International misled the committee about the true nature and extent of the internal investigations they professed to have carried out in relation to phone hacking; by making statements they would have known were not fully truthful; and by failing to disclose documents which would have helped expose the truth”.

Turning to the senior figures at the top of News International, the Committee described James Murdoch, then Chief Executive of News Corporation Europe, as having an “astonishing lack of curiosity” about key events and documents.

On Rupert Murdoch the Committee said “on the basis of the facts and evidence before the committee, we conclude that if at all relevant times Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone hacking, he turned a blind eye and

UNITED KINGDOM

exhibited wilful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publications”, before going on to conclude “Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company”.

The Committee also had tough words for the police and Crown Prosecution Service.

Referring to former-Acting Deputy Commissioner Mr John Yates and Director of Public Prosecutions Mr Kier Starmer, the report stated: “Given the extraordinary revelations in the media and in civil court cases in the years that followed, however, they both bear culpability for failing to ensure that the evidence held by the Metropolitan Police was properly investigated in the years afterwards, given all the opportunities to do so, and that the sufficiency of the evidence was not reviewed by the CPS.” The Committee’s conclusions were not, however, reached unanimously. Four Members of the Committee voted against the report as a whole.

Rt Hon. Edward Milliband, MP

Many of the passages were also agreed on division, including those quoted above relating to the conduct of the Murdochs and the finding that News International had “corporately” misled the Committee.

The report’s findings were

134 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

denied by some of those it criticized. News Corporation described the report in a statement as “unjustified and highly partisan” and one of the executives accused of

Rt Hon. Jack Straw, MP

misleading the Committee described the Committee’s conclusions as “unfounded, unfair and erroneous”.

The report’s publication came the day after the second of two parliamentary debates on the relationships between the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and News International.

The controversy centered on a number of emails disclosed to Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry into phone hacking and press standards which some took to suggest there may have been contact between Mr Jeremy Hunt, MP, or his staff and the company during its proposed (and later aborted) bid to take over BSkyB. The Leader of the Opposition, Rt Hon. Edward Miliband, MP, (Lab), argued that the Prime Minister should refer the case to the Prime Minister’s adviser on the Ministerial Code, Sir Alex Allen.

Mr Miliband claimed that the code had been broken on three spate occasions by the Culture Secretary.

The Prime Minister, Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP, (Con), rejected the claims that the code had been broken.

He said it was more appropriate that the Culture Secretary would give evidence to the Leveson Inquiry rather than being referred to Sir Alex.

He went on to say that he would not wait until Leveson had completed his inquiries to act if evidence emerged that a Minister had broken the code.

Rt Hon. Jack Straw, MP, (Lab) argued that it was the Prime Minister’s responsibility to investigate potential breaches of the code and that he was failing to do so by not referring the content of the emails and the conduct of the Secretary of State’s special adviser to Sir Alex. However, Rt Hon. Peter Lilley, MP, (Con), argued that Sir Alex’s role was to investigate whether a

Rt Hon. Peter Lilley, MP

Minister’s actions constituted a breach of the code when the facts of the case where known but that the Leveson inquiry was the correct way to establish those facts.

The new session of Parliament began with the Queen’s Speech on 9 May. It seems unlikely that these two issues will go away, with the possibility that the Culture, Media and Sport Committee may seek to pursue further those who it believes misled it and with the Leveson inquiry still to hear from key witnesses from government and elsewhere.

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:53 Page 135

NEW ZEALAND

WAITANGI LAND SETTLEMENT LEGISLATION PASSED At the start of the first day’s sitting of the New Zealand Parliament for 2012 on 7 February, tribute was paid to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on the occasion of the diamond jubilee of Her Majesty’s accession to the Throne. The Prime Minister, Rt Hon. John Key, MP, in moving the House’s congratulations, said that “in her speech as she ascended to the throne, [the Queen] promised to follow the example of service and devotion provided by her father, King George VI. For six decades the Queen has kept that undertaking.

These have been decades during which the concept of the British Empire has receded and the importance of the Commonwealth has come to the fore. And over 60 years New Zealand has orientated itself on the world map differently: less the Antipodes and all that that implies, more a modern and assertive nation with a central role in the Pacific. We have developed our own sense of identity”.

He added: “The dignity, wisdom, and assurance that the Queen brings to her role as New Zealand’s head of State supersedes maps and distances. Throughout the changes of the past 60 years her status as our Sovereign has given many of us a sense of stability and confidence. Her role is a link with systems of constitutional government that have histories much longer

than our own, and with traditions that move and inspire us.”

The Leader of the Opposition, Mr David Shearer, described the Queen’s reign as

Rt Hon. John Key, MP

“one of an unwavering commitment and dedication to service. It is a commitment that has spanned the service of 14 New Zealand Prime Ministers and 12 British Prime Ministers.”

Mr Shearer acknowledged that “over the last 60 years much has changed in New Zealand, and there will inevitably be some discussion about our future constitutional arrangements. But that is a debate for another day”.

Continuation and conclusion of address in reply debate Mr Grant Robertson (Deputy Leader—Labour), speaking in the continuation of the Address in Reply debate on 7 February, said: “The [government’s] plan to lift our economic sights comes down to selling off our

future, hoping someone will dig up some wealth, and cutting public services. That is what the government has in store for New Zealand: sell, cut, hope. It is tired, old theory and it fails to grasp one of the core opportunities that lie in front of New Zealand: the opportunity to base our future on ideas and policies that see the economy and the environment as two sides of the same coin.

“The notion that in order to grow our economy we must compromise our environment comes from another century.

For Labour, we recognize that our future lies in the development of companies and people who are smart, clean, and green.”

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Hon. Bill English, MP, responded that “with the old arrogance of the Labour Party, the deputy leader is saying there is a balance between the economy and the environment, as if that is some new idea. No one has thought of that before! The government’s first priority is to get back to surplus—to manage the government finances prudently to get back to surplus by 2014-15. To continue the process of rebuilding New Zealand’s international competitiveness is our second priority. The third one is to deliver better public services, and the final one is to rebuild Christchurch”.

Dr Kennedy Graham (Green) described the Prime

Minister’s policy agenda delivered by the Governor General in the 2011 Speech from the Throne as a “rational, if rather pedestrian, plan by a practical, if rather visionless, government. Where, for example, is this government’s vision for a brighter future for the people—for a more inclusive and harmonious New Zealand society?

