Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Youth and Employment Services) | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

On 30 November 2021, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Kate Jenkins, provided her report, Set the standard: report on the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, to the government. The Jenkins report sets out a comprehensive set of recommendations to improve the culture of Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces and ensure all those working in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respected.

A number of the recommendations require legislative change to implement them. The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 would make initial changes to four pieces of legislation in order to implement recommendations 17 and 24 of the Jenkins report. The bill will progress important and significant reforms to help ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced, where respectful behaviour is standard and in which any Australian, no matter their sex, orientation, gender identity, race, disability or age, feels safe and welcome to contribute.

This bill would be the first of what we anticipate will be further legislative changes to implement the Jenkins report. The bill will amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to strengthen and clarify the employment rights of MOP(S) Act employees. It will implement recommendation 17 of the Jenkins report. The bill will make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, the bill removes any doubt by making this explicit. This would support employees to exercise their rights under the Fair Work Act. The bill requires a parliamentarian to provide reasons where they dismiss an employee from employment. This recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follow best practice.

The bill would amend the Work Health and Safety Act to clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of the WHS Act. This would clarify that parliamentarians must exercise due diligence to ensure the Commonwealth is fulfilling its duties under the Workplace Health and Safety Act. The bill also implements recommendation 17 of the Jenkins report.

The Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provide important frameworks to protect against discrimination in the workplace and encourage diversity. The bill would amend the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act to put beyond doubt that these employees have protection from age and disability discrimination. These amendments implement recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report. This would bring these acts in line with amendments made to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 by the Sex Discrimination and Fair Work (Respect at Work) Amendment Act in relation to MOP(S) Act staff.

In summary, this bill will provide additional protections to MOP(S) Act employees and provides a clear intent that the government is committed to implementing the recommendations of the Jenkins report. Significantly, the reforms in the legislative package will ensure Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful and that the nation's parliament serves as a model workplace for our nation and strives for best practice in the prevention and handling of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. I'm proud to do so and regret that I have to, probably like the minister at the table. I'm proud that we're able to make this place better but sad that there is such a need. I will give you a quote:

This is Parliament. It should set the standard for workplace culture, not the floor of what culture should be.

That's a quote from one of the 490 interviews conducted as part of the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, or the Jenkins report.

Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins, who has done an incredible job, released her important report into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces on 31 November last year. The report is aptly titled Set the standard. In what has sadly become uncommon during this 46th Parliament, the bill before parliament is the result of constructive, bipartisan efforts to produce a bill that I'm hopeful will make real change, a legacy that we in the 46th Parliament can all be proud of. This bill implements recommendations 17 and 24 of the Set the standard report.

Working for a parliamentarian is a unique experience—227 unique experiences perhaps, because there are 227 different parliamentarians here. It can have extreme highs when things are going well and deep lows when things are tough for the boss. No matter how nice your boss might be, there is always a power imbalance between a parliamentarian and their staff—I'm reading words written by a member of my staff here, but the reality is that I'm still the employer. I know this can be a very difficult workplace. I know how hard the staff work in this building and in the electorate offices which provide support remotely during sitting weeks and all year round in the electorate. People make contact when their lives are at risk, when they're feeling suicidal, when they're starving, when they're homeless—all sorts of people make contact with our 227 electorate offices.

Staff working for members of parliament have an added worry that comes around every three years—or six years in the other place for most of them, for 72 of them—and that's the performance review we go through. So they can have a boss who is out of a job, and they immediately lose their job as well. There are many reasons why working for a member of parliament may be appealing, but job security is not one of them. The minister and I, each having a marginal seat, recognise that it's a performance appraisal that's particularly difficult. Lack of job security is a major barrier to staff raising complaints. Staff should never be subjected to bullying, sexual harassment or sexual assault, wherever they're working. That's a given.

This bill implements two recommendations of the Set the standard report. We know things have changed over the life of this building, for example. I think we've heard the story before. When this building opened, there were four bars in it—I think I've got the count right. There are now zero bars in this building. One of them became a childcare facility. Things have changed in that time. To implement recommendation 17 of the report, the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 will be amended to make it clear that the provisions in the Fair Work Act apply to MOP(S) Act staff and that written notice of termination, specifying the reasons for termination, must be provided—just like a normal workplace. Recommendation 17 also provides that it should be made clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers—because those 227 members of parliament are all individual employers. In order to implement recommendation 24, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act will be amended to clarify that those laws apply to MOP(S) Act staff.

Legislating these two changes will give greater job security to staff and, importantly, highlight to parliamentarians their obligations as employers. Remember: the only skill they have as an employer is the fact that they got 51.1 per cent of the vote or more. We come to this place with a broad range of skills and experience in the workplace, as we should. But a lot of those processes don't necessarily prepare you for the workplace and working with the secretariats and the parliamentary staff—all the people who make this incredible workplace hum. So legislating these two changes will give greater job security for staff and, importantly, highlight those obligations.

