HOME   >   OUR MPS   >   ROSS ROBERTSON   >   SPEECHES

It is a pleasure to address you this evening, and I very much appreciate you inviting me to your meeting.

I would like to say a few words about ethics and accountability in these politically turbulent times. Each day as I sit in the Speaker’s chair, I feel we need to have aspiration to and assurance of the high standards with which we should consider our nation’s affairs and destiny.

Here I concur with Marilyn Waring:

“Most of the people I know (and a number of them sit in parliamentary seats) are disgusted with the sandpit the House has become – and it was certainly this bad when I was an MP. We are desperate for a government and an opposition with policies that have content. We are desperate for intelligent debate about the wrinkles around the shades of grey that are the real choices. There’s tremendous impatience from many of us with the present simplistic black/white approach. We feel ashamed that a country with such a basically decent and principled population can be so manipulated.” [End quote].

At all times we must be humble, for there have been many lives wrecked by the best of intentions – just recall the ruin of the John Major government (UK) who drowned in the very sleaze they promised to expunge in their ‘Back to Basics’ policy boast.

Let us remember too that democracy is fragile, and we owe it to those who fought and fell so that we might have freedom of speech to debate the issues with passion and commitment. This we should do rather than attacking personalities, in order to haul the House out of the depths to which it has sunk in the esteem of our nation. Hyman Rickover said “Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people”.

For the last five years I have been privileged and honoured to be a part of the traditions and conventions surrounding the role of the Presiding Officers. I must personally assume responsibility for maintaining the order and dignity of the House during my sessions as the Speaker, and this fits in well with the principles of the Code of Ethics which I have proposed for New Zealand parliamentarians. Much of parliament’s real work is done in select committees, where the Chair is selected from MPs but the Presiding Speakers are not involved.

The current impasse cannot be dealt with solely by a Code or our written rules. What we need is a major rethink among politicians of how political business, political debate and government itself is conducted. For me, ethics and values are the most important issues facing the survival and development of democracy this century.

Throughout my parliamentary terms I have been concerned about the public perception of our profession. Currently I serve as Chair of the “International Council” of the organisation Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA), an organisation that is endeavouring to improve governance throughout the world. I have discussed Codes of Ethics/conduct with my PGA colleagues, and at a forum on Ethics & Accountability in the US Senate in June 2004 we concluded that transparency, ethics and accountability are pre-conditions of good governance.

The question was asked of me recently by television presenter and ex-MP Willie Jackson: “Do you think a Code of Ethics is needed, and why?” My response was “Yes”, and the reasons two-fold: first, that there were no specific guidelines about how members should conduct themselves from an ethical point of view; and second, “trust” – politicians worldwide are the least trusted profession. The following are just some of the comments which appear in a recent poll published by Readers Digest in July 2005:

- In the list of most trusted professions, politicians were number 30 of 30, behind even real estate agents, car salesmen and psychics;

- Respondents voted Parliament the second least trusted Government body in New Zealand today;

- There is no doubt that politicians have demeaned the House of Representatives in the public mind, particularly among home-owners, nearly half of whom have no belief in the institution.

These are disturbing comments and figures. Such beliefs and perceptions may, or may not, be based on misunderstandings, but they still matter. They are the public’s perceptions.

Politics is all about perception rather than reality – and it is the trading in half-truths designed to fill people with fear that is particularly disreputable. That tendency gives all in my profession a bad name.

The mausoleum for the first New Zealand Labour Prime Minster (Michael Joseph Savage) extols that ‘there is no fame to rise above, the crowning honour of a people’s love’. Modern politicians do not need to be loved but we do at least need to be respected. Sadly, research shows a decline in affection for and participation in democratic processes throughout the western world. In 2005, ‘did not vote’ finished third behind the Labour and National parties in the New Zealand election; in 2002 it finished second. The minor parties were well behind. In many jurisdictions there is a rising sense of a rift between the leaders and the led, and this is expressed in low voter turnouts at elections, trivialisation of vital issues and the turning away from service by capable people who abhor the ugly public face of parliamentary culture. I would like to see MPs working ensure the reinstatement of integrity and service for all citizens.

A great concern in the recently concluded Dame Margaret Bazley Police inquiry was the lack of a Code of Conduct, and this is one of the first points to be addressed by the Police Department.