“Where is this government’s vision to make New Zealand a responsible global citizen? A strong economy certainly enables financial resources with a view to returning to surplus, but it does not, on its own, buy social and environmental justice and responsibility.

“These must be envisioned and enacted. The Green vision

Hon. Bill English, MP

for a strong economy is one that is fully entwined with environmental sustainability and social responsibility. It is a vision that lives within our means and lives up to our clear,

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 135

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:38 Page 136

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

clean, green image. The Green belief is that economic growth has a limit, and that that limit is natural, immutable, and nonnegotiable, requiring humanity to live harmoniously within its parameters, and at a certain material point to develop along cultural and spiritual lines rather than through simply further economic growth. There is a natural end point to economic growth”.

Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations,

NEW ZEALAND

Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP described Treaty settlements as “a very good-news story for

all of us. About half of them have now been concluded. This government is committed to concluding just and durable Treaty settlements as quickly as possible. The passage of these Bills is very important because settlements cannot be finalized until the legislation is passed, and delays in legislation mean delays for iwi in sharing the benefits with their people and in putting the grievances behind them.”

On 28 February the final speaker in the Address in Reply

THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill Speaking in the third reading of the National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill on 14 February, Hon. David Carter, MP, Minister for Primary Industries, explained that it “sets out the legal framework for the collection of information on livestock, and their location and movement history throughout their lifetime. It also outlines the governance arrangements and powers for the NAIT organization that will manage the…scheme, scheduled for July 2012 for cattle and March 2013 for deer”. With the scheme, explained Mr Carter, “we can give assurances to domestic consumers and our trade partners that the product is healthy and disease-free. We can manage a disease more effectively and rapidly reopen markets if they are closed. Furthermore, the NAIT scheme…can further support improved productivity and on-farm management.”

There was widespread support in the House for the National Animal Identification and Tracing scheme, which is being funded jointly by the government and a levy on farmers. Grant Robertson (Deputy Leader—Labour) said “this is about the strength of the New Zealand economy. It is about applying technological solutions…developed in New Zealand…to establish our sustainability overseas”, because “technology available now…can tell us about the soil content [and] the way that grass is grown” and “markets across the

136 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

world… are demanding more and more that they understand the origins of the produce that is being purchased”. He also advocated “the government extending the process out further beyond deer and cattle to sheep”. Mr Shane Ardern (National) thought that in time “the problem with retention rates of tagging devices in sheep will be overcome and the cost then will be reduced substantially”.

Although Mr Kevin Hague (Green) agreed that “traceability…is important as one of those valueadd components to our agricultural economy”, he saw “the lack of consultation with the organics sector” as “a significant gap”. He also expressed concern “that in this entity that is not really an arm of the State we have…chosen to vest quite considerable search, seizure, and related powers”, and “an abiding concern that the extent of those powers outweighs the nature of the problem that those powers are created for”.

Mr Richard Prosser (NZ First) viewed “the mandatory adoption of the…system as being precipitate”, arguing that “too great a reliance may come to be placed on this new technology at the expense of existing systems…which are proven and…serve New Zealand well”, and that “we do not wish to see our farmers and consumers unfairly disadvantaged by any financial or compliance burdens…in the absence of a similar required standard being applied to comparable imported foodstuffs.”

The Bill passed unopposed on 15 February.

debate, Hon. Steven Joyce, MP, Minister for Economic Development, accused the opposition of inconsistency: “the other side of the House…demands, on the one hand, jobs, jobs, jobs, which is right, but then it says: ‘You cannot do that, you cannot build that there, you cannot explore for that, you cannot invest in property here, you cannot invest in this country’.”

A motion of no confidence in the government was defeated by 64 votes to 57.

Treaty settlement Bills With the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 regarded as the founding document for European settlement in New Zealand, a process was established for Maori to sell land to the Crown.

Increasing pressure for land from settlers led eventually to land purchases without sufficient validation.

Disagreements between Maori and the Crown then led to unrest, land confiscations, and the New Zealand Wars.

In 1975 the Treaty of Waitangi Act established the Waitangi Tribunal, to examine claims of Crown violations of the Treaty of Waitangi.

In 1985 the fourth Labour government extended the Tribunal’s powers to enable it to hear claims going back to 1840, and in the 1990s the government began the process of hearing historical claims—a process that still continues.

On 29 March five Bills giving effect to historical Treaty of Waitangi settlements were passed.

This represented the most Treaty Bills passed in any calendar year since the settlement process began.

Parliament’s Business Committee agreed to the House sitting extended hours on that day, between 9 am and

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:54 Page 137

NEW ZEALAND

1 pm to deal with some of the legislation.

The remaining Bills were debated during ordinary sitting hours in the afternoon.

Speaking to the third readings of the Ngati Manawa Claims Settlement Bill and the Ngati Whare Claims Settlement Bill, which were debated as cognate Bills, the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Mr Finlayson welcomed the representatives of both iwi [tribes] sitting in the gallery: “From the inception of the push towards settling central North Island claims back in 2002…you have been at the forefront of settlement negotiations. I…acknowledge the leadership, the pragmatism, and the hard work of both negotiating teams. It is through their diligent labour that we are here today.

“Both iwi were part of the Central North Island Iwi Collective, whose forestry claims were addressed as part of [a 2004 settlement]. In 2009 the Crown and [the runanga or assemblies of the two tribes] signed separate deeds of settlement to settle all their outstanding historical Treaty of Waitangi claims. The Ngati Whare package sets an example for current and future settlements, with unique arrangements that have been developed for the forest within the Whirinaki Valley. Cogovernance of the forest park centres on development of a conservation management plan approved jointly by the Crown and Ngati Whare. This is the first such arrangement in the history of Treaty settlements.”

Speaking of the Ngati Manawa settlement, Mr Finlayson said that it was “intended to meet the traditional, historical, cultural, and spiritual needs of the iwi.

They were loyal to the Crown during the New Zealand Wars,

but this did not protect them.

Like iwi throughout the country they suffered from the effects of the native land laws and the Crown’s purchasing techniques…Twentieth century land, river, and forestry development by the Crown added to their misfortune. The key aspects of Ngati Manawa’s cultural redress package aim to reinvigorate the relationship between Ngati Manawa and sites of significance in their area of interest”.

He concluded: “the Crown is acutely aware when it enters into negotiations that full restitution is impossible. We cannot turn back the clock. We cannot return all that was taken.” He also paid tribute to “the generosity of Ngati Manawa and Ngati Whare in accepting this”.

