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

In my last statement as Chair of the Standing Committee on Petitions, I spoke about the role and responsibilities of members in regard to petitions. This week I will comment on petitions received so far in the 44th Parliament. As you know, Madam Speaker, the House receives a large number of petitions on a wide range of topics. The number has not decreased in the 44th Parliament. So far, 106 petitions have been considered by the committee. Seventy of these met requirements and were presented to the House—46 by me and 24 by members.

The number of petitions might not appear to be especially high, but a closer look shows a strong commitment to petitions. The 70 petitions contained more than 1.3 million signatures. Some attracted a very large number of signatures. One petition, focused on community pharmacies, contained more than 1.1 million signatures. Several have gathered more than 20,000 signatures. One petition with nearly 30,000 signatures drew the safety of cyclists to the House's attention. A petition I presented today on bridges and roads attracted more than 20,000 signatures. The issues addressed in petitions vary according to what the subjects of national debate are and what issues might have a high impact on a small number of people.

Most petitions attract a much smaller number of signatures. Several have contained just one signature. These petitions are not treated any differently, or any less seriously, than those that attract a large number of signatures. In many cases, petitions with very few signatures simply reflect the local nature of the request being made of the House. In any case, whether a petition has one or one million signatures, if it meets the requirements it is presented and referred to the responsible minister, and a written response is usually received.

As a committee, we deal with a diverse range of subjects when examining petitions. While other parliamentary committees, by their very nature, tend to deal with one or perhaps two subjects at a time and to examine them closely, the petitions committee glimpses a wide range of matters at each of its meetings. Sometimes the matters are familiar to us because we have encountered them in our electorates, and sometimes they are new to us and alert us to emerging issues.

The subjects of petitions can trace the changing focus and attitudes of Australians over time. The three petitions I presented today are a good reflection of this and provide a snapshot of the current concerns of parts of the Australian population. They range from local matters like roads and bridges in a local council area, to individual sufferers of multiple sclerosis, to the processing of asylum seekers. In recent weeks, petitions have focused on local, national, and even global issues. Subjects have included access to pharmacies, mobile phone and television reception, pensions, GP co-payments, aged-care facilities, extradition requests, Syria's Christian minority and climate change.

When it comes to the subject matter of petitions, the committee's role is entirely neutral. Committee members put aside any personal views about the content and focus on the requirements of the standing orders. This neutral perspective extends to my role in presenting petitions as well. As I mentioned last week, the act of presenting a petition to the House does not indicate that the committee members or I necessarily agree with its contents. Likewise, when members present petitions, they may or may not agree with their terms. In this way, petitions represent a vehicle for every citizen of Australia to have their concerns placed directly before the House.

To conclude, I would like to note that, so far in the 44th Parliament, 64 ministerial responses have been presented to the House, responding to 76 petitions. This is a big change from the pre-2008 days, as, between 1901 and 2007, only 21 ministerial responses to petitions were received. This exponential increase in the rate of ministerial response represents one of the real strengths of the current approach to petitions.