As well as legislating to provide safe workplaces, we also need to do something else: change the culture of this building and our workplaces back in the suburbs and in the bush. We need to 'set the standard', as per that quote I started with. Just yesterday, three women who were sexually harassed by former High Court judge Dyson Heydon reached a historic settlement with the Morrison government. This settlement took almost two years of negotiations after an independent investigation was concluded in 2020 and upheld the women's claims. Remember, the women we're talking about have clerked for the highest position in the land. So one would assume they know their way around a court room and a legal text book. Still, it took two years of legal negotiations. The lawyer for the three women said:

… they were so severely impacted by what happened that it took them years to come forward to pursue this matter.

An associate to a High Court judge is a coveted position. Only the brightest and most promising young lawyers are appointed. These three women, all associates to Justice Heydon, have not been able to pursue their dreams of what would likely have been very successful legal careers. This is the destruction of lives that sexual harassment and sexual assault leave in their wake.

I particularly would like to acknowledge the bravery of these three young lawyers in coming forward to call out the behaviour of a person at the pinnacle of the profession when they had only just entered it. That would've been a very terrifying experience, so I commend them for their courage.

In the last year, we have all heard of many strong, brave young women advocating for change. I commend the courage and conviction of Grace Tame, Brittany Higgins, Chanel Contos and Saxon Mullins in speaking to power and being prepared to wear the consequences when power bites back, which is happening for many of those young women. They have still had the courage to speak truth to power and they're changing the world, and changing this building. They are changing it and making it a better place, but it's up to all of us in this building to listen, because I do believe that we have failed some of them.

I note the member for Boothby, whose contribution I look forward to. We do need to call out when people target someone on the other side of the aisle, because poor behaviour is always poor behaviour. I know we could do more, and I personally could do more, but I do try to reach out when I see bad behaviour and call it out. Sometimes we do fail our colleagues when a polite word of support would, I'm sure, be appreciated, but actions are appreciated even more.

When I think of these young women, I would certainly say that they don't owe us their smiles or their politeness, as is claimed by some. As the parliament acknowledged, Mr Speaker, in response to your fine words last week—a great message to the people of Australia—we should have done better. We should have listened more. We should have acted sooner. It's certainly not good enough when a senior minister of the government describes a rape allegation as just a she-said, he-said. I hope such a thing will not be repeated. It's not good enough when a senior minister of the Crown describes an alleged victim as a lying cow.

The acknowledgment in the parliament last week by both party leaders was the start of the healing required to fix this workplace. This bill is the next step, but there is a lot more work still to do. Labor has a long-held commitment to ensuring that our parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone. That's not to say they won't be stressful workplaces. As I'm sure the people in my electorate office will know in the build-up to the next election, it is hard work. It is stressful work, and elections are a time when people come out of the woodwork with their concerns. Some are issues they have sat on for years, and they want a candidate or a politician to solve them, and some of these issues are unable to be solved easily. But we do have to make sure that all our workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone.

Labor has a commitment to gender equality—we changed our rules to reflect that commitment—including the need to promote and support women's leadership in the parliament, because you can't be what you can't see; we know that. I worry about some strong women opposite departing this parliament. I wish them all the best in their new endeavours—unless they go on Sky after dark! But whatever they do, I wish them well. We will miss their strong voice on certain topics. I wish the member for Boothby well in particular.

The Labor caucus has committed to working towards implementing all of the recommendations from the Set the standard report. We will consult with our parliamentary and electorate staff, relevant unions—an important part of any workplace negotiation—and all the workplace representatives as we work towards the implementation of Commissioner Jenkins's report. Our staff are a huge priority in this process. We need to make sure that we get it right, that we listen. I know that there is not a short supply of self-believe when it comes to politicians in this building. Sometimes we can be guilty of sitting down and listening to what we want to hear. I have found it's good to just sit down and go through this process and do the best you can in terms of hearing the concerns of your staff.

I've been very lucky with my staff over the years. I'm just a few days from the 15th anniversary of my first speech, and some staff have been with me all of that time—who have put up with me for all of that time, who've looked after me. It is brilliant. Our families are essential, obviously, but our staff are the ones that let us do this job, which I'm honoured to do.

This is their workplace. It's a stressful workplace, and they deserve nothing less than a safe and supportive work environment. The safety of everyone who works here is important. There aren't many workplaces where they say, 'Rather than going home at 8pm, you're now going to go home at 5.30 am.' That's a bizarre workplace. I know that, apart from people maybe being a little bit grumpy—and the Chair, perhaps—when it got to 5 am this place still hummed along nicely.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) | Link to this | Hansard source

You're reflecting on the Speaker there!

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) | Link to this | Hansard source

You did a great job, Speaker, in a long night that seemed to go for about five years from what I could work out. We need to get that balance right and look after the safety of everyone, including the fourth estate. I know their job has risks as well, as we saw during the protests last week—people being attacked just for doing their job.

There's a lot of work to do. We want to make sure we look after the rights of all Australians, particularly when it comes to dismissal. There are so many complications. We want to get that balance right, particularly in those situations where your employer is unhappy with you—and let's be honest: it's more likely to be the MP or the senator who's done the wrong thing, because of their position of power—and you make a complaint about that problematic person, especially if it's going to be played out in the media. If we're talking about criminal code type behaviour, I think we need to make sure that we have an independent investigator who has a parliamentary pass and can enter the building and secure a place that they need and not have to go through an entire process. MPs and senators are political animals; we need an independent person that can enter the building and do what they need to do to pursue justice rather than be worried about the implications of any particular investigation.