Hon. Nanaia Mahuta, MP, (Labour) said: “Treaty settlements are a living recognition that, despite the hurt and the historical actions that took place between iwi and the Crown, this is a real attempt to try to restore some of that hurt and seek redress, albeit insufficient, I think, in the living memories of the descendants today. But it is a start, and it is an important start to ensure that future generations can move forward”.

In the third reading of the Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill, Mr Finlayson commented that “one noteworthy feature of the Bills we debate today is that they all involve rivers.

“There are slightly different co-governance mechanisms.

They have been carefully constructed to reflect the needs and the realities of the particular river systems”.

Ms Denise Roche (Green) was “heartened by the fact that Maniapoto have been returned to their role as kaitiaki [guardians], and that they will

be able to work in a cogovernance and comanagement relationship with the Crown and with councils to clean and nurture the Waipa and return her to health”.

Two further Treaty settlement Bills received their third readings later in the day, during ordinary afternoon sitting hours of the House.

As he did for all five Treaty settlement Bills, Hon. Dr Pita Sharples, MP, the Minister of Maori Affairs and Maori Party co-leader, moved the third reading of the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill, on behalf of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi negotiations, saying that he believed that the settlement would “support the healing of the relationship between Ngati Pahauwera and the Crown”.

Mr Finlayson explained that

Ms Moana Mackey

“in this Bill the Crown acknowledged its breaches of the Treaty, offers an apology to Ngati Pahauwera, and provides for cultural, financial, and commercial redress. During the process of land alienation that began in the 1850s the Crown failed to make sure that Ngati Pahauwera had sufficient lands for its future needs. By the mid 20th century Ngati Pahauwera was virtually landless, and ever since they have suffered economic, social, and cultural impoverishment”.

The last of the Treaty settlement Bills to have its third reading on 29 March was the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. Like the previous Bill, this one contained an acknowledgment of the Crown’s breaches of the Treaty, and provided “cultural, financial, and commercial redress”, as Mr Finlayson explained.

Ms Roche described the settlement as “worth $110 million and 6,000 acres, plus cultural redress and recognition across Ngati Porou rohe [territory]. It is the secondlargest single deal in the history of Treaty settlements”.

Ms Mahuta pointed out that “we are having a very different conversation here with Ngati Porou because this settlement is, in part, a continuation of a conversation and a relationship that has been well established.

This is a sophisticated, smart, and strategic settlement in that not all the issues for Ngati Porou have been resolved. So it will lock future governments into a continued relationship of having to work with Ngati Porou to achieve the best outcomes in that area”.

Ms Moana Mackey (Labour) attributed the historical grievances of Ngati Porou to “the direct result of the Crown’s failure to respect Ngati Porou’s rangatiratanga [sovereignty]. The Crownimposed significant landtenure reform on Ngati Porou has meant that the East Coast does remain one of the most socio-economically deprived regions of New Zealand, despite the significant efforts and achievements of the people and the runanga [assembly] of Ngati Porou thus far”.

Mr Finlayson said “the settlement given effect by this Bill will provide Ngati Porou with a platform for future growth”.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 137

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:38 Page 138

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

AUSTRALIA

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STANDS ASIDE

Hon. Peter Slipper, MP

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Peter Slipper, MP, has stood aside while criminal and civil allegations against him are being investigated. Mr James Ashby, a former staff member in Mr Slipper’s office, claims that he was sexually harassed

by Mr Slipper. In addition, Mr Ashby alleges that Mr Slipper has misused Cabcharge vouchers.

On 22 April, Mr Slipper released a statement in which he emphatically denied the allegations. Mr Slipper stated that “any allegation of criminal behaviour is grave and should be dealt with in a manner that shows appropriate regard to the integrity of our democratic institutions and to precedent.

As such, I believe it is appropriate for me to stand aside as Speaker while this criminal allegation is resolved.

The allegation is incorrect, and once it is clear they are untrue I shall return to the Speakership.

I would appreciate the relevant bodies dealing with the matter 138 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

expeditiously. In relation to the civil matter there will be an appropriate process that will resolve the matter in due course”. Mr Slipper advised that the Deputy Speaker, Ms Anna Burke, MP, would act as Speaker while he stands aside.

On 8 May, Mr Slipper, in a statement to the House, stated that “Honourable members will know that some allegations have been made in relation to me by James Ashby including a

of the House by introducing reforms which have been supported by all sides and to ensure the House works in the way intended by the practices and procedures of the House.

My understanding is that there is general appreciation in the broader community of what I am seeking to achieve as Speaker. As honourable members would understand I place great importance on the institution of parliament. I propose to ask the Deputy Speaker as Deputy Speaker and members of the Speaker's panel to assist in chairing the proceedings of the House.

There is much more to be done and I look forward to completing what I have begun. I present a copy of my statement

Ms Anna Burke, MP

claim under civil law and a claim of criminal behaviour.

This is the first opportunity that I have had to affirm to the House that I deny allegations that have been made. I believe I am entitled, like any other person, to have the presumption of innocence. I am also entitled to have these matters dealt with by proper process. It is unfortunate that trial by media seems to have become the order of the day in this country. As Speaker I have sought to improve the standing

Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP

and invite the Deputy Speaker to take the chair”.

Mr Slipper was elected as Speaker on 24 November 2011 following the resignation of the then Speaker Hon. Harry Jenkins, MP. Mr Slipper was

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:55 Page 139

AUSTRALIA

formerly a member of the Liberal Party but resigned following his election to the Speakership. Mr Slipper’s election to the Speakership helped strengthen the minority government of Prime Minister Hon. Julia Gillard, MP, by effectively increasing Labor’s vote on the floor of the House of Representatives from the

Hon. Julia Gillard, MP

current 75 to 74 votes to 76 to 73 votes.

The investigation has raised concerns about the integrity of the Speakership. The former Clerk of the Senate, Mr Harry Evans, commented that “both parties have contributed to degrading the office of Speaker, which should be held in high regard by the public and MPs, instead of using it as just another job for one of their number”. Mr Evans concluded that “it will take a long time to recover, if it ever does”.

The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Tony Abbott, MP, commented that “on the issue of Mr Peter Slipper, the now stood-aside Speaker, can I say that it is vital and it is essential that all of the various issues and allegations confronting Mr Slipper be fully dealt with before he returns to the chair. I noticed that the Prime Minister today is trying to suggest that the allegations against Mr Slipper have previous parallels. Well, I'm

afraid the Prime Minister just doesn't get it. She doesn't understand how serious these allegations are. She doesn't appreciate that it is her judgement and her standards which are now very much at issue because Mr Slipper only assumed the chair because she engineered him into it”.

