A Review of Federal Guidelines for Parliamentary Petitions in Australia

The Lower House of Federal Parliament in Australia has released guidelines for petitioners. These guidelines provide important information and helpful tips on the petition process. Unfortunately, at this stage, the guidelines do not allow for e-petitions, but are limited to traditional paper petitions requiring physical signatures. A summary of the guidelines can be seen below.

The right of petitioning Parliament is a longestablished fundamental right of the citizen. It is the only direct means by which an individual or group can ask the Parliament to take action—all other processes entail communicating through a parliamentary representative (Member or Senator) or a parliamentary committee. 

What is a petition?

A petition is basically a request for action. The subject of a petition must be a matter on which the House has the power to act, that is, it must be a Federal (nationally controlled) rather than a State matter and one involving legislation or government administration. The ‘terms’ of a petition consist of the address, reasons for petitioning the House and a request for action by the House. For example, petitions may ask the House to introduce legislation, or to repeal or change existing legislation, or to take action for a certain purpose or for the benefit of particular people. Less commonly a petition from an individual citizen may seek the redress of a personal grievance, for example, the correction of an administrative error. 

New arrangements for petitions 

In the past, the Parliament was informed of the subject matter of each petition and the number of signatures. They were then forwarded to the relevant Minister but responses were unusual. At the commencement of the 42nd Parliament in 2008 the House of Representatives amended standing orders (the rules of the House) relating to the way petitions are dealt with. A Standing Committee on Petitions was established to ensure that all petitions presented to the House were considered and responded to appropriately. The role of the Petitions Committee is to receive and process petitions and to inquire into and report to the House on any matters relating to petitions and the petitions system. 

The principal petitioner In order to improve the House’s ability to respond to petitions, the rules for petitions require a principal petitioner (even where a group of people sponsor a petition). This person, who initiates, sponsors or organises a petition, must provide his or her original signature along with full contact details on the first page of the petition. This will enable the Petitions Committee to contact him or her regarding any response or follow-up to the petition. Contact details are for the use of the Petitions Committee and will not be published. It is not possible for a Member of the House of Representatives to be a principal petitioner or indeed to sign a petition. 

Drawing up a petition 

Care must be taken in the preparation of petitions as the House has certain rules about their form and content. These rules are designed to ensure the authenticity of petitions and to protect the intentions of petitioners. A recommended form of a petition to the House of Representatives is at the end of this Infosheet. 1963 petition from the Yirrkala people concerning land rights, on traditionally decorated bark 2 The standing orders do not impose any particular style of expression but certain other requirements must be met. Those involved in drawing up petitions should familiarise themselves with the rules before collecting signatures. (The terms of the petition may not be altered after the collection of signatures commences.) If in doubt, the principal petitioner should contact the Petitions Committee secretariat early in the process of developing a petition to ensure it conforms with standing orders and can be accepted by the House. This will avoid the possibility of the petition being ruled out of order and not being presented to the House. 

To be presented to the House, a petition must: 
- be addressed to the House of Representatives 
- refer to a matter on which the House has the power to act, that is, a Commonwealth legislative or administrative matter 
- state the reasons for petitioning the House 
- contain a request for action by the House How a petition should be prepared At present the House of Representatives does not accept petitions in electronic form. Petitions must be on paper. In addition: 
- the petition must show the terms (the facts or reasons for the petition and the specific action requested) at the top of the first page of the petition and the request must be at the top of every subsequent page 
- the terms must not contain any alterations and must not exceed 250 words (i.e. address, reasons and request together) 
- the language used must be moderate and the terms of the petition must not be illegal or promote illegal acts 
- if the petition is not in English it must be accompanied by a translation certified to be correct. The person certifying the translation must place his or her name and address on the translation 
- it must not have any letters, affidavits or other documents attached to it and any such attachments will be removed before presentation to the House 
- a petition from a corporation should be made under its common seal. Otherwise it will be received as the petition of the individuals who signed it

Rules about signatures

Every petition must contain the signature and address of the principal petitioner on the first page. Each signature on the petition must be made by the person signing in his or her own handwriting. A petitioner who is not able to sign may ask another person to sign on his or her behalf. Every signature must be written on a page bearing the request part of the terms of the petition. Signatures must not be copied, pasted, photocopied or transferred on to the petition. They must not be placed on a blank page or on the reverse of a sheet containing the terms of the petition. Getting a petition presented Petitions can be mailed to the Petitions Committee in the House of Representatives. Alternatively, petitioners may ask any Member, including a Minister, to present a petition in person. In both cases, the Committee checks that petitions are ‘in order’ (comply with the rules for petitions) before presentation. 

What happens in the House? 

Petitions are usually presented on Mondays by the Chair of the Petitions Committee. The Chair announces the subject of the petition and the number of signatories for each petition. If a Member wishes to present a petition in person, there are a number of opportunities for this, including the time for Members’ statements, adjournment debate and the grievance debate. Petitions presented to the House are received by the House and they become part of the records of the House. At the time of presentation no discussion of the subject matter of a petition takes place (other than the Member’s statement if it is presented personally). 

What happens after a petition has been presented? 

