High standards of ministerial conduct

IT is hard to imagine in these days of parliament as a blood sport: 30 years ago Malcolm Fraser told his ministers to give "prompt, concise and informative" answers to parliamentary questions.

IT is hard to imagine in these days of parliament as a blood sport: 30 years ago Malcolm Fraser told his ministers to give "prompt, concise and informative" answers to parliamentary questions.

The then prime minister must have been serious because the exhortation is officially recorded in a cabinet minute in February 1978 as a government decision.

Mr Fraser made the comments at a meeting of the full ministry before the resumption of parliament. He also told ministers to maintain "the highest standards of debate" and to ensure parliamentary proceedings were kept at a serious and responsible level.

Policy statements, answers to questions and speeches introducing bills were to be kept brief to allow the maximum time for backbench members to speak.

Ministers often did not live up to these expectations: then, as now, they found it easier to deal with difficult Opposition questions by not answering them.

The accountability of the government to the parliament was taken more seriously. Parliament was where most major government announcements were made and Liberal MPs kept the government on its toes by sometimes voting against it.

The Opposition reserved censure motions against the government for major controversies, rather than using them as just another form of point-scoring.

Mr Fraser set high standards for conduct. The minute records that he told ministers to raise promptly with him or his deputies problems relating to their departments.

Partly, his approach was a response to the scandals that beset the Whitlam government in its last year, in 1975, when three ministers were sacked.

Sometimes Mr Fraser overreacted, as with the sacking of the government's Senate leader and administrative services minister, Reg Withers, for contacting the chief electoral officer to criticise the proposed names of two new seats. A royal commission found senator Withers had acted improperly, though not illegally.

It is unlikely any other recent prime minister would have regarded that as a sacking offence.