[Volume:654;Page:3072] 
This is a short bill that provides an interim definition for the term “funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes” for the purpose of clarifying the principal duties of the Parliamentary Service. The bill provides an interim definition that is very similar to the meaning set out in the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Act 2007 which expires on 1 July 2009. 
Generally speaking the bill maintains the legislative framework that has been in place since legislation was passed in 2006 and preserves the convention observed by members of Parliament before 2006 which was that Parliamentary publicity entitlements should not be used for electioneering. As I have said this has been a convention for many years. It was first provided for in legislation in 2006. The interim arrangements that were made in 2006 were renewed in 2007. Extending the current interim definition by passing the legislation will ensure certainty and transparency for all parties while a permanent definition is developed and enacted. 
If the definition lapses we will return to the unclear and uncertain situation that followed the Controller and Auditor-General’s inquiry into  
Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election 
. That inquiry highlighted the need for Parliament to define very clear rules about services and funding for parliamentary purposes and particularly the need to make a distinction between publicity that is for a parliamentary purpose and publicity that is not for a parliamentary purpose because it is by its very nature electioneering. The bill preserves the relatively simple and straightforward provisions of the current interim Act and maintains the long-understood rule that members cannot use the fund for publicity or communications that solicit votes for themselves or their parties that solicit donations or that solicit for membership of their parties. The bill enables members to get on with the job they were elected to do. It also enables the Parliamentary Service to do its job and avoids creating an environment of uncertainty for officials while the electoral finance review is in progress. 
I think it is worthwhile reminding the House that the history of the interim definition is that the Controller and Auditor-General’s report on advertising expenditure during the 2005 general election concluded that some of the expenses that were met from the Vote Parliamentary Services appropriation were in fact election expenses and should not have been paid by the Parliamentary Service. Members will remember that there were some famous examples of that. The most notable was the instance of the Labour Party’s pledge card when the Parliamentary Service was required to pay for—not just in the 2005 election but also during the successive election—a pledge card that essentially outlined the Labour Party policy that would form the basis of any Government action should Labour be successful in being elected. Of course in 2005 a Labour Government was elected. The Controller and Auditor-General brought down his report and as a consequence a process was enacted to see that the money was refunded to the Crown. 
Following the Controller and Auditor-General’s report there was a need to establish and define exactly what “parliamentary purposes” were and in particular what was meant by “electioneering” when considering communications and publicity by members and parliamentary parties. Concern was also expressed that while the Controller and Auditor-General’s report focused on the advertising expenditure it had implications for all expenditure under the Vote Parliamentary Services appropriation. The Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Act 2006 was subsequently introduced to give clarity to the phrase “parliamentary purposes”. One of the little-known facts is that the uncertainty created by the Controller and Auditor-General’s report at that time might have meant that all expenditure by all parties on any matter could have been considered somewhat illegal at that time. The legislation specified that publicity was within the scope of “parliamentary purposes” unless it included explicit electioneering. Basically the Controller and Auditor-General said and the law at the time was changed to say that material could not explicitly seek votes donations or party membership. Although that had been the practice of political parties for some years the Auditor-General’s report left open the question of what could be considered in that regard. 
The 2006 Act expired in 2007 and was subsequently rolled over into the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Act 2007 which expires on 1 July 2009. The current interim definition needs to be rolled over to avoid a requirement of the Parliamentary Service to apply and observe a narrower definition of “parliamentary purpose” developed by the Controller and Auditor-General. The interim definition provides a brightline test with a very clear guide about what is prohibited. That is generally considered to be satisfactory because it has stood the test of time. There were no incidents such as occurred in 2005 repeated in 2008. It has been maintained through two interim statutes which have been in place for some 2½ years. The bill provides an interim meaning that is substantively the same save for some minor technical changes which have been included. It has proven to be administratively practical by the Parliamentary Service since introduction. There has not been the need to require major changes in the practices of members and parties which would have been the consequence of the Controller and Auditor-General’s approach. 
The interim definition is clear about the publicity material that can be funded using parliamentary funds. It is preferable to have the interim definition continue so that the Parliamentary Service is not faced with having to develop new policies and guidelines for members before having to respond to any requirements that could arise from the electoral finance review. It is more sensible to allow this review to be completed and in the meanwhile for the current definition to continue so that policies and administrative guidelines need not be changed twice in the next 18 months. 
Developing a permanent definition has taken longer than was originally envisaged. The Government has already signalled that it intends to review the electoral finance rules and will soon be releasing a discussion paper to facilitate that. It is worth noting that all political parties have signalled a willingness to participate in that review in order that there is settled law around electoral financing for future elections. Therefore it seems reasonable to allow the current legislation for the definition of “funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes” to continue so that where any changes need to be made they are done in conjunction with that electoral finance review. The Government expects the review to be completed and any resulting legislation to be enacted in this term of Parliament. That is why the bill provides an expiry date of 31 December 2010—that is we expect the permanent definition to be developed by that date. 
Although the bill maintains the status quo in most respects there are a small number of technical changes to be included. The changes are as follows. First the bill covers more than one financial year so the reference to appropriations needs to reflect that fact. Secondly the new meaning of the bill excludes reference to inter-parliamentary travel programmes as that is not funded from Vote Parliamentary Service but from Vote Office of the Clerk; it does not need to be there. Thirdly the bill has been drafted to take account of the Parliamentary Service Amendment Act 2008 which allowed for the Speaker to make directions for services and funding entitlements to be available to certain electoral candidates in periods between polling day and the declaration date—that is where a candidate is deemed to be elected on election night but not sworn in for some time later. That interim period left them totally uncovered. This bill takes care of that matter. 
In the meantime the interim definition is consistent with the purpose of the appropriations and has set what is considered to be an acceptable threshold for material to be considered as electioneering and therefore outside the scope of being regarded as for parliamentary purposes. I commend this bill to the House. I indicate that the bill will be referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.