The slow process to remove politicians’ privileged status of being able to bully and harass staff and behave in ways that wouldn’t be tolerated in other workplaces took another step forward yesterday with the introduction of the bill to establish a new Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission. The new commission will be able to investigate complaints against parliamentarians, staff employed by them and workers in Parliament House, with powers to compel cooperation.
At least one Coalition MP opposes the commission as putting “another line of unelected bureaucrats between politicians and voters”, as if the freedom to bully, harass and sexually predate on staff should be part and parcel of democracy and politicians shouldn’t be held to the same basic standards as every other worker in the country.
Given the sheer level of bullying that goes on inside political offices — talk to a political staffer, they’ll tell you a tale of the bullying they’ve encountered at some point, including by some of the most prominent politicians in the country — it’s likely that that will form the bulk of the commission’s work. But it will depend on the willingness of staff to complain. There are whistleblower-style protections in the new bill, but reprisal is a huge risk, not to mention what Brittany Higgins felt — that in raising her sexual assault, she became a political problem for her minister.
The focus at the moment, however, is on the fact that the commission can only investigate matters that “do not form part of proceedings in Parliament”, with independent MPs complaining about what they regard as misogynist abuse by Coalition MPs inside the chamber.
Deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley seemed to try to justify abuse of independent MPs — nearly all women — by saying, in effect, that Zali Steggall started it, as if pointing out that Peter Dutton’s call for a ban on Palestinian refugees was indeed racist means abuse within the chamber was justified.
It’s true that clichés like “robust debate” and “clash of ideas” act as cover for abuse, but also that objections of the latter can tip over into objections to the former. Guardian Australia, bizarrely, ran figures on the number of MPs being kicked out of Parliament in an article headlined “‘Enough is enough’: teal MPs call out ‘misogyny’ of Coalition MPs in question time” — though it inserted, probably at the behest of cautious editors or lawyers, the line “There is no suggestion the ejections from Parliament are related to the behaviour alleged by the teal MPs.”
And yes, there is no connection between the cited example of Michael Sukkar being kicked out nearly 30 times, and any sort of abuse — risking getting ejected is part of the job of opposition MPs, one heightened by how biased a speaker might be and what role opposition MPs are assigned by their tactics committee. Moreover, you can bet that if it was Labor in opposition, that implied connection between abuse and being ejected wouldn’t be being made (and how many people who tut-tut about parliamentary standards also like to quote some of Paul Keating’s best lines in Parliament?)
That all said, the risk of misogynist abuse is quite real given the sheer dearth of women in opposition ranks: seven out of 25 Liberal MPs, three of out 21 LNP MPs, and one out of nine Nationals MPs are women, while every teal MP is female. And there is no-one who can seriously claim that the standard of conduct in question time is a good advertisement for a political career. If the aptly named Keith Pitt thinks the commission will deter people from politics, he seriously needs to go visit some workplaces in the real world, where abusing colleagues, habitual lying and bullying of staff are grounds for sacking, not par for the course.
Nor is it all on the opposition. Governments, this one included, continue the abuse of question time with the stupidity of Dorothy Dixers. If governments want to use what is supposed to be a key accountability forum in order to spruik their own message and savage their opponents, they can hardly complain if opposition MPs interject. But crossbench MPs, engaged in the same task of trying to hold governments to account, deserve far more respect.
The only time in living memory parliamentary standards were substantially improved was when Julia Gillard led a minority government and crossbench MPs used their leverage to improve question time. The only way we’ll get the same again is if crossbench MPs can wield the balance power after the next election and impose better parliamentary standards on a minority government. And, contra Pitt, that might actually make politics a slightly less unattractive career for people whose idea of an enjoyable workplace doesn’t extend to relentless abuse.
Fortunately, as current polling suggests, a minority government is looking more and more likely.
How do you feel about the behaviour of politicians in question time? Would a minority government improve things? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