After a petition has been announced in the House the full terms of the petition (but not the signatures) are printed in the Hansard for that day. They are also published on the Petitions Committee’s website. The Committee may forward the terms of the petition to the Minister responsible for the administration of the matter raised in the petition. Responses to petitions are announced in the House, printed in Hansard and are published on the Committee’s website. The Petitions Committee may also decide to hold discussions with the principal petitioner and government officials on the subject of the petition, at its discretion. Some statistics In the 42nd Parliament an average of 115 unique petitions were presented each year. Since 1988, when the number of signatures was first recorded, the petition with the greatest number of signatures was one presented on 4 December 2000 concerning taxation and beer prices, with 792,985 signatures. In 1993 a petition concerning health care funding signed by more than 500 000 people was presented. Petitions received cover a wide range of issues including, for example, health care, education and the environment. 

Historical note 

In the United Kingdom the right of petitioning the Crown and Parliament for redress of grievances dates back to the reign of King Edward I in the 13th century. The origins of Parliament itself can be traced back to those meetings of the King’s Council which considered petitions. The terms ‘bill’ and ‘petition’ originally had the same meaning. Some of the earliest legislation was in fact in form no more than a petition which had been agreed to by the King. The present form of petitions developed in the late 17th century. The House of Commons passed the following resolutions in 1669: That it is an inherent right of every Commoner of England to prepare and present petitions to the House in case of grievance; and of the House of Commons to receive them. That it is the undoubted right and privilege of the House of Commons to adjudge and determine, touching the nature and matter of such Petitions, how far they are fit and unfit to be received. The effect of these resolutions was inherited by the Australian Parliament and the right of petitioning thus became the right of every Australian. 

In modern times the practice of petitioning Parliament does not have the same primary role as an initiator of legislation or other action by the Parliament as it did in early history. There are now other, and usually more effective, means of dealing with individual grievances—for example, by direct representation by a Member of Parliament, by the Commonwealth Ombudsman or by bodies like the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. It is hoped that the new arrangements for responding to petitions may result in them becoming an important means of community involvement in the work of the Parliament. For more information House of Representatives Practice, 5th edn. Department of the House of Representatives, Canberra, 2001. pp 611–620. www.aph.gov.au/house/work/petitions.htm. 

From the standpoint of GoPetition, we are concerned that the Federal Parliament is not dealing with the reality of the information age and current technologies. There are ways to ensure signature integrity by electronic means. Moreover, e-petitions provide a more convenient means of identifying support while facilitating broader reach. GoPetition also takes the view that petitions lodged with GoPetition may be downloaded and presented to the Lower House by a supporting Member as a miscellaneous document. In this way, we believe that e-petitions at GoPetition can be presented to the Lower House for consideration.

The Timeless Nature of Petitions

As I recently returned home to Australia to catch up on a mountain of paperwork, I suddenly realised that my awaiting mail was only about a third of its usual size. No doubt this was due to the fact that I now receive most correspondence and statements electronically by email. But there is a paradox. Although I see less paper, I see just as much information (if not more). Nothing has changed.

And so it is with petitions. Nothing has changed. History tells us that the process of petitioning is ancient. I have written about this here. It seems that the human condition (psyche) is built to protest, to advocate, and to seek justice. No matter what the age. No matter what time in history we find ourselves.

For example, less than two hundred years ago, in Australia, one of the most famous petitions ever written had a powerful social influence. Despite an absence on Internet and email, the Ned Kelly petition has become a testimony to the trial and execution of an iconic Australian legend. Whether he is famous or infamous, is beside the point. The Ned Kelly petition demonstrated and captured like a photograph, a cross-section of the Australian colonial psyche.

After the bushranger Kelly was sentenced to death by Irish-born judge Sir Redmond Barry, Ned Kelly's friends and family, along with David Gaunson (the parliamentarian) organised a petition for reprieve and did their best to obtain as many signatures as possible to try and save Ned's life  from the hangman's noose.

Petitions in Ned's day were nothing new. They were used to help gain compo for Ann Jones, to try and stop Constable Fitzpatrick from being booted out of the police force in Lancefield, to get Mr. Ryan out of gaol after being arrested under the Felon's Apprehension Act and several others associated with the Kelly story.

After Ned's capture, a public meeting was held at the Hippodrome in Melbourne, seeking that the life of Ned Kelly be spared. The petition for reprieve was organised, published widely and then presented to the Governor. Over 30,000 signatures were collected on the petition. The actual numbers of signatures reported varies from 30,000 to 60,000.

The petition for reprieve has an important place in Australian colonial history. It demonstrates the tensions between "the establishment" - the incumbent government of Victoria - and the general population, anti-authoritarian working class battlers.

The petition came after the astonishing trial of Ned Kelly. After he was captured and stood trial, he was sentenced to death by the Irish-born judge Sir Redmond Barry. This case was extraordinary in that there were exchanges between the prisoner Kelly and the judge, and the case has been the subject of attention by both historians and lawyers. When the judge uttered the customary words "May God have mercy on your soul", Ned allegedly replied "I will go a little further than that, and say I will see you there when I go". He was hanged on 11 November at the Melbourne Gaol for multiple murder by Elijah Upjohn.