The Prime Minister commented that “it is appropriate that Mr Slipper has stood aside as Speaker whilst alleged criminal conduct is investigated. It is also appropriate for all parties to note the processes under way and treat them with respect”.

Investigation into Mr Craig Thomson, MP Mr Craig Thomson, MP, the Labor member for Dobell in New South Wales was the former Secretary of the Health Services Union (HSU) before being elected to Parliament in 2007. He is being investigated for alleged inappropriate use of his HSU corporate credit card and other expenditure. The investigation and its implications are serious

Hon. Tony Abbott, MP

because of the Gillard Government’s slim hold on minority government. On 29 April, Mr Thomson’s membership of the Labor Party was suspended while the investigation proceeds. He has indicated that he will continue

to support the Labor Government on the floor of the House. Up to this point, no criminal or civil charges have been directed against Mr Thomson.

The Australian Government agency Fair Work Australia (FWA) has undertaken an inquiry into the HSU. The report of the FWA was finally published in May after an inquiry which has taken over three years. The 1100 page report claimed Mr Thomson

Mr Harry Evans

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Members of Parliament (Life Gold Pass) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2012 The Members of Parliament (Life Gold Pass) legislation closes the Life Gold Pass (LGP) scheme prospectively so that members who enter, or re-enter, the Parliament from the commencement of the legislation will not be able to accrue an entitlement to a LGP. In addition, the legislation reduces the travel entitlements for certain LGP holders and their spouses or de facto partners.

The Special Minister of State, Hon. Gary Gray, MP, commented that “the Life Gold Pass has a long history. The provision of travel benefits to sitting or retired senators and members, through issue of a Life Gold Pass, commenced on a limited basis in 1918 in the form of a Life Railway Pass and this was extended to include unlimited air travel in 1959. In 1973, an executive decision extended Life Gold Pass benefits to spouses and widows of Life Gold Pass holders”. Mr Gray noted that “in

2002, legislation was enacted to limit the number of return domestic trips available to Life Gold Pass holders, their spouses and widows. However, limiting the number of trips provided for all entitlees has not prevented ongoing criticism of the Life Gold Pass scheme on the grounds that its provisions exceed community standards”.

The Shadow Special Minister of State, Hon. Bronwyn Bishop, MP, advised that the opposition supported the legislation. Ms Bishop noted the importance of having an independent tribunal which sets members salaries and remuneration.

Ms Bishop stated that it “was appropriate that an independent tribunal exist and that members of Parliament and senators should not be involved in setting their own salaries and remuneration”. Ms Bishop noted that the legislation “accepts the recommendation of the now independent tribunal to limit entitlements under the gold pass scheme, closing it prospectively to new members and limiting existing entitlements”.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 139

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:37 Page 140

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

provided the investigator with information that is false and misleading. The report found that Mr Thomson used more than $270,000 in union funds for federal electioneering, between 2002 and 2007 spent $73,000 on credit cards for dining and entertainment, and during the same period withdrew $103 000 in cash withdrawals.

On 8 May, the Manager of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives, Hon. Chris Pyne, MP, moved

Hon. Chris Pyne, MP

“that in the view of the grave findings made against him by Fair Work Australia, the Honourable Member for Dobell be suspended from the service of the House for 14 sitting days, and that after that the Honourable Member make a statement for the consideration of the House in response to the findings made against him so that the House can consider whether a further period of suspension is warranted”. This motion was defeated with the independent members voting with the government.

On 9 May, Mr Pyne moved “that the House requires the Member for Dobell to make a statement to the House immediately, for a period not exceeding 10 minutes, about the matters arising from Fair Work Australia’s inquiry into the Health Services Union that

AUSTRALIA

relate to him”. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Julie Bishop, MP, seconded the motion stating that “the report has found, amongst other things, that the member for Dobell misused the funds of the Health Services Union to support his election to this Parliament. This is a very serious allegation. Let me be clear. A member of this parliament has been accused of a serious fraud that underpins his presence in this place”.

The Leader of Government Business, Hon. Anthony Albanese, MP, in speaking against the motion drew attention to inconsistencies in the opposition’s attack. Mr Albanese noted that when Liberal Senator Mary Jo Fisher had certain charges brought against her, Mr Abbott stated that “the matter is now before the courts where I understand it will be contested and she should be extended the presumption of innocence”. Mr Albanese stated that Mr Thomson “has said he will make a statement; he should be left to do that. That is what we would expect under all circumstances. But if we go down the road of trying to present this place as judge and jury then we destroy the separation of powers and the balance between political representatives and the judicial wing, which is a very dangerous step indeed”.

At the conclusion of this debate, Mr Thomson stated that “the next sitting week is when I intend to make a statement.

“There has been a comprehensive and very long Fair Work Australia report of some 1,100 pages, which we did not have access to until late Monday night. It is appropriate that I have time to go through that so that I can make a

140 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

comprehensive statement to Parliament, which is what I intend to do. This week is an important week, being budget week. It is a week when

Hon. Julie Bishop, MP

families around Australia are looking at what this government could do and that, quite frankly, is what this week should be spent on. But I indicate to Parliament that I intend to make a statement in the next sitting week”.

On 21 May Mr Thomson addressed the House of Representatives. He began by restating some of the threats that had been made against him: “Go cut your wrists or, better still, hang yourself”. “Go out the back, cut your throat—

Hon. Anthony Albanese, MP

that's the only way”. “Have you slashed your wrists yet?” “You are dead. A bullet between the eyes will save taxpayers' money”. ‘'Mr Thomson while

looking at the Leader of the Opposition and the press gallery stated that “you have unleashed the lynch mob and you have fanned it and for that you're, ultimately, responsible”.

Mr Thomson commented that “in making this statement I am very conscious that in the eyes of many of the public I have already been charged, convicted and sentenced. The public will hold these views because of the quite extraordinary media coverage which has taken place”’ He noted that “it is important to once again remind the House that I have not been the subject of any conviction, not even the subject of any legal proceedings; none of the allegations have been tested in any court or tribunal”.

Mr Thomson criticized the FWA report and its author Mr Terry Nassios.

Mr Thomson stated that “rather than forensic, Mr Nassios, the delegate, was selective and biased. He was so biased, in fact, that I had to write to the general manager last year asking for his removal from this position. Mr Nassios had an outcome that he wanted to achieve and he was trying to link assertions. There was no body of evidence that supported his position”.

