DONNA BATES: An independent parliamentary standards commission is warranted and necessary in our Parliament

There should be no argument that an independent parliamentary standards commission is warranted or indeed necessary in our nation’s Parliament.

The 2021 Set the Standard report was scathing in its summation of Parliament as a workplace, citing a culture where widespread and endemic harassment, bullying, and sexual misconduct were the norm.

Culture can make or break an organisation, and Parliament is no different. Respect and healthy workplace culture can build high-performing teams, drive revenue, increase productivity and build and foster business connections.

Poor corporate culture presents in so many ways, and has many knock-on effects — employee stress, illness, substance abuse, low productivity and sliding ethical standards are some of the symptoms of a toxic culture and if not dealt with appropriately, can snowball out of control across an organisation.

And that’s what former sex discrimination commissioner Kate Jenkins found in her report — a toxic environment “largely driven by power imbalances, gender inequality and exclusion and a lack of accountability”.

A culture without consequences that left a “trail of devastation for individuals and their teams”.

So now, three years on, I find it hypocritical that those governing Australia are still debating about how best to legislate for better parliamentary standards.

In any other workplace in Australia, it would have been necessary to have already implemented the report’s findings, and at the same time to be abiding by laws already in place through the Fair Work Act.

So why should Federal Parliament be any different? Do our elected representatives believe that they are somehow above the law, and that the unique politically charged environment in Canberra allows them special dispensation to flout laws governing workplace behaviour?

In healthy organisations, honesty, integrity and respect flourish within existing workplace rules, and a positive culture creates its own scaffolding around employees.

Sadly, I think it’s wishful thinking that Federal Parliament could replicate that model currently without a watchdog, with teeth, like an IPSC.

Backroom behaviour is one thing, but it’s clear the behaviour in the chambers of both houses of Federal Parliament has also deteriorated and should be addressed, even though it will not fall under the remit of the IPSC.

Brewing over many years, we have witnessed the erosion of the fierce contest of ideas slowly morph into parliamentary war games, where defamatory misinformation is weaponised and inappropriate language cuts good people to their very core.

It has become more urgent to ensure that robust debate is maintained while respecting differing points of views. It is also necessary to support those who encourage personal accountability and ethical behaviour in parliamentary debates.

At its very core, the matter is about all politicians being in and staying in personal integrity. It would be disturbing if the thought of new, stricter standards of behaviour led to politicians arguing against them, instead of embracing them and the process in good faith.

Staffers and parliamentarians on all sides of the fence can lose real-world perspective living in the Canberra bubble, and toxic un-parliamentary behaviour has been allowed to proliferate. It’s telling that an IPSC is required but unfortunately, some politicians have demonstrated the inability to self-regulate and existing mechanisms and sanctions haven’t worked as a deterrent.

Just like corporate Australia and the millions of small businesses and their employees who must comply with workplace laws, it is time for the Federal Government to start punishing those who don’t self-regulate or find themselves unable to do so. And, where necessary, remind wayward politicians and staffers that being in politics is not a right, but a duty and a privilege.

Donna Bates is an integrity expert and strategic growth consultant