Commissioner Jenkins has put together a great report. She's certainly aware that the safety of everyone who works in this building and in our electorate offices is important. As I said, there's much work to be done, and Labor's ready to do that work. and I'm sure we'll be joined by a willing coalition government as well. That's why I support this bill.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I give the call to the member for Boothby, I do want to just reiterate the concerns that I raised last Thursday about the sub judice rule. This is a very serious issue, and I want to restate it again before members talk en masse on this bill. The sub judice rule really impacts not just upon an accused right to a fair trial but also upon a complainant—very much so.

It also impacts upon what we know and what we hold dear in this place—that is, the doctrine of separation of powers. It is not our place, as parliamentarians in this place, to comment on matters that are before the courts. And I want to make very, very clear to all members who may be sitting in their offices preparing their speeches for the debate on this bill that I'm asking all members on the Speaker's panel—the Deputy Speaker, the Second Deputy Speaker, those on the Speaker's panel—to cut short or pick up any members who might offend the sub judice convention.

I know this is a political issue, but, in this place, we have to respect the conventions that protect our systems of law. So I'm going to call upon members to be especially aware. And I say this in the light of recent comments by the Director of Public Prosecutions in the ACT, who has urged the end 'to all public commentary, including by officers of the court and public figures'. Notwithstanding the procedures that the office of the DPP in the ACT, despite the procedures it has in place, the Director of Public Prosecutions said:

"Notwithstanding this, I strongly discourage all public commentary, on active cases, including commentary about commentary, and particularly by officers of the court and public figures."

I can't state it any clearer than that. The sub judice convention is one that should be observed in this chamber, and it is one that I'm calling on all members to follow. If you are in any doubt about whether your speech might offend the sub judice rule, then I would ask you to speak with members on your respective sides that might have some legal training, for instance, and might be able to assist you in that regard.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) | Link to this | Hansard source

Speaker, just to inform those that might be crafting, I was aware of that advice. We crafted something that was along those lines. Do you have concerns about mine, or is it more of a broad—

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not—

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) | Link to this | Hansard source

Without wishing to put a spotlight on my contribution.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't mean to single you out, Member for Moreton, but I really do have some concerns based on what the DPP has come out and said. Very clearly, he's calling for an end to all commentary on the case, and I think we should be very alive to that. The Member for Boothby has the call.

Nicolle Flint (Boothby, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am pleased to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. I am also pleased that you are in the chamber, and in the chair, as I begin to speak because, Mr Speaker, your comments yesterday in response to the member for Warringah and the member for Chifley, who raised concerns about the length of time that we sat last Wednesday evening, when the House didn't rise until nearly 5 am, were very thoughtful and very encouraging. For one of the first times, I heard a member in this place, a Speaker, acknowledge that, yes, we were following procedure and precedent and convention, and we were working within the rules of the House and the agreement between the parties, but that doesn't mean that we can't reflect on whether that should change. I think it does need to change.

I do not think that it is safe for anyone to be in this place for almost 24 hours straight and then have to come back within a couple of hours, if they left at all, to do another very long, full day of work in a workplace that is unlike any other. Mr Speaker, I want to record my thanks to you for the reflection that you gave on the issues that were raised, and I commend the members who raised them. These are the conversations that we need to have to continually improve the way that this place operates. Mr Speaker, thank you.

To the member for Moreton: thank you for your very kind comments. The member for Moreton is, unfortunately, one of the few people on the other side who, in my experience, has consistently called out bad behaviour, appalling behaviour, dangerous behaviour. I'm very grateful for that. Thank you. He's said some very kind things. But we all have to take responsibility for cultural change, for changing the way we interact and for changing the boundaries of the way that we interact, especially for women. The safety of everyone is becoming increasingly more fraught in this place. I want every single member and senator, and all of our staff, to be safe going about their work here in Parliament House and out in the electorate. It is our responsibility to call out bad behaviour when we see it and do whatever we can to improve it for our staff and the wonderful staff who work in this building, our staff who travel with us, and all members and senators.

The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 implements two recommendations from the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Kate Jenkins, whose report, Set the standard: report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces, was handed down on 30 November 2021. I will refer to it as the Jenkins report.

The legislative changes proposed by recommendation 17 and 24 of the Jenkins report to confirm that the Fair Work Act 2009, the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 apply to people employed under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984, the MOP(S) Act. In particular, the bill implements recommendation 17 of the report by amending the MOP(S) Act to make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, the bill removes any doubt by making this explicit. This is an important safety net for MOP(S) Act employees.

Amending the MOP(S) Act to require a parliamentarian to provide reasons for dismissing an employee from employment recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follows best practice. Employees ought to know why their employment has been terminated and if it's for a lawful reason, such as a restructure or the end of a fixed-term contract. Amending the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 will clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for purposes of this act.

The bill also implements recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report by amending the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify that these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act are sought to ensure that these workers have protection from age and disability discrimination.

