Genre: Legal

Code of Conduct for Members and ICAC Note: This briefing paper outlines the background provisions of the Code of Conduct. It cannot comprehensively cover every aspect of the Code's application, and Members seeking advice about particular matters should contact the Parliamentary Ethics Adviser or seek private legal advice. The New South Wales Legislative Assembly adopted a Code of Conduct for its members for the first time on 5 May 1998. (The same code applies to members of the New South Wales Legislative Council.) The resolution adopting the code of conduct for the current Parliament was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 8 May 2007 with an amendment being made to the Code in June 2007. The Code of Conduct that has been agreed to by both Houses is as follows: Preamble to the Code of Conduct The Members of the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council have reached agreement on a Code of Conduct which is to apply to all Members of Parliament. Members of Parliament recognise that they are in a unique position of being responsible to the electorate. The electorate has the right to dismiss them from office at regular elections. Members of Parliament acknowledge their responsibility to maintain the public trust placed in them by performing their duties with honesty and integrity, respecting the law and the institution of Parliament, and using their influence to advance the common good of the people of New South Wales. Members of Parliament acknowledge that their principal responsibility in serving as Member is to the people of New South Wales. THE CODE Disclosure of conflict of interest Members of Parliament must take all reasonable steps to declare any conflict of interest between their private financial interests and decisions in which they participate in the execution of their office. This may be done through declaring their interests on the Register of Disclosures of the relevant House or through declaring their interest when speaking on the matter in the House or a Committee, or in any other public and appropriate manner. A conflict of interest does not exist where the member is only affected as a member of the public or a member of a broad class. Bribery A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which the Member has received, is receiving or expects to receive. A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which any of the following persons has received, is receiving or expects to receive: A member of the Member's family; A business associate of the Member; or Any other person or entity from whom the Member expects to receive a financial benefit. A breach of the prohibition on bribery constitutes a substantial breach of this Code of Conduct. Gifts Members must declare all gifts and benefits received in connection with their official duties, in accordance with the requirements for the disclosure of pecuniary interests. Members must not accept gifts that may pose a conflict of interest or which might give the appearance of an attempt to improperly influence the Member in the exercise of his or her duties. Members may accept political contributions in accordance with part 6 of the Election Funding Act 1981. Use of public resources Members must apply the public resources to which they are granted access according to any guidelines or rules about the use of those resources. Use of confidential information Members must not knowingly and improperly use official information which is not in the public domain, or information obtained in confidence in the course of their parliamentary duties, for the private benefit of themselves or others. Duties as a Member of Parliament It is recognised that some members are non-aligned and others belong to political parties. Organised parties are a fundamental part of the democratic process and participation in their activities is within the legitimate activities of Members of Parliament. Secondary employment or engagements Members must take all reasonable steps to disclose at the start of a parliamentary debate: the identity of any person by whom they are employed or engaged or by whom they were employed or engaged in the last two years (but not if it was before the Member was sworn in as a Member); the identity of any client of any such person or any former client who benefited from a Member's services within the previous two years (but not if it was before the Member was sworn in as a Member); and the nature of the interest held by the person, client or former client in the parliamentary debate. This obligation only applies if the Member is aware, or ought to be aware, that the person, client or former client may have an interest in the parliamentary debate which goes beyond the general interest of the public. This disclosure obligation does not apply if a Member simply votes on a matter; it will only apply when he or she participates in a debate. If the Member has already disclosed the information in the Member's entry in the pecuniary interest register, he or she is not required to make a further disclosure during the parliamentary debate. This resolution has continuing effect unless and until amended or rescinded by resolution of the House. This code forms part of the web of definitional terms of corrupt conduct in sections 8 and 9 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988. Section 8 of the Act is an inclusive provision which specifies the kind of acts that might constitute corrupt conduct. This section defines corrupt conduct as the dishonest or partial exercise of official functions, or breach of public trust or the misuse of information or material which was acquired in the exercise of official functions. Section 9 is an exclusionary provision, establishing the