In addition, Mr Thomson raised questions about the relationship of a Vice President of FWA, Mr Michael Lalor who is the partner of the current HSU National Secretary Ms Kathy Jackson. Ms Jackson has been highly critical of Mr Thomson.

Mr Thomson stated that “the main accuser's partner is second in charge. The questions Fair Work has to answer, the questions the deputy president has to answer, are: what influence did he have in relation to the writing of the report?”

The FWA report, amongst a

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:55 Page 141

AUSTRALIA

range of issues, examined the expenditure of HSU funds for the purpose of assisting Mr Thomson’s election to Parliament for the seat of Dobell. The FWA report found almost $270 000 worth of expenditure that allegedly could be attributed to this purpose. In rejecting this finding, Mr Thomson drew attention to analysis of the FWA report by the Australia Electoral Commission (AEC). Mr Thomson stated that “quite clearly the AEC report that was

Mr Craig Thomson, MP

released last week blows a massive credibility hole in everything that Fair Work Australia did”.

Mr Thomson’s statement continued for almost an hour in which he discussed his achievements in his seat of Dobell, and sought to address some of the more serious findings in the FWA report. The Opposition used the statement to assist its scrutiny of relevant government agencies during Senate estimate.

Senate budget estimates Senate budget estimates were held in the weeks commencing 21 May and 28 May 2012.

Estimates hearings are considered one of the most effective mechanisms for scrutinising the performance of executive government. Various agencies were scrutinized on

issues surrounding Mr Thomson.

On 28 May the Senate Employment and Workplace

Relations Committee scrutinised representatives

THIRD READING: AUSTRALIA Minerals Resource Rent Tax Act 2012 Australia is experiencing an unprecedented mining boom with high levels of investment and profit. The Minerals Resource Rent Tax seeks to tax mining profits more effectively and fairer. Currently, state and territory governments generally tax non-renewable resources by applying a royalty on production.

Royalties are generally applied on the basis of volume or value and do not take into account how profitable a mining operation is. The Assistant Treasurer, Hon. Bill Shorten, MP, commented that “royalties often take a flat amount of revenues or production regardless of profitability”. The Minister argued that taxing profits was more effective noting that “taxes on profit return more to the nation when times are good, but they also relieve the tax burden on the industry when times are bad”.

The expected revenue from the Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) will allow the government to distribute the mining boom to other parts of the economy. The revenue will provide for a small business asset write off and deduction for motor vehicles. In addition, the mining tax will help fund, over time, an increase in the Superannuation Guarantee (SG) levy, from the current 9 per cent, to 12 per cent. The SG is paid by employers for all eligible employees who are paid more than $450 in a calendar month.

The minimum level of super support for eligible employees is currently 9 per cent of an employee's ordinary time earnings. In addition to these measures, Mr Shorten advised that the mining tax will “fund billions of dollars of new roads, bridges and other critical infrastructure, such as the Gateway project in Western Australia. Much of this infrastructure will benefit where the resources come from and where the workers and their families live, such as the great coalmining regions of New South Wales and Queensland”.

The opposition is fiercely opposed to the MRRT. During debate in the Senate, the Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Shadow Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation, Senator Mathias Cormann commented that “we were promised rootand-branch tax reform which would make our tax system simpler and fairer—what the government has delivered is manifestly more complex and less fair”.

Senator Cormann raised concerns about the mining tax revenue estimates and how the new tax would interact with the state royalty arrangements. Senator Cormann stated that “it is obvious that the spending commitments that the Labor Party have attached to the mining tax are far greater than even what the government suggest would be raised in revenue through the mining tax”.

The legislative package was referred to both the House and Senate Economics Committees for separate inquiries and reports. The reports of both committees contained dissenting reports by opposition members. The House Economics committee stated that “the mining boom is generating massive profits but not all Australians are benefitting. The government’s proposal to tax mineral resources more efficiently and link the increased revenue to specific measures which support small businesses and workers is an effective solution to sharing Australia’s mineral wealth across Australia and into the future”.

In contrast, Coalition Senators of the Senate Economics committee stated that “the Mining Tax Deal entered into by the Gillard government gives an unfair competitive advantage to the three largest miners who were given exclusive access to secret negotiations on the new tax design, makes federal Budget outcomes hostage to decisions about royalties by state and territory governments and raises serious and unresolved constitutional issues”.

The minority report of the Australia Greens Senators commented that “the benefits of the mining boom have been the subject of exaggerated claims and the mining industry pays less than its fair share of tax”.

The Australian Greens noted that “the mining boom has led to an appreciation of the Australian dollar, higher interest rates and shortages of labour in certain regions or with certain skills.

These impacts are in turn leading to lower profits and lower returns to shareholders in other industries such as manufacturing and tourism. The Australian Greens argued that ‘a better designed mining tax could raise a lot more revenue than the Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) – in the order of an additional $100 billion over the next decade”.

On 19 March the legislative package passed the Senate 38 votes to 32.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 141

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:37 Page 142

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

from Fair Work Australia (FWA) on its report into the Health Services Union.

Mr Iain Ross, President of the FWA responded to various comments made by Mr Thomson in his statement in the House of Representatives.

Mr Ross stated that in relation to the allegation that the

Sen. the Hon. Eric Abetz

delegate who conducted the investigation, Mr Nassios, was “selective and biased”, “these are serious allegations made against a career public servant.

The appropriate forum to test such allegations is in a court of law. The General Manager of Fair Work Australia has taken steps to file proceedings in the Federal Court in relation to the report of the investigation into the HSU national office”.

In relation to Mr Thomson’s criticisms of Mr Michael Lalor, Mr Ross commented that “the implication is that the vice president has engaged in misconduct in that he has sought to influence Mr Nassios' investigation. I wish to make two points in relation to this suggestion. First, no-one has provided me with any evidence to support the allegation that Vice President Lawler has sought to influence in any way the HSU investigations.

“I have made inquiries of the general manager about this issue and have been informed that she is not aware of any

AUSTRALIA

such evidence. Second, the vice president has assured me that the imputations of misconduct by him arising from Mr Thomson's statement are false”.

During the hearing, Sen. the Hon. Eric Abetz, asked the Minister at the table, Sen. the Hon. Joe Ludwig whether the government had confidence in the FWA report into the HSU. Senator Ludwig stated that “as I said, policy questions more broadly we can deal with when the department arises. You have me representing Minister Shorten. Any questions in relation to policy, I can certainly take on notice and refer them to Minister Shorten”.