It was clear through the review process that staff of parliamentarians often believed that they were presented with limited avenues to address complaints through a human resources process and that they often feared for their long-term employment prospects should their employment be terminated due to disagreements with their member or senator. These proposed changes to the MOP(S) Act will help address these issues and alleviate these concerns, providing staff with certainty through a legislative framework that clearly defines their role. The bill represents another important step in implementing recommendations of the Jenkins report to ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful workplaces for all.

There is so much more from the Jenkins report that will be implemented and that is being worked through by people on all sides of this place. The Member for Moreton also reflected that we cannot do our jobs without our staff. I'm lucky to have a wonderful electorate office who have supported me incredibly well through my time here. I know the challenges they face; we all know the challenges they face. They often have people on the phone who can be aggressive, can be abusive, can be rude, and they have to deal with that. They have people presenting them with distressing issues. People might be suicidal. People might have had terrible life catastrophes that they then turn to us to seek help for. We know that the hours for our staff are a huge challenge as well, as I've already reflected on. So I do want to acknowledge the incredible work our staff do and that we have a lot more to do. I do believe that this is a bipartisan approach on making sure that this place is as safe for our staff as possible.

I was pleased to see that the multiparty Leadership Taskforce has been established. They have an independent expert chair, and we have members and senators from across all parties, which again means that staff across the board will be looked after and be front of mind for all of the members and senators involved in the Leadership Taskforce. We are also undertaking a comprehensive review of the MOP(S) Act, consistent with recommendation 18 of the Jenkins report, which will conclude in September 2022.

At the start of last week, on the first day of our sitting, we had the statement of acknowledgment, which was recommendation 1 of the report. It was delivered by presiding officers in both chambers. I was very pleased to be here in this chamber on the first sitting day to hear the Speaker, Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, Leader of the Nationals, Deputy Prime Minister, Leader of the Greens and the crossbench also apologise and acknowledge the unacceptable history of workplace bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. I do note that this was not just an apology and acknowledgment to staff but also to members and senators as well.

Every person should feel safe and respected in their workplace. Personally, I'm someone who has not felt either of these things for a range of reasons, but unfortunately that is mainly because of the behaviour of the left, whether it was GetUp, Labor, the unions or Extinction Rebellion, who targeted my electorate office a number of times in increasing intensity that made me and my staff feel very unsafe. Unfortunately, there are some junior and senior men who are supporters of the left, I guess you could say, who have behaved in completely unacceptable ways towards me as well. All of this started in the lead-up to the 2019 election and hasn't stopped since, and, as such, I do believe I have a better understanding than most about what it is to be targeted, to be attacked and to feel unsafe in your workplace. Whether it was out and about in my electorate or sitting at my desk in the electorate office, it's not just the physical confrontations, it is the absolutely disgraceful, hateful online abuse that particularly comes at women in public roles—not just me but so many other women in public roles—and you can't stop it, because it's online. I'll have a lot more to say about this in the next couple of days.

I just want to add my voice to those who have said that they are deeply sorry and regretful, as I am, that there are so many other women, staff, MPs and senators in this place who have felt unsafe doing their jobs. The statement of acknowledgment demonstrates that it's unacceptable for anyone in this place to expect or accept abusive, harassing, offensive or dangerous conduct. I think our bipartisan message to everyone, especially our staff, is: You don't have to suffer in silence. It is time to speak up. We'll support you to do so and to help us achieve the change that we need to achieve.

I really want to sincerely thank everyone who's participated in the Jenkins review. I think that thanks to this review this place can become a best-practice workplace and model for a positive, respectful workplace and for positive, respectful working relationships. I hope that every single member and senator in this place is going to do all they can to ensure that this is the case.

I'm very mindful of the Speaker's words earlier, but I do want to particularly acknowledge Ms Brittany Higgins for being the catalyst for this report and for the change that we are seeing. I know her matter is before the courts, so, although I was going to make some further remarks, I won't. What I do want to say is that the Jenkins report goes to so many issues that will take a long time to resolve in this place, but I do believe that we will ensure that this becomes a much, much safer workplace for everyone.

It really does break my heart that we have young women who have terrible experiences as staff in this place. I worked here in 2008 and 2009 in the Leader of the Opposition's office, and I worked in the South Australian Leader of the Opposition's office and for a shadow minister in SA as well. I spent a lot of time working in parliament and a lot of time travelling, and I can absolutely say that I never felt unsafe. I was never singled out as a woman, targeted as a woman or attacked as a woman. I had a wonderful experience. That experience and the learning I acquired whilst a member of staff really set me up for the rest of my career. So it does break my heart to see all of the female staff who haven't had those experiences. That's why, in part—but also because of the things that have happened to me—I will continue, including after I've left this place, to ensure in any way I can that we all work together to make sure that our federal parliament is the safest place it can possibly be for women, whatever their role might be here, and also for parliamentarians and staff across the board.

