Tuesday, 30 May 2023
Committees
Legal and Social Issues Committee
Committees
Legal and Social Issues Committee
Reference
The PRESIDENT (13:09): I need to advise the house that I have received a letter from the chair of the Legal and Social Issues Committee advising that on 24 May 2023 the committee agreed to self-refer an inquiry into the rental and housing affordability crisis in Victoria. The committee has set a reporting date of 17 November 2023. The terms of reference will be available soon on the website and are available from the committee secretariat.
Jaclyn Symes: On a point of order, President, I seek your guidance on the issue of self-referrals to committees. Despite the fact that I believe they lack a bit of transparency and that there is an inability for the chamber to adequately interrogate and consider the merit and the resources required for these important inquiries, I take particular issue with this self-reference. On the face of it, it appears to me that it infringes the same question rule subject to standing order 7.06. Further, I do have a concern that despite the fact that this topic was well ventilated in the chamber, it would appear to me that this is a committee that is seeking to assert more authority than the house, as it has chosen to self-refer a topic that was decided by this house that it should not prosecute. An inquiry that has been squarely voted on in this house then put up as a self-reference seems to be undermining the will of the house.
Georgie Crozier: On the point of order, President, I know that the Leader of the Government and indeed the government are most unhappy about this committee doing this work, but this is not the same motion. It has got similar points, but it is a different motion. It has different components to it, and the committee is entitled to do a self-reference. They have voted on it, and despite the Leader of the Government not being happy with the decision of that committee –
David Davis: There is no point of order.
Georgie Crozier: There is no point of order, as Mr Davis so aptly points out.
The PRESIDENT: I am going to take the Leader of the Government’s point of order into consideration. I think that the will of the house is very important, whichever way it goes, and I have a concern myself. Basically upper house committees are beasts of the upper house, and my concern is if we have a referral that goes to a committee and the majority on the committee decide they are not going to do that referral –
David Davis: No, they cannot do that.
The PRESIDENT: Well, it cannot work both ways, Mr Davis. I have a concern. The reality is we have had this issue before about the chair instructing committees how to operate, and that is not a matter for me. But I think this is a concern that should be taken up by the Procedure Committee. People would be outraged, I would have thought, if a committee decided to use the numbers not to do a referral from this house. I am going to take the point of order into consideration. I think the only course of action I will have in the end anyway is to refer this issue to the Procedure Committee.
Georgie Crozier: On a further point of order, President, I understand that the committee was conscious of the house’s decision in relation to –
Georgie Crozier: No, I am not on the committee. Clearly they have taken into consideration what the house has done.
Jaclyn Symes: How do you know? I don’t know that.
Georgie Crozier: Well, you have got an issue with the self-referral, Minister; I do not.
The PRESIDENT: Ms Crozier, do you have a new point of order or is this further to the point of order?
Members interjecting.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I would appreciate it if the Leader of the Government and the Leader of the Opposition want to have a further conversation around this that they do not have it in the chamber. I will take this into consideration.
David Davis: Further to the point of order, President, I think it is important to note here that the Procedure Committee actually made a change at the end of the last Parliament. There was a sessional order that allowed only two referrals across a Parliament by committees, and in fact the committee obviously considered matters around referrals by committee. The standing orders are as the standing orders are. Obviously the fact is that if the house makes a decision a committee cannot overrule that, but the truth is that in this case the words are different. I ask you to consider this when you look at this matter. The words are different, and a committee is thereby entitled to make its decisions within the standing orders as they stand. If people in future want to make changes, they could.
The PRESIDENT: I think what was in previous standing orders and sessional orders is probably irrelevant. I think it is what we have got in our current standing orders. To alleviate everyone’s concern, the only course of action I can consider is to send this for consideration to the Procedure Committee – so everyone needs to relax a bit. I do have that concern that I outlined, that if the will of the house is not taken into account, where could this go? That is my consideration.
Trung Luu: On a point of order, President, speaking as the chair of the Legal and Social Issues Committee in relation to the matter raised to our committee and in relation to standing order 7.06, it was taken into deep consideration and from reviewing of the actual referral, the words were different. I understand the topic was the same topic; however, what was asked in the referral –
Members interjecting.
Trung Luu: The topic could be anything. The topic could be the same topic, for example, but in relation to what was asked in the committee referral, the criteria that was asked was different. And it was put through the committee and we reviewed the actual referral, and that is why we accepted it.
The PRESIDENT: I will take everyone’s points of order into consideration. I might not come back until the end of the week on this one.