Senator Abetz responded that “so you need the department to tell you whether or not the government has confidence in Fair Work Australia's reports? I would have thought that is something that the government, the minister and Prime Minister could have come to independently, without the assistance of departmental advice”.

Senator Ludwig concluded that “I have said we have confidence in Fair Work Australia. It is their report.

Senator Matthias Cormann

Clearly, they have a range of disturbing issues that are canvassed within that— disturbing to me and, I am

142 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

certain, disturbing to Minister Shorten and to the government—but the report itself is a matter for Fair Work Australia.

“My opinion about that is important to me and, I suspect, to others, but you have an opportunity today to ask questions in relation to Fair Work Australia. You should avail

Sen. the Hon. Joe Ludwig

yourself of that opportunity”.

On 23 May the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee examined the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) in relation to the FWA report into the HSU. Senator Abetz asked the AEC whether its report “destroyed the credibility of the Fair Work Australia investigation, and I would like to know whether you agree with that assertion”.

The AEC Commissioner Mr Ed Killestyn responded that “there were lots of comments made, including in the media and certainly in letters and emails that we had from the public, which concluded erroneously that in some way we had found that the payments were authorized. I am at pains to suggest that we did not examine any question of whether the payments were authorized or not”.

Mr Killestyn also commented that “nor does the

AEC report carry any implications for the veracity or otherwise of the findings of the Fair Work Australia report in terms of the charter that Fair Work Australia has to carry out”.

On a different topic, the Senate Economics Committee examined the Treasury over the state of the economy and the risks posed by the European debt crisis.

The Secretary of Treasury, Dr Martin Parkinson told the committee that the government’s budget position was “incredibly healthy”.

He noted that if there was a global recession as a result of the European debt crisis, Australia had the capacity to stimulate growth by going back into deficit and cutting interests rates.

He did comment that “it does seem to me with hindsight a great shame – a

Dr Martin Parkinson

great pity – that during this great commodities boom, we never ended up in surplus”.

Senator Mathias Cormann asked Mr Parkinson whether Treasury had conducted any planning in the event that Greece exited the Euro.

Mr Parkinson advised that “yes, of course we’ve been thinking about what might happen in Europe and what the options might be for Australia to respond in the event that things deteriorate”.

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:56 Page 143

INDIA

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS SETS OUT CHALLENGES BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT The Budget Session of Parliament commenced with the Presidential Address to both Houses of Parliament on 12 March 2012. The President of India, Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil highlighted the achievements and the future plan of the government. The Indian economy which had grown at a rate of 8.4 per cent in 2010-11 slowed down to about seven per cent this year. She was confident that the economy would soon return back to the high growth trajectory of eight to nine per cent. The year 2012-13 would mark the first year of the 12th Five Year Plan that set the goal

Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil

of faster, sustainable and more inclusive growth. Reiterating the government’s commitment to provide an honest and more efficient government, she said several important steps had been taken towards that end. A number of Bills had been introduced in the Parliament including the Public Interest

Disclosure and Protection of Persons Making the Disclosure Bill and the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill. These Bills, once enacted, would help in curbing corruption and enhancing transparency and accountability in governance.

She further added that the Unique Identification Programme would improve service delivery for millions of underprivileged people. New eGovernance projects in education, health, public distribution and postal services would be launched for providing easy services to citizens. The President asserted that government would continue to focus on ensuring greater transparency, efficiency and accountability in the implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme.

The government would work on five important challenges that included: striving for livelihood security and continuing to work to improve issues regarding poverty, hunger and illiteracy. The President supported the National Intelligence Grid and the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) which she said aimed to improve India's capability to counter internal security threats. Touching upon foreign affairs, the President said the government remained firmly committed to the success of the South Asian Association for Regional

Dr Girija Vyas

Cooperation, ASEAN, G-20, BRICS and IBSA. She said India believed in resolving all outstanding issues with Pakistan through dialogue and attached high priority to the development of its strategic and cooperative partnership with China.

On 13 March, Dr Girija Vyas, a senior member of the Indian National Congress moved the Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address. Referring to the recent elections in five of the Indian states, Dr Vyas said it was a testimony to the maturity of Indian democracy.

Elaborating the efforts made by the UPA government to help those most vulnerable in society, she highlighted the government’s initiatives in containing inflation, besides the emphasis on health, education and inclusive growth. The Lok Pal Bill was introduced in Parliament to fight corruption but could not be passed due to the non-cooperative attitude of the opposition. She said a unified command was needed

to fight terrorism and extremism. Seconding the Motion, Dr Shashi Tharoor (INC) said the difference between the UPA government and some of its predecessors was that it believed in growth.

India had become the world’s second largest telecommunications market and the government was going to create a national optical network to connect the unconnected. The Food Security Bill would ensure that no one remained hungry. India was ready to assume its global responsibilities in the 21st century, said Dr Tharoor.

Shri Rajnath Singh, a senior member of the BJP said while the opposition was willing to extend constructive

Shri Rajnath Singh

cooperation to the government on issues of national interest, the government was not.

Instead of strengthening the federal structure of the country through cooperation between the centre and states, the

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 143

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:35 Page 144

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

government was bent on adopting a confrontation attitude towards the states. He lamented the unilateral decision to establish NCTC despite opposition from the Chief Ministers of several states and said the decision to give police powers, a state subject, to the Railway Protection Force constituted interference in the affairs of the state. He criticized the government for failing to check inflation, unemployment and corruption and blamed the government for not taking effective diplomatic steps to counter Chinese interference in

INDIA

The presidential procession making its way through Parliament.

Arunachal Pradesh. Referring to

THIRD READING: INDIA The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2010 The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 was enacted to provide for the development and regulation of foreign trade by facilitating imports into and augmenting exports from India and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Since its enactment, certain requirements have necessitated amendments to the said Act. These included providing a statutory provision for safeguard measures enabling imposition of Quantitative Restrictions (QRs) and bringing in tighter export or trade control in the case of dual-use goods and related technologies.

The proposed amendments would enable the government to impose quantitative restrictions as a safeguard measure to provide the domestic industry a level playing field, in case a surge in imports led to, or threatened to seriously injure

domestic industry or rationalize the system of penalty leviable under the Act. The provision of notifying all restrictions on imports and exports through the Foreign Trade Policy would ensure that information was available at one place, therefore, ensuring conformity with India’s commitments to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The power of review would ensure transparency and public accountability in the system, and the amendments would also ensure that trade in sensitive technologies is regulated and India’s growing trade in services is facilitated.