I'm really proud of what our government has done and what Prime Minister Scott Morrison has done and the leadership that he has provided which has seen us make so many changes already. Those changes probably don't get nearly enough acknowledgment. I certainly understand them because, again, they've impacted me personally. We have, of course, this bill before us today. We've had the Jenkins report and the Foster report. We've implemented many of the recommendations of the Respect@Work report. We have changed the Electoral Act to make it safer for all candidates and sitting MPs, particularly in a campaign situation, which is absolutely critical to making sure that the Australian people continue to have free and easy access to their elected representatives. I do not want us to turn into a country where you have to book an appointment with your MP or senator to see them. I want us to stay the place where you can run into us doing a listening post at the shops. That's if members and senators are anything like I was during my time as the member for Boothby. I did hundreds and hundreds of street corner listening posts and mobile offices in parks and on roadsides around my electorate. When we take that away or if we say, 'No you can't see us in person at all because it's too dangerous,' then we lose the essence of our democracy.

I thank the Prime Minister for the Online Safety Act, and I also acknowledge the Prime Minister and the minister for communications for their leadership. In the next day or so, we will be debating the anti-trolling bill. These are the ways that we make it safer for all MPs and senators to be able to do their jobs—particularly women, because, in the online space, the hateful, disgusting, disgraceful abuse that is sexist and misogynistic and is being aimed at women is completely unacceptable. Our government has started to act on this, but there is much, much more that we need to do, and I will be one of the people on the front line making sure we have these changes implemented.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Arts) | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to give Labor's support to the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. In making these remarks, I'm very mindful of the comments made by the Speaker about the conduct of this debate, and I urge all members, if they missed those comments, to go back and have a look at them. There's a lot at stake in making sure that we conduct this debate correctly.

Last Wednesday, the parliament and party leaders made clear that a new standard is required. That statement of acknowledgment was in response to the first recommendation of Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins from her review into the Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, Set the standard. This bill aims to implement further recommendations from the review in relation to the employment of members of parliament staff. The review's findings were shocking but, unfortunately, for many not surprising.

Labor has sought to take meaningful action on the issues raised not only by the Jenkins review but also by the Foster review and by people who have shared their stories. Rather than playing politics with these serious issues, we need to be committed to addressing them in a consultative way, to make this workplace a safe one. Last year, the Labor caucus resolved to work towards implementation of each and every recommendation of Commissioner Jenkins. We've sought to engage with the government constructively on implementation, and we are genuinely committed to the process, because we want a better outcome for our staff. Making this workplace safe is an issue that's too important to play politics with.

There's a commonly held view that the unfair dismissal provisions in the Fair Work Act don't apply to MOP(S) Act staff—a view that is not correct but has developed over many years based on the lived experience of staff. So this bill seeks to implement recommendation 17 of the Jenkins review: that the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act be amended to make clear that the Fair Work Act applies and that staff are covered by unfair dismissal laws.

We know the lack of job security for parliamentarians' staff is a major barrier to staff raising complaints. This lack of job security results in a power imbalance which itself makes it easier for bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault to occur and harder for complainants to speak up. Not only can staff lose their jobs because of an election, a reshuffle or a leadership change, but it was a common concern of participants in the Jenkins review that staff could be sacked because their parliamentarian had 'lost trust or confidence' in them, which may well have a whole context behind it, based on these other issues.

In Set the standard, the Human Rights Commission noted that the ability of parliamentarians to dismiss their staff if they have lost trust or confidence in them is not an express legal right that arises either under the MOP(S) Act, in the enterprise agreement or in employment contracts, yet this is one of the reasons for dismissal given on the Department of Finance's termination-of-employment form. That box on that form makes it seem as though an employee has no recourse even if that is the reason provided for termination. So the review also recommended:

Labor had concerns that it was not clear from the bill or from the original explanatory memorandum that the written notice of termination provided for in the bill is anything more than the ticking of a box on a form. As the review noted, while loss of confidence or trust may be a valid reason for termination, the Fair Work Commission has held

… merely advising an employee that they are being dismissed for 'loss of trust or confidence', or asserting such loss is not, of itself, enough to show a valid reason for dismissal. Rather, there must be 'sufficient evidence and reasoning to support this loss of trust and confidence'.

Labor has committed to implementing the recommendations from the Jenkins review. To do so properly, this legislation needs to be clear that making an unsubstantiated claim of a loss of trust or confidence is not enough to justify a termination. If that isn't clear, it can't be said this bill is fully implementing Commissioner Jenkins's recommendation.

We're pleased that the government has agreed to amend the explanatory memorandum to provide the necessary clarification and that this could be done without us moving amendments to the bill that would have delayed the implementation. It's incumbent now on the Department of Finance to update its guidance and its termination-of-employment form to reflect the findings of the review and this legislation. Labor has always supported the principle that you shouldn't lose your job without a proper reason. In fact, the first unfair dismissal laws were introduced by Labor governments. The changes in this bill will help provide some comfort to staff that they're protected by legislation if they have been unfairly dismissed.

The bill also implements paragraph (c) of recommendation 17 of the review, to clarify that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity—our capacity—as employers. Finally, the bill implements recommendation 24, to amend the Disability Discrimination Act and Age Discrimination Act to clarify that those acts apply to staff of members of parliament.

