Liberals under fire over restricted access to expert legislation advice

The state government is avoiding “proper scrutiny and accountability” by limiting access to legislation drafting experts, MPs claim.

NON-government MPs say their ability to do their jobs effectively is being limited because the government is rationing access to expert advice.

Funding to the Office of Parliamentary Counsel – which makes sure legislation and amendments passed by the house are correctly drafted – was increased by $150,000 a year in last year’s budget.

But some MPs are angry they cannot access help without getting the permission of Speaker of the House of Assembly Mark Shelton first.

“To place a request, members are advised to first request drafting support through the Speaker,” Mr Shelton wrote to members.

“In practice, my office will forward the request to OPC, which will be assessed based on priority and capacity of the OPC.”

Speaker Mark Shelton wrote to members to say any requests for access to the Office of Parliamentary Counsel must go through him. Picture: Richard Jupe

But in a terse exchange of letters, Greens leader Cassy O’Connor said Mr Shelton should not be involved in the process.

“The 2019-20 budget as passed by Parliament, stated ’funding of $150,000 per annum is provided to enable legislative drafting support for members of parliament, in consultation with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel’,” she said.

“We do not believe it is appropriate to insert yourself as a middleman in this process.

“As you have stated it will be the OPC that assesses their capacity, not you.”

Premier Peter Gutwein said the government had priority access to the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. Picture: Richard Jupe

Premier Peter Gutwein said the government has first call on the experts.

“I think I’m the first Premier that’s ever provided that access under the terms it is currently available,” he said.

“Members have got more access than they ever had before. There is more resource provided than ever before.

“In terms of bills, the number one priority that government has is ensuring that its own legislative agenda gets through.

“We were elected and received a mandate from the Tasmanian people to get that agenda through and so that will always remain a priority.”

Labor’s Dean Winter said the government was being petty.

“Blocking access to drafting support or allowing access in a non-meaningful way is unworkable and is symptomatic of a government opposed to proper scrutiny and accountability,” he said.

“The government wants us to be acting as a rubber stamp and this is simply unacceptable.”

Labor MP Dean Winter said the government was being petty in restricting access to legislative experts. Picture: Richard Jupe

Mr Gutwein said significant resources had been provided to non-government members during the formulation and passage of voluntary assisted dying laws,

“Amendments will be given priority in the first instance and we’ll consider individual bills on their merits, but the priority will always be the government’s legislative agenda,” he said.

Government defends legislative logjam

THE government has defended its plans to push through a series of major reforms in the next five Parliamentary sitting weeks.

The Liberals want parliament to pass poker machines legislation, promised TAFE reforms, a new container deposit scheme, anti-protest legislation and laws to set up a new Stadiums Tasmania Trust.

To date, parliament has had it’s least productive year so far this century, with just 11 pieces of legislation being passed through both houses — and four of those were budget bills

Most years the figure is more than 50 and even in the election years of 2014 and 2018, 28 and 40 bills were passed respectively.

Leader of Government Business Michael Ferguson on Wednesday confirmed some of the draft bills aren’t finished yet.

“They’re going through a managed process and we look to expert draftspeople to ensure that they are quality-assured,” he said.

“I can think of one example, my own legislation in the Future Gaming Market legislation that’s actually going through its quality assurance right now and additional to the fact that the bill itself has been publicly released as an exposure draft.

Michael Ferguson Liberal member. Parliament activity in Hobart today. Picture Eddie Safarik

“I think it points to the fact that there’s no surprises in this and only with minor quality assurance changes going forward, not just Upper House but also Lower House MPs will have had a lot of opportunities to look at those bills, and of course, have their attention drawn to any minor changes that arise from the consultation.

And Mr Ferguson defended reshuffling the Legislative Council sitting schedule at short notice.

“Well, in actual fact, the reason that the leader for the government in the Legislative Council recommended the movement of one week of sittings was precisely so that the bills could really be considered by each house with adequate time to be considered.

“That was the very point of it. So if that’s been lost on a couple of MLCs, I’d be happy to explain that further.”

Greens leader Cassy O’Connor said the govenrment had form in springing complex legislation on the Parliament at short notice.

“It’s a bit rich for Mr Ferguson to claim they’re messing around with the sitting schedule to allow more time for debate on bills,” she said.

“We frequently have weighty, complex legislation tabled on the Tuesday for debate on the Thursday. It’s dismissive of good legislative process.

“I suspect this is about the Liberals gambling policy legislation, which is expected to come before the House in October, and if passed, will inflict harm on generations of Tasmanians.”

‘Embarrassed’: Premier lashes out over WA GST windfall

PREMIER Peter Gutwein has launched another broadside at GST sharing arrangements which have delivered a windfall surplus to Western Australia.

He says the state should be “embarrassed” for getting more than its fair share as it enjoys booming mining royalty revenues.

WA Premier Mark McGowan’s last week delivered a budget with a surplus of $5.6bn on Thursday – the largest in the state’s history and the only state surplus in the nation.

At the same time, Tasmania’s deficit budget will see the state slide further into debt.

Mr Gutwein said the federal government needed to review the sharing arrangements which had delivered such a skewed outcome to WA.

“That state should be embarrassed to be frank in terms of the revenues it’s receiving at the moment,” he told parliament.

Peter Gutwein in parliament question time. Picture Eddie Safarik

Tasmania’s GST take has increased under a revised formula which guarantees increase revenue for WA — but also that no state ends up losing revenue.

But Mr Gutwein said that guarantee came with a time limit.

“We are no worse off in fact, we are better than where we were forecasting right now today,” he said.

“But the guarantee finishes in 2026/27 and it’s incumbent on the federal government to review that situation well before they’re going to ensure that we either return back to the … calculations of old or the guarantee continues.”

‘Growing influence of big money in politics’: Wilkie’s warning

AN INDEPENDENT MP says the proposed reforms to Tasmania political disclosure laws - the weakest in the nation - are too limited to prevent the growing influence of big money on the politics in this State.

In his submission to the Electoral Disclosure and Funding Bill 2021 and the Electoral Matters (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2021, Clark MP Andrew Wilkie called the reforms too little and too late.

Mr Wilkie said the threshold for reporting donations of $5000 was still too high and should be dropped to $1000.

His submission also said the definition of a gift was not broad enough to capture all moneys and gifts in kind from any source.

He said a broader definition would force the Tasmanian Hospitality Association and the Federal Group to reveal their “pro-poker machine campaign expenditure over the $1000 threshold.”

“A $10,000 cap on the total amount a donor can donate during an electoral cycle would prevent the growing influence of big money in politics,” Mr Wilkie said.

Mr Wilkie declares all donations of more than $1000 in real-time and does not accept money from alcohol, tobacco or gambling companies.

His criticism follows similar concerns raised by independent member for Nelson Meg Webb who said the “long-awaited and long-overdue” reforms contained a “disturbing sting in the tail

The government says it is delivering on its commitment to introduce a more transparent and modern political donation disclosure scheme in Tasmania.

But Ms Webb agreed with Mr Wilkie that the threshold should be $1000 not $5000.

The Electoral Act Review Final Report, released in February, stated a threshold of $1000 would be in line with the majority of submitters to the review as well as the general trend in other jurisdictions.