COMMONWEALTH LATIMER HOUSE PRINCIPLES
extent of the democratic remit that applies in the Territory and casts into considerable doubt the operation of any authentic form of responsible government in this jurisdiction. “It is simply an unnecessary
impost on the people of the A.C.T. to have a federal executive looking over their shoulders in exercising their democratic rights. Removing s35 will strengthen the democratic character of the A.C.T. and provide additional certainty for A.C.T. legislators in performing their roles as elected representatives, ensuring that they are attentive to the needs and aspirations of A.C.T. citizens, rather than the executive of the federal government.”14 There remains unfinished
business with respect to the operation of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988. As we touched on before, it is clearly desirable that the prescriptive provisions concerning the number of Members of the Assembly and the maximum number of Ministers should be removed and these powers be granted to the Assembly itself.
Committee system The review observed that: “The committee system of the
Legislative Assembly needs to be reviewed to reflect a larger Assembly, and to improve overall performance. This will resolve the current need to rely on the three-person standing committee.” The Assembly’s committee
system in its current form involves six three-Member standing committees with coverage over particular portfolio areas – 1. Climate change, environment and water; 2. Education, training and youth affairs; 3. Planning, public works, territory and municipal services; 4. Health, community and social services; 5. Justice and community safety (which also performs a scrutiny of bills role); and 6. Public accounts. There is also one four-Member
standing committee on administration and procedure which is primarily established to advise the Speaker on the internal administration of the
Legislature itself. The Assembly creates select committees on a needs basis with a five-Member select committee on estimates established each year to review the government’s Appropriation Bill and associated budget. The constraints within the existing
system primarily relate to the scarcity of Members within the Assembly. There are obvious limitations in the extent to which committees can meaningfully explore the vast array of issues that emerge within the context of each of these broad portfolio
“The fact that the review process will be repeated in each Assembly is also positive and brings a continuous improvement mechanism to bear.”
groupings. It is also the case that individual non-executive Members must sit on numerous committees at the same time which means that each Member is required to get across an extraordinary range of policy detail, a situation not typically encountered by Members in larger legislative bodies. Professor Halligan seems to concur with this view noting in his report that “the resources of the committee, including the size of its membership, need to be strengthened”.15 The review observed that, “Greater
use should be made of the committee system for the consideration of legislation”.16
While there are always
benefits in parliamentary committees scrutinizing proposed legislation, to undertake this role effectively would almost certainly require an increase in the number of Members who sit on committees. The same applies in relation
to Professor Halligan’s finding that the resources of the Public Accounts Committee, “including the size of its membership, need to be strengthened”.17
Within these constraints our
committee system performs remarkably well and the level of advice and support provided by committee secretaries within the Office of the Legislative Assembly is of a very high calibre.
Conclusion We see the predominant value of the review process as being to enliven discussion about our governance arrangements and as a potential catalyst for strengthening and refining the A.C.T.’s existing institutional capabilities and structures. The review rated the A.C.T. Legislative as performing well against the Latimer principles and the Benchmarks of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association , noting that “the Assembly has had relatively more independence, compared to comparable systems operating within a Westminster tradition because a one-party majority in the Assembly is the exception”.18
We believe that the
review process has been a positive one and will help inform the changes necessary to make the A.C.T.’s form of governance even more effective. The fact that the review process will be repeated in each Assembly is also positive and brings a continuous improvement mechanism to bear, one that doesn’t allow us to rest on our laurels or to become complacent. We see value in the suggestion contained within the 2004 publication of the Commonwealth Latimer House principles on the Three Branches of Government relating to the “creation of a monitoring procedure outside official Commonwealth processes”. It is noted in the document that such a procedure could “initially... involve an ‘annual report’ on the implementation of the Guidelines in all Commonwealth jurisdictions, noting ‘good’ and ‘bad’ practice”.19 In this way, all Commonwealth
jurisdictions could better gauge their performance on a continuum, identifying their strengths, areas where improvements can be made, and participating in a broader constructive dialogue about how to give best effect to the guidelines and
the principles underpinning them. Endnotes
1. Berry, W (2007) ‘The application of the Latimer House Principles in developing a legis- lature’s budget: parliamentary autonomy versus executive prerogative’ and Berry, W (2008) ‘Rat- ing the A.C.T. Legislative Assembly against CPA Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures – is A minus good enough?’ 2. Included as Appendix A 3. Resolution of continuing effect 8A - Endorsement of the Commonwealth (Latimer) House Principles on the Three Branches of Government Resolution agreed by the Assembly 11 December 2008 (amended 23 February 2012). 4.
http://www.canberra.edu.au/arc-whole- gov/staff/biography-of-prof-john-halligan 5. Halligan, J (2011) ‘An assessment of the performance of the three branches of govern- ment in the A.C.T. against the Latimer House principles’ p 2. 6. Ibid, p 9. 7. Ibid, p 9. 8. Ibid, p 3. 9. Berry op cit, p 8. 10. The current A.C.T. Act sets the number of Members within the Assembly at 17 as well as the maximum number of Ministers that can be appointed at five, including the Chief Minister. 11. Towards the end of 2012 Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, indicated a willingness to amend the Australian Capital Territory (Self Govern- ment) A.C.T. 1988 in order to grant the Assem- bly the power to determine its own size. 12. Hawke, A (2011) ‘Governing the City State’, p 33 accessed at
http://www.cmd.A.C.T..gov. au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/224975/ Governing_the_City_State.pdf 13. Halligan op cit, p 4. 14. Submission 29 accessed at http://aph.
gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Commit- tees/Senate_Committees?url=legcon_ctte/ A.C.T.terrirtory_self_government/submissions. htm 15. Ibid, p 3. 16. Ibid, p 3. 17. Ibid, p 3. 18. Ibid, p 7. 19. Commonwealth (Latimer House Principles) on the Three Branches of Government, p 24. accessed on 27 June 2012 from http://www.
thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/ uploadedfiles/%7BACC9270A-E929-4AE0- AEF9-4AAFEC68479C%7D_Latimer%20 House%20Booklet%20130504.pdf
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue One | 51
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92