These are simple fixes which will help provide greater security for staff and highlight to parliamentarians their obligations—our obligations—as employers. We still have a long way to go to implement all the recommendations and the measures necessary to make this workplace safer not just for parliamentarians' staff but for everyone who works here. Labor is committed to this process and to working collaboratively with all parties to make sure that change does indeed happen. I commend the bill to the House.

Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to rise to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 and the report Set the standard from the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces. I want to start by quoting Commissioner Kate Jenkins from the report itself for the House and for those listening:

This is an opportunity for the leaders of our country to transform Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces to become what they already should be: workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced, where respectful behaviour is rewarded and in which any Australian, no matter their gender, race, sexual orientation, disability status or age, feels safe and welcome to contribute. By acting on this Report this Parliament has the unique chance to leave an historic legacy for future generations of people working in the Parliament and, through them, for all Australians.

This aim is an important one, because it is only by reflecting the whole of Australian society, and living up to community expectations, that Parliament can perform its function in a representative democracy: making good decisions that will positively impact Australian society. The recommendations in this Report are designed to make the Australian Parliament the sort of workplace and institution in which Australians can be rightly proud.

This is a very, very sensitive topic. It is an issue that so many Australians across the country have faced—employees, particularly women—for generations: being safe at work. I, like the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Boothby have expressed, am deeply troubled and indeed very sorry for any person not just in this place but across our great nation who has been in situations where they have been improperly treated.

We have a great responsibility here in this place to set the standard, and that is exactly what our government is doing. I, along with the member for Boothby, will be honest in this place and say that I have never felt unsafe doing my job here in Australia's parliament. I've never felt unsafe in my office and I can vouch for the environment in my own office that I have created for all my staff, no matter their gender, no matter their age, no matter their sexuality and, I must also say, no matter their gender identity. I would hope that Australians believe me when I say I have done my best in my office—as we all need to do across our parliament—to make sure my employees feel safe.

The government is indeed implementing recommendations to make sure our staff across the parliament can lead the way in terms of their safety in this place. This bill implements two recommendations from the Jenkins report: recommendation 17, which amends the MOP(S) Act for employees; and recommendation 24, which amends the Age Discrimination Act. The bill will amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to strengthen and clarify the employment rights of MOP(S) Act employees. In particular, this bill would implement recommendation 17, as I said, of the report, amending the MOP(S) Act to make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, this bill will remove any doubt by making this explicit, amending the MOP(S) Act to require parliamentarian to provide reasons when they dismiss an employee from employment. This recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follow best practice. The bill is amending the WHS Act to clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of the Work Health and Safety Act.

The Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provide important frameworks to protect against discrimination in the workplace and to encourage diversity. The bill would amend the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify that these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act to put beyond doubt that these employees have protection from age and disability discrimination. These amendments to the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 implement recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report and will bring these acts in line with amendments made to the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 in 2021.

This bill builds on the work that has already been taken to progress and implement the report's recommendations and make Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces safe and respectful for all participants. This is something that our country needs across a broad range of workplaces and more. This is not a problem in our country confined just to workplaces; this is a problem across our country in the homes and lives of Australians, particularly women. This is a serious matter for our country, and I, for one, am pleased that this has come up for debate in our country, in our parliament. Of course, I'm sorry for the individuals who have been hurt in this place and who have had to play out in the media very private matters. That is never easy. And so I'm proud that our government is standing up for the rights of those in this place and improving and making sure we have a better Australia for all.

Patrick Gorman (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Western Australia) | Link to this | Hansard source

My wife, Jess, and I met working in this building. Shared values led to a shared life together. Overall, for both of us, a lot of good came from our time working here—although we couldn't quite bring ourselves to name our son 'Kevin'! Jess left politics for corporate Australia and her career is better for it—HR departments, performance reviews, whistleblower mechanisms, professional development opportunities, diversity metrics and reporting to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. For Jess and I, it is particularly painful to know that not everyone has had a positive experience working in this place.

Every parliamentarian should be proud to say they work in Parliament House. This legislation is one small step towards earning that pride and respect back. I want to thank the many people, especially women, who came forward and participated in the Jenkins review. The truth is that many felt they couldn't directly contribute to the review. It is unreasonable to expect everyone to feel that they can speak out to suit a particular review's timeline. There will be more stories and truths to be told over this year and over coming years. For those that are still sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see if we are serious and if our words match our actions, we need to win your trust back.

To those of you who have been strong enough to speak out, I say thank you. True patriotism is not waving a flag or yelling a chant until you are red in the face. Patriotism is looking at your country and knowing where and how it must be improved, sometimes at huge personal cost. Because of your efforts, because you spoke out, we have Set the standard: report on the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. This has provided a clear road map of practical and achievable reforms. Last week in this place the Prime Minister and the opposition leader said sorry, and I, too, am sorry. As leaders in this place, every single member of parliament has not just the obligation to set the standard but also an obligation to raise the standard. Even with this report and this bill, the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, I feel that we need to do more to raise the standard.