During debate on the Bill in both Houses of Parliament, the proposals in the Amendment Bill met with broad approval.

The Bill was passed by Rajya Sabha on 9 August 2010 and by Lok Sabha on 12 August 2010.

The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 19 August 2010.

144 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

the proposed NCTC, Shri Kalyan Banerjee (AITC) said the law and order matter was vested with the state government and the central government could not encroach upon the power of the state. He asked for special grants for the development of border areas.

Stating that all corruption that had taken place since 1947 could be traced back to the Congress rule, Shri Rattan Singh Ajnala (SAD) asked the government to frame stringent laws to check the menace of corruption. The NCTC law was an attack on the federal structure of the constitution.

Shri Inder Singh Namdhari (Independent) said both the state governments and the union government should work together to eliminate terrorism.

Arunachal Pradesh was an integral part of the country and China had no basis to object to the visit of the Defence Minister to that state, he asserted. Shri Sanjay Nirupam (INC) observed even though terrorism affected the entire country, the issue of terrorism was being politicized and it was said that setting up of an institution like NCTC would interfere with the rights of the states and disturb the federal structure. Shri Tathagat

Satpathy (BJD) said the central government was acting in an autocratic manner on issues like NCTC. Shri Shailendra Kumar (SP) believed progress could be hampered unless there was a check on population growth.

He suggested for providing employment allowance to the educated unemployed youths and proper investigation of various corruption cases noticed in centrally funded schemes. Shri Gorakhnath Pandey (BSP) suggested for giving severe punishment to people involved in the generation or transaction of black money and asked the government to provide education, health and drinking water facilities to people in rural areas. Shri Sharad Yadav (JDU) regretted that the English educated youth gained employment while those who were taught in Indian languages did not. Poverty and unemployment had increased during the seven year regime of the UPA government and corruption was rampant.

Nothing had been done to ensure that the centrallysponsored schemes like the National Rural Health Mission, MNREGA, Total Literacy Campaign, etc. produced the desired results. Shri Anant

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 10:57 Page 145

INDIA

Gangaram Geete (Shiv Sena) spoke of farmers facing serious problems and the large measure of the population suffering from malnutrition.

Shri Nama Nageswara Rao (TDP) alleged that the government had failed to check corruption and natural resources were being plundered. It was a serious matter that farmers in Andhra Pradesh were, for the first time, saying no to farming as they were not getting minimum support price for their produce.

Shri Narahari Mahato (AIFB) said unemployment was wide spread and farmers were suffering due to the high cost of inputs including fertilizers.

Shri Syed Shahnawaz Hussain (BJP) said the problem afflicting the present-day UPA government seemed to have no solution. He was of the view that the government had failed to check corruption, black money and price rises. The government failed to rewrite the fate of Muslims even when they were enjoying two-third or even three-fourth majority and seemed to remember the minorities just prior to the election in Uttar Pradesh. He alleged that the NDA-governed states were being discriminated against. Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD) regretted that the President’s Address did not mention a single new programme even though the country was facing several challenges. The government had not yet been able to cater for the list of people living below the poverty line, he said.

Dr Mirza Mehboob Beg (J&KNC) asked the government to make public the report submitted by the three interlocutors appointed by the central government to address the issue of Jammu and Kashmir. He congratulated the people of Jammu and Kashmir

for their overwhelming participation in the Panchayat elections conducted in the state after a long gap despite boycott calls.

Shri Mohammed E.T. Basheer (BSP) appreciated the skill development plan for the youth mentioned in the President’s Address. He requested the government to

take effective steps for controlling the prices of drugs.

Replying to the discussion, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh joined all members of the House in conveying the government’s sincere thanks to the President for her enlightened Address. In the light of the fact that the year 2011-12 was a difficult year for

all countries, India’s economic performance of about seven per cent growth was regarded as commendable. Emphasizing the need to focus on the developmental gaps affecting the most vulnerable, he assured the House that his government would rise to this important task. He was confident that the 12th five-year

THIRD READING: INDIA The Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Amendment Bill, 2010 The Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 was enacted to provide for the acquisition of right of user in land for laying petroleum and minerals and for matters connected.

Since its enactment, several underground pipelines had been laid across the country carrying crude oil, petroleum products and gas. The network of such pipelines in India has grown in a big way.

Despite regular patrolling and inspection of the pipelines, large number of incidents of pilferage and sabotage of pipelines by anti-social elements are frequently taking place. As the petroleum and its products are hazardous material, its spillage from such pipelines has serious consequences.

To curb the threat of such incidents as well as sabotage of pipelines it was felt that a more stringent punishment was required in the said Act. Sections 15 and 16 of the Act, which lay down the provisions to deal with the cases of spillage from, or sabotage of pipelines, do not provide for sufficient deterrence to criminals from committing the offence.

Sub-section (2) of section 15 provides that whoever willfully removes, displaces, damages or destroys any pipeline shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than a year, but which may extend to three years and also be liable to fine Section 16 provided the offence shall be deemed to be cognizable under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

To achieve this objective the government brought forward the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) AmendmentBill 2010: The amending measure was by and large welcomed by members during discussion in both

Houses of Parliament. Some Members did express certain reservations that: •

•

There was no clarity in the Bill regarding the type of punishment to be given for varied offences; and North Eastern regions – where the majority of oil fields were – were not adequately taken cognizance of.

Members also suggested adequate security was provided to persons lodging complaints and the need for a review of commission paid to the distributors.

The Minister-in-charge of the Bill assured to address concerns and suggestions made by members, and stated that the Amending Bill had been brought forward to achieve the following main objectives: (i) Provide stringent punishment regime; (ii) Provide exemplary punishment for life imprisonment, death punishment for sabotage, terrorist acts; and (iii) Make the offence cognizable and non-bail-able.

Dwelling on initiatives being taken by the government, the Minister stated it had drawn up reward and recognition schemes for villagers, such as conducting awareness programmes for villagers and the trial of surveillance systems for monitoring movement of live patrol men and night guards.

The Bill was passed in Lok Sabha on 12 December 2012 and by Rajya Sabha on 21 December 2012.

The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 12 January 2012. Accordingly the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land) stands amended.