boundaries of corrupt conduct. An act mentioned in section 8 will not constitute corrupt conduct unless it would amount to either: a criminal offence; a disciplinary offence; or reasonable grounds for dismissing, dispensing with the services of or otherwise terminating the services of a public official. In the case of conduct of a Minister of the Crown or a member of a House of Parliament -- a substantial breach of an applicable code of conduct. As noted, subsection (d) above was introduced through the 1994 amendments to the ICAC legislation so that an act by a Minister or member could also amount to corrupt conduct if it amounts to a substantial breach of an applicable code of conduct. An applicable code of conduct is defined in the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 as, firstly, in the case of a Minister, a ministerial code of conduct prescribed or adopted for the purposes of section 9 by the regulations, and, secondly, in the case of a member of Parliament (including a Minister of the Crown), a code of conduct adopted for the purposes of the section by resolution of the House concerned. Under the provisions of the Act, the Legislative Assembly is required to appoint a committee to carry out functions in relation to the Code of Conduct, including reviewing the code at least once every four years. (Section 72E of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 . The designated committee for purposes of the Act is the Legislative Assembly Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics see VP 04/12/2003, pp. 536-7). The code was last reviewed in 2006 by the Legislative Assembly Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics. (See the report of the Legislative Assembly Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics, Review of the Proposed Amendments to the Code of Conduct and Draft Constitution (Disclosure by Members) Regulation 2006 , September 2006). Background In 1988, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) was established with jurisdiction over all "public officials". Public official was defined to include officers in the Parliament, government departments, statutory authorities and local councils, as well as parliamentarians and local councillors, judges and magistrates. Those working in the private sector and general community who are not public officials may be covered if their conduct adversely affects or could adversely affect the honest or impartial exercise of a public official's official functions. The principal functions of the ICAC are to: investigate, expose and prevent corruption involving or affecting public authorities or public officials; and educate public authorities, public officials and members of the public about corruption and its detrimental effects on public administration and on the community. (See information on "What is the ICAC?" http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/go/the-icac ) The ICAC does not punish offences nor does it have any prosecutorial role. Its role is to protect the public interest and to prevent breaches of public trust by exposing and minimising corruption. The legislation establishing the Commission has incorporated many amendments since its assent as a result of court challenges and anomalies that have been recognised in the legislation. Of note is the New South Wales Court of Appeal decision in Greiner and Moore v Independent Commission Against Corruption. Greiner v ICAC (1992) 28 NSWLR 125. This court case concerned an ICAC inquiry into the appointment of a former member of the Liberal Party and Minister of that Government, Dr Metherell, to a senior public service position as an alleged inducement to resign his parliamentary seat. The former Premier (Mr Greiner) and former Minister (Mr Moore) appealed the decision in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and a judgment was brought down that the ICAC's finding was made without, or in excess of jurisdiction, was a nullity, and was wrong in law. In 1994 the Parliament passed an amendment to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 in response to continued debate following this decision. The ensuring amendment to correct this anomaly expanded the jurisdiction of the Commission in relation to Ministers of the Crown and members of Parliament. This expanded jurisdiction enables the ICAC to investigate an allegation that a Minister or member of Parliament has breached a code of conduct applicable to that Minister or member, if the alleged breach was substantially of a corrupt nature.( Section 122 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 precludes any action contrary to Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and thus parliamentary privilege.) The link between the Code of Conduct and the Members' Handbook Under the Code of Conduct "Members must apply the public resources to which they are granted access according to any guidelines or rules about the use of those resources." The preface to the Legislative Assembly Members' Handbook explains that the handbook "has legal status as a set of guidelines for the appropriate use of facilities, services and entitlements provided to members of the Legislative Assembly." The handbook sets out guidelines for the conduct of members in regard to such matters as travel entitlements. It explains the relationship between the guidelines, the Code and the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 in the following terms: Failure to use public resources in accordance with the guidelines detailed in the Members' Handbook amounts to a breach of the Members' Code of Conduct which may, in turn, amount to corrupt conduct under the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 , even if the conduct is not otherwise illegal.