I look at the challenges my staff face on a daily basis: dealing with hateful emails, disgusting and inappropriate content sent through social media to official channels, and an increasing sense of hate, anger, and violence in how people choose to engage with their democracy. I know that some members felt unsafe here in Canberra over the weekend, and I would just ask people: imagine for a moment that you felt unsafe and disrespected in this building every single day. That, it is clear from this report, is how some people feel about this workplace. Staff should be able to walk into this building feeling safe, respected and valued, every single day. For too long, that has not been the case. I have worked in this building as a senior staff member and served as a party secretary, and I am now in this place as a member. I know, like all of you, that not every person who works in this building is a good human being. But I've also worked in this building with some brilliant and dedicated people.

So much of the conversation that has occurred around parliamentary workplace culture is about those who choose to drag the culture down, those who assault or intimidate—those who should never be close to power. It's for that reason I also want to pause and pay tribute to those in this place who work for the public good, people who work harder in these roles than they will at any other time in their career, people who think through complex policy changes on behalf of the nation and who simply want to support good parliamentarians creating good policy in building a greater country. Because, whatever your politics, most people come here with a sense of purpose and a desire to serve. To those who do that, and to those who come here and raise the standard, I say thank you. To those who provide support in the workplace for others who may find it tough here at times, I say thank you. To those who make this a workplace that I love and that I know is an honour for so many of us to serve in, I say thank you. I also know that, over the course of this process, my own staff have felt at times that it's been tough for them to engage in this process and see things said about their workplace, as we go through this very difficult discussion, and so I also want to thank them for all of their work and support of me as a parliamentarian.

I felt I couldn't speak on this without consulting some of those people that I've worked with in this building. Indeed, I started with my wife, who gave me a fair chunk of this speech, and I thank Jess for that, in terms of her counsel. But I also spoke to a range of other people who have worked in this building over many decades. All of their comments had the same theme: implement all the recommendations, no cherry picking, act quickly. And this quote: 'What is the point of power, or even sitting in Parliament House making legislation, if we don't exercise that to effect real change?' And I think we all know that that is now the test for all of us, as we begin to legislate on this.

This bill does one piece of the work: it starts the process of lifting the culture and the workplace experience of every one of the 270 electorate offices and of Parliament House. Like many, I put in a submission to the Jenkins review recommending further steps that I believe would improve workplace culture and professionalism. There is a lot of work to do. This bill is one step in that journey. The bill addresses recommendation 17 and recommendation 24 of the Jenkins review. If passed, this legislation will introduce a requirement to give reasons for termination of a staff member under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act. It will also offer protections for staff under the Work Health and Safety Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. It's about time that we do that.

The other test on us is not how much legislation there is or how many committees there are. The test is: does the culture change? We see week on week in this place that that is a very tough piece of work for us to do. If we talk about the culture that is highlighted in this report, every time I pick the report up I am struck by how honest people were about the culture. I'm struck by some of the ways that people have felt very aggrieved by the culture that does permeate through this place, and throughout the electorate offices and ministerial offices of the country. I will quote from the report, which says that there is a culture of:

…   …   …

…   …   …

…   …   …

…   …   …

None of this is acceptable, but all of this is true about this workplace, and it has to change. One quote from one person who submitted to the review that struck me as sadly true and appalling was this:

a real culture of gossiping about young female employees … who they're sleeping with … whether they're having an affair, whether a perfectly innocent friendship is actually an affair … I think it's really upsetting for a lot of those young female employees that they can't just be judged on their work, and that there's always this sort of subtext of who they're sleeping with.

That's for the young women employees in this place. Then, when women get older, we have this:

… environment where working parents, and specifically working mothers, are not welcomed and accepted …

That isn't good enough. We've taken some steps in the right direction in this place, steps such as those towards turning bars into childcare centres. The childcare centre is one that my children have used and that many parents in this place use, and I note the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition on this matter over a number of years.

But, as I said, the cultural problem of this building that we are seeking to address isn't just of Parliament House; it is also of the electorate offices, and they are located in every state and territory, so this is a national cultural problem. It is not one that is constrained or is simply a Canberra bubble challenge, so I would say to those who are involved in leadership positions in state and territory governments and in the parliaments of the states and the territories that they also should read this report. They should also make sure that they are taking proactive preventive steps so that a cultural problem that we know is here does not exist anywhere else, because the culture in Canberra is simply a melting pot of the cultures of the various states and territories.

I know a lot of the public would be wondering why we're spending so much time talking about the staff of politicians. The Australian people could fairly ask why we are focusing only on this. The answer is clear: if we can't protect those whom we work with most closely, how on earth can the Australian people have faith in us to legislate to protect them? Parliament must be about setting the highest standard, and then we must lift the entire nation up to that standard.

At times I've been struck by the fact that the standards in this building have been lower than the standards in other workplaces that I have worked in throughout my life. I am thinking about one of my first jobs as a student, when I was a shift manager at McDonald's. At 18 years of age, I had to write someone up and give them a written warning for sexual harassment in the workplace. They had harassed another shift member. I'd never had to do that before, but the process was so crystal clear. There was a form. There was a process to follow through. There were check-in points for the staff member who had been harassed, and it was resolved to their satisfaction. It just strikes me that, if we could have processes that you could follow when I was an 18-year-old working at Macca's, surely we could finally be on the path here in this building to improving the processes of our place.