The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two | 145

Parliamentary news pages_Layout 1 15/08/2012 15:34 Page 146

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT

INDIA

plan would lay out a credible plan of action for faster,

sustainable and more inclusive growth. The difficult decisions

THIRD READING: INDIA The Export Import Bank of India (Amendment) Bill, 2011 The Export-Import Bank of India Act, 1981 was enacted to establish a corporation to be known as the Export-Import Bank of India for providing financial assistance to exporters and importers, and for functioning as the principal financial institution for cocoordinating the working of institutions engaged in financing export and import of goods and services with a view to promoting the country’s international trade.

The Export and Import Bank (EXIM Bank) was established with an authorized capital of 500 crores of rupees, increased to 1,000 crores of rupees in 1999 with a provision that the Central Government of India would, by notification, increase the authorized capital up to two thousand crores of rupees in 2007.

The government found it had become necessary to provide for an adequate capital base to the EXIM Bank to meet the requirement of capital arising from the significant business growth. Accordingly, it proposed to increase the authorized capital of the EXIM Bank from 2,000 crores of rupees to 10,000 with a provision that the Central Government might increase the authorized capital up to an amount that was deemed necessary.

The proposed amendments would enable the EXIM Bank to make fresh borrowings and enable the bank to enhance single or group borrowers exposure limits.

To this end the government

brought forward the ExportImport Bank of India (Amendment) Bill, 2011.

The amendments proposed in the Bill received support from members of all sections of the House during discussion.

Members suggested that: •

•

There needed to be a review of the system of appointment of professionals on bank boards; and The government should provide information regarding small scale and medium scale sectors not only to the members but also on its website.

Members also felt that the government prepared a roadmap vis-à-vis encouraging exports, and issues like Fiscal deficit and trade deficit needed to be addressed. They however commented that the Bill provide an opportunity to consider how to make the EXIM Bank viable and durable instrument.

The Minister-in-charge of the Bill in his reply inter-alia assured members that EXIM Bank would continue to play a key role in export lines of credit and overseas investment of Indian companies, and agreed that EXIM Bank had to do more to support small and medium enterprise sectors.

The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on 21 December 2011 and by Rajya Sabha on 27 December 2011.

The Bill as passed by both Houses of Parliament was assented to by the President of India on 12 January 2012

146 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Two

that the government had to take were made more difficult by the fact that there was a coalition government and policy had to be evolved keeping in mind the need to maintain a consensus. The government had attached high priority to the development of agriculture and as a result, the growth rate of agricultural production within the last five years had been high. He was convinced that control over the left wing extremism and terrorism was necessary to achieve the growth objectives and setting up the NCTC was an important step in that direction. He made it clear that the idea of NCTC and the manner in which the NCTC would function were two separate issues and the differences between the centre and the states on NCTC could be narrowed down and a consensus could be arrived at.

Referring to the condition of Tamil citizens of Sri Lanka, the Prime Minister said since the end of conflict in Sri Lanka, their resettlement and rehabilitation had been the highest and most immediate priority for the government.

After a lengthy debate, all amendments moved were negative and the motion was adopted.

In the Rajya Sabha, the Motion of Thanks on President’s Address was moved by Shri Satyavrat Chaturvedi (INC) on 14 March which was seconded by Dr E. M. Sudarsana Natchiappan (INC). After a long debate, the Rajya Sabha adopted the Motion of Thanks on 20 March 2012.

Railway Minister resigns On 14 March 2012, the Minister of Railways, Shri Dinesh Trivedi, presented the railway budget for 2012-13 in which he proposed to make a moderate

increase in passenger fares.

However, the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC), to which the Railway Minister belonged, voiced strong opposition to the proposal.

Following this, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok sabha, Smt. Sushma Swaraj, MP, along with Shri Sharad Yadav (JD-U), Shri Basudeb Acharia (CPI-M), Shri Gurudas Dasgupta (CPI) sought clarification from the government. The Rajya Sabha also witnessed heated exchanges between the treasury and opposition benches on the issue.

Responding to the demand in the Lok sabha, the Leader of the House and Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee, MP, clarified that the government received one communication from the chairperson of the Trinamool Congress addressed to the Prime Minister and the government had not yet taken any action on it. With regards to the resignation of the Railway Minister, the Prime Minister had not received any resignation letter. The railway budget was the property of the House and the House had the inherent right to approve every proposal in respect of money and finance. Responding to the submissions made by several members on 19 March, regarding Shri Trivedi’s reported resignation, Shri Mukherjee said the resignation letter had reached the Prime Minister and it was under consideration. As soon as a decision would be taken, the Prime Minister would communicate it to the House.

The resignation of Shri Trivedi was subsequently accepted and Trimool Congress member, Shri Mukul Roy was sworn in as the Railway Minister on 20 March 2012.

Book ad - Parliamentary African Reform_Different Ads.qxd 15/08/2012 11:04 Page 147

Available to Members and Officials of the CPA for purchase from the CPA Secretariat, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, U.K. Tel.: (+44-20) 7799-1460

Fax: (+44-20) 7222-6073

E-mail: hq.sec@cpahq.org Also available to members of the public from booksellers.

CPA Centennial medal advert_Layout 1 15/08/2012 11:02 Page 148

CPA CENTENNIAL GIFTS CPA pens

This superb limited-edition medal celebrating the centennial of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association is now for sale on a ‘first come, first served’ basis.

Approximately 4.5 centimetres in diameter, the medal features a map of the world listing each of the nine Commonwealth regions on the obverse and, on the reverse, the ‘winds of change’ centennial logo.

Each medal is beautifully presented in an individual presentation box and comes complete with a numbered certificate of authenticity personally signed by the retiring Chairperson, YB Dato’ Seri Mohd. Shafie bin Hj Apdal, MP and the Secretary-General, Dr William F Shija.

Only 150 of these rare medals will ever be made and they are for sale at £40 plus £7.50 postage and handling (total £47.50). Please send your payment and delivery address to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Suite 700, Westminster House, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom.

Queries regarding the medal can be emailed to hqsec@cpahq.org

Inside back cover_Layout 1 16/08/2012 10:55 Page 37

CPA SHOP CPA pens

CPA silver-plated cardholders

Silver-plated photoframe, clock and pen in holder

CPA souvenirs are available for sale to Members and officials of Commonwealth Parliaments and Legislatures by contacting the CPA Secretariat by email at: hq.sec@cpahq.org or by air mail at: Suite 700, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, United Kingdom

Outside back cover_3-col feature 15/08/2012 10:58 Page 168

GOT YOUR COPY?

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN

To subscribe to The Parliamentarian, please email pirc@cpahq.org.

Members of Parliament: Please contact your Branch Secretary.