Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker,

In my previous statements to the House as Chair of the Petitions Committee, I spoke about the requirements for petitions, the role of the Committee and members, the practicalities of petitioning, and a brief outline of the history of petitioning. At this early stage in the Parliament, I think it would be useful to focus on the history of petitioning parliament in a bit more detail. To do so, I will go back to the early days of petitions, before returning to the present to briefly examine the effect petitions can have.

The act of petitioning the House represents the only way by which an individual citizen can directly have a matter raised in the House, and is described in House of Representatives Practice as 'a fundamental right of every citizen'. This right has a long history, Madam Speaker, and goes right back to the early days of Westminster parliamentary democracy.

In the days of Kind Edward I in the 13th century, where our tradition of petitioning originates, petitions were presented to the King and considered by his council. In those days, petitioning was primarily used for the redress of personal grievances. Some of the earliest forms of legislation were simply petitions requesting that the king take action on a particular matter and are the origin from which our current system of legislation by bill evolved. Petitions represent one of the oldest of all parliamentary forms, and have been described as 'the fertile seed' from which other proceedings of the House are derived. Even the origins of parliament itself can arguably be traced back to the King's Council sitting to consider petitions. Naturally, the form which petitions take has undergone considerable change since the days of King Edward I.

The form of petition we know today developed in the 17th century. In 1669, the UK House of Commons affirmed the right of petitioners to prepare and present petitions to seek redress of grievances. It also affirmed the right of the House of Commons to receive these petitions, and its right to determine which petitions were fit to be received. It was at this stage, Madam Speaker, that it was established that petitions had to be addressed to parliament and drawn up in a prescribed manner. From this time on petitions tended to request action on a public grievance, rather than a personal one.

Australia inherited this system from the UK, and I would like now to turn our attention to the Australian experience. Since Federation, a large volume of petitions have been presented to the House. They have numbered around 300 a year. Before the current system was established in 2008, petitions which met the requirements in the standing orders needed to be certified by the Clerk. Once presented by a member or the terms were read out by the Clerk following the lodgement by a member, the petition was then automatically referred to the relevant minister. The minister could then, if they chose, lodge a response with the Clerk. Once a petition was referred, it was very rare that any further action would be taken. Between 1901 and 1999 only 18 responses to petitions were presented to the House. In the ensuing nine years, a further three responses were presented.

All this changed with the reforms of 2008 and the establishment of the Petitions Committee. Before being presented, petitions are first certified by the Petitions Committee as meeting the standing order requirements. After presentation, the standing orders allow for the committee to refer petitions to the responsible minister and there is an expectation that a response will be received by the committee within 90 days of presentation.

As a result of these reforms, almost every petition referred to a minister has received a response. Under the standing orders, ministers are expected to respond to the committee in writing. These responses are then considered by the committee, presented to the House by me as chair, published in Hansard and on the committee website, as well as being sent on to the principal petitioner. In this way, petitioners are kept informed of the progress of their petition and any ministerial response to it.

While it is true that ministers do not often agree to the request made by petitioners, the effect that petitions can have are numerous. Outside the parliamentary context, petitions have a range of effects. It has been said that many petitioners tend to sign for community reasons rather than out of pursuit of personal gain. In doing so, petitioners demonstrate a sense of duty and common purpose within a community—a common purpose which is then demonstrated through the presentation of a petition to the House. This further provides members with a better understanding of the issues affecting Australians and the Australian community and may contribute to more informed debate and decision making.

Petitions can also draw the attention of ministers to issues of which they may be unaware. Similarly, petitions can help to create or foster a climate of opinion, both within parliament through exposing members to ideas and requests and within communities as potential petitioners read the reasons and requests for actions contained in the petitions. In the process, petitions can help inform members about the strength of feeling in the community on particular issues. It is for these reasons that many people go to great efforts to gather as many signatures as possible.