Although two newspapers (The Age and The Herald) reported Kelly's last words as "Such is life," another source, Ned Kelly's gaol warden, writes in his diary that when Kelly was prompted to say his last words, he (Kelly) opened his mouth and mumbled something that he couldn't hear—and since the warden's office is closer to the scene of the hanging than the witnesses' allotted space, Ned Kelly's last words actually remain uncertain.

Sir Redmond Barry died of the effects of a carbuncle on his neck on 23 November 1880, twelve days after Kelly. Kelly's prophetic powers and iconic magnetism were clearly evidenced by his trial, death and the amazing support he received in the Petition for Reprieve. Over 30,000 Victorians solidified Kelly's legendary status by signing the petition for reprieve which ultimately confirmed his iconic and quintessential colonial rebel status.

Petitions, then and now, have not changed. The delivery method and technology for signature collection may have advanced. But the human spirit behind each petition stays the same. Justice.

Petitions used to address intense pain of sexual abuse and lax anti-abuse laws

United Kingdom: One unfortunate observation about trending petitions at GoPetition is the constant stream of sexual abuse cases and the urgent need for law reform in this area at various levels.

In one case, child sex abuse survivor, Sarah Fox, has expressed her deep disappointment and outrage at a Supreme Court Ruling in the UK allowing sex offenders the right to appeal against being on the relevant sex register. Urging review, she has asked for help and support in a petition campaign targeting local MPs and the British Government.

Thousands of sex offenders in England and Wales are set to be given the right to appeal against having to register with the police for life. Home Secretary Theresa May said the government would make the "minimum possible changes" to comply with a 2010 Supreme Court ruling.She said ministers were "appalled" by the ruling and the bar for appeals would be set as "high as possible". Sex offenders will only be able to appeal 15 years after leaving prison.The Supreme Court ruled that denying offenders the right of appeal was incompatible with their human rights. But Andrew Flanagan, chief executive of the NSPCC, said: "Adults who sexually abuse children should stay on the offenders register for life as we can never be sure their behaviour will change."

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the appeals system "must be extremely tough" in order to win the support of Labour MPs."The depravity and the seriousness of sex offences, and the harm and damage they do to their victims, means the systems we have in place to protect the public must be paramount," she said.

Paedophiles: Only individuals sentenced to more than 30 months for a sex-related crime are required to register with police for life. It is estimated that about 24,000 sex offenders who were required to register for life, including paedophiles and rapists, could be affected by the ruling. Qualifying sex offenders are currently required to notify the police of their personal details, any change of address and when they travel abroad.There is no centrally held register of sex offenders in the UK, but the Home Office says the system of notifying the police is commonly known as the sex offenders register.

Last year, two convicted sex offenders used human rights laws to challenge the system and won the right to appeal against their life-long registration. The two offenders were a teenager convicted of rape and a 59-year-old man guilty of indecent assault. The teenage boy, known only as F, had been jailed for 30 months in October 2005, aged 11, for raping a six-year-old boy. The second case involved a man named Angus Aubrey Thompson, who was jailed in 1996 for five years. Both the offenders said their life-long registration with no chance of a review was a disproportionate interference in their family lives. In the case of F, he said he had been prevented from taking a family holiday abroad and from playing rugby league.

'Minimum changes'

Mrs May told the Commons the government was "appalled" by the Supreme Court ruling, but there was no possibility of further appeal. "This government is determined to do everything we can to protect the public from predatory sexual offenders," she said. "And so we will make the minimum possible changes to the law in order to comply with this ruling." She said the Scottish government had already amended its laws to allow convicted adults to seek a review after 15 years on the sex offenders register, but the rules in England and Wales would be "much tougher".

"Offenders can only apply for consideration of removal after waiting 15 years following release from custody - in England and Wales there will be no automatic appeals," she said."The final decision of whether an offender should remain on the register will be down to the police, not the courts as in Scotland."There will be no right of appeal against the police's decision to keep an offender on the register. That decision will be final." She added the government was about to launch a consultation on closing down "four existing loopholes" in the registration system, including making it compulsory for offenders to notify the police if they intended to travel abroad for even one day, as opposed to the current three days or more. 

BBC political correspondent Gary O'Donoghue said the ruling meant ministers were now "committed to introducing a review process". "They were due to bring proposals forward around now to amend the Sexual Offences Act 2003 but government sources have told the BBC an appeal system won't be introduced to Parliament until the spring," he said. He added the move was likely to infuriate backbenchers on both sides of the Commons who last week registered their disapproval over plans to give prisoners the vote in elections following legal decisions based on human rights laws.

Mark Williams-Thomas, a former police officer who worked in child protection, is concerned about the decision - particularly in relation to child sex offenders. "These people are like leopards, they don't change their spots," he said. "What we will end up with is potentially a very dangerous situation where someone has committed offences in the past and be able to say they haven't committed any new offences and therefore don't present a risk. "But they are a risk in the same way as an alcoholic is always an alcoholic."

The link to the online petition can be seen here: http://www.gopetition.com/petition/43086.html