What I want for my electorate is for people to look here and see that we are setting that high standard in how we treat one another, we're doing our best and we're lifting the entire nation up, whatever people's background, sex, gender identity or how they choose to express themselves. So we can't just tidy up our own workplace. That would be too insular, too narrow-minded. But today we are talking about legislation that does seek to protect people in this workplace. This is a good step, a step in the right direction. I commend the legislation and I look forward to working with members across the chamber to make sure we do much more work on this.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 is an important turning point for this parliament. I begin this speech by acknowledging the work of the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins—the seven months of very deep engagement with all of us in this House and indeed, many hundreds of former employees of the House. More than 1,700 individuals made contributions to this review, the second Jenkins review. Some 33 organisations made contributions. There were 935 survey responses, 490 interviews conducted and 320 written submissions, with an additional 11 focus groups.

It was a very busy seven months for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner. I want to honour her work but pay tribute also to each and every one of those 1,723 people who contributed to this review in some way, shape or form. My message to you is that I will work every day in this parliament, as I know my Labor colleagues will, to ensure that the pain and trauma you experienced, which was expressed in this report, will never be in vain. There will be a very firm commitment to make the Australian parliament a place we are all proud to work in and a model employer for the nation.

As the member for Perth rightly pointed out, we're not just talking about the almost 5,000 people who work on a sitting day in this building; we're also talking about the 151 electorate offices that are scattered around Australia, each employing staff, and the senators' offices throughout the states and territories. There are a lot of people that work here or come into contact with the parliament—through lobbying efforts, media people working in the building, the cleaners. Everybody should be able to come to this place and expect they'll be treated in a respectful manner and that, if there are issues, clear processes and remedies are in place for people to seek redress. This is 2022. Probably the most astonishing thing about this report is that it's taken this long to get here.

My Labor colleagues were very keen to be involved in the lead-up to this report—talking to our staff and encouraging people to make contributions. I thank the Labor caucus for the strong support gained in this process. Last Tuesday—or was it on Wednesday—we had the implementation of the very first recommendation, the statement of acknowledgment, in this House. Whilst I am delighted that that happened sooner rather than later, I want to put on record just how disappointed I was that there wasn't care taken to ensure that that statement of acknowledgment was the best it could be. I'm not suggesting that the words were insufficient in any way, but the fact is that more than 1,700 people contributed to this review, bearing their lived experience to this parliament, and they were not advised, let alone invited, to attend the statement of acknowledgment. My staff, like all of our staff, probably found out after the fact, unless we as members were ringing them up beforehand, as I did, to say, 'You should watch this; I'd be interested to know how you respond.' That was a missed opportunity for this parliament, and we really have to start doing things better.

I am delighted that the task force has finally met. This report came down in November. The task force met on 7 February, I think, or it might have been 2 February. There was some delay in doing so, but the task force is now in place. I acknowledge some of the discussion in this chamber last week when the member for Warringah, followed by the member for Chifley, raised questions asking the Speaker to examine—given the commitment we had just made to ensuring that this place would be a safe, respectful workplace—the impact of extremely long sittings on staff and other people who work in this House. I note that the chair has reflected again on his answer, and I am very pleased to hear that, because the role of the Presiding Officer is absolutely critical to the implementation of all the recommendations in this report. There are a number of recommendations. I'm thinking in particular of recommendations 2, 9, 10 and 16, which are not the subject of the bill before us but absolutely demonstrate the critical role not just of each and every one of us in this parliament but of the Presiding Officers in ensuring that we live up to setting the standard in this place.

I am very pleased that we have before us a bill that will seek to implement recommendations 17 and 24 of this review, and I know that my colleague the member for Watson outlined those commitments. They're important changes to clarify that the Fair Work Act does in fact apply to our staff, as do the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. They're important pieces of legislation.

But I tell you what: this nation is watching us for what we do. The time for words has long passed. There is a whole generation of Australian women now refusing to remain silent, sit back and just listen to our speeches. They have told us loud and clear—the thousands who marched on the front lawns of this Parliament House and each and every brave woman who has stood to recount her experiences of sexual harassment, assault, abuse and bullying—that words alone will change nothing. If you did not get that message from the National Press Club last week, you are deaf. It is abundantly clear that words will not ensure that women and children are safe from violence and abuse. Words will not improve access to justice. They won't ensure that our workplaces, homes and public places are safe. Words won't deliver a better future—not even better words. The only way we get to secure a better future is through action.

As I said, the time for talking is well and truly done. We need our leaders to be bold, brave, and determined to embrace decisive action. For all of us as individuals, employees, leaders, parents and citizens in this place, the moment to be bold and determined and to demand reform is right now. We cannot lose this moment in our history. It is incumbent on each of us, and I know that everyone in Australia is watching this parliament very closely right now. I will be standing here, holding this government to account every waking moment of my days in this parliament. You don't get to walk away like you did with the Respect@Work report, and dud us and only implement half the recommendations. We on this side of the House are absolutely committed to working for the implementation of each and every one of these regulations.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.