So how do we get more people involved in democracy? First, in my opinion we start early. We should review the secondary school curriculum with particular attention to the need to develop political understanding amongst young people, and to teach them about the roles, policies and positioning of political parties as well as political processes. It needs to include teaching of political literacy, which should specifically include teaching about political parties and young people’s role in the democratic process as well as basic political concepts, so as to ensure that a strategic co-ordinated approach is taken to the delivery of citizenship education, from curriculum development to teacher training and classroom activities. It will be up to the government to ensure that examples of good practice in citizenship and political education are adequately disseminated to all schools and youth groups. We can then market parliamentary voting to the technically literate. On Sunday 4 March 2007 Estonia premiered the world’s first internet voting for parliamentary elections. The turnout was up 3% and the Estonian Electoral Committee will investigate whether internet voting was the main reason for the bump. My guess is that it was, because the 18-24s, generally much more technically literate, would have used it. We should follow suit. Our estimated 18-24s turnout, based on survey[1], in 1999 was 69%, in 2002 62%, and in 2005 60.6% - appalling.

Secondly, let me now tell you a little more about the Code that I have proposed. It is deliberately modest, declaratory rather than mandatory. There is no evidence in New Zealand of the sort of corruption that has plagued other parliaments from time to time, or that is endemic in some other countries. The principles on which the Code is based include integrity and accountability, for it is accepted that these qualities are prerequisites to maintaining confidence and trust in politicians.

By beginning simply and not sanctimoniously, we recognise that most members are hard-working and sincere. The future of the parliamentary system is in our hands, and we want an agreement about the kind of tone we wish to emanate from Parliament.

The typical purposes of such a code are:

1. To recognise that service in Parliament is a public trust;

2. To maintain public confidence and trust in the integrity of parliamentarians individually and the respect and confidence that society places in Parliament as an institution;

3. To assure the public that all parliamentarians are held to standards that place the public interest ahead of parliamentarians’ private interests and to provide a transparent system by which the public may judge this to be the case;

4. To provide for greater certainty and guidance for parliamentarians in how to reconcile their private interests with their public duties;

5. To foster consensus among parliamentarians by establishing common rules and by providing the means by which questions relating to proper conduct may be answered by an independent, non-partisan advisor.

In other words, my Code of Ethics is again relevant.

While society expects that individuals should be as free as possible to pursue their private goals, parliamentarians are always in the public eye and our actions, values, and ethical conduct send a signal as basic norms of acceptable behaviour. As parliamentarians we need to define what we consider to be ethical conduct in New Zealand, for today what is right and wrong is what you can get away with.

We are all keenly interested in sharing our understanding of our professional home – Parliament - the home where we seek to summon the common sense, concerns and commitments of our communities. Community literally means ‘together we serve’. Parliament should be the pinnacle of public service where we ensure the frank and free flow of critical analysis of the values, visions, ideas and actions of our people.

When I initially petitioned my colleagues with my draft Code of Ethics, initially some of them were doubtful, suggesting that all of my colleagues would become my enemies (not just those sitting on the other side of the House!). Then they were chastened by a referendum that cried out for a significant reduction in the number of MPs (120 down to 99), which in fact was opposite to the considered view of the Royal Commission on MMP which suggested 150 MPs.

Last year I made my third attempt through submissions to Parliament’s Standing Orders Committee to persuade my colleagues to adopt a Code. It was my third strike. I am hopeful that I might have more success on this occasion - time will tell - but if not, some of my supporters have suggested I consider legislation by way of a Private Member’s Bill.

In the late 1950s New Zealand was regarded by many as a ‘model democracy’; one for all nations to emulate. At that time, 25% on the electoral roll were members of a political party, a wealth of ideas flowing from the heartland, bubbling up to give a richly representative fund of policy to point to improved wellbeing. Today political membership is 2%. In the 1950s official voter turnout averaged more than 90%- today it is marginally over 80%. Winston Churchill used his valedictory speech to muse ‘what lies before us if God wearied of mankind?’ MPs should be more concerned about the ways in which the public have wearied of us!

I believe New Zealand has an obligation to lead with good governance, transparency and accountability. By adopting a Code of Ethics and following it according to its spirit and purpose, we can once again become known as a developing model democracy.

People are calling for a Code of Ethics for ministerial advisors [2]. I agree with that, but how much more important is it that there be such a Code for MPs?

With regard to my goal of raising respect for both Parliament and our New Zealand democracy by improving the performance of Parliament, as that recently-acquired Kiwi saying goes, it may not happen overnight, but I am convinced it will happen -

and with the impetus from the Police report it could be sooner rather than a longer term happening.

 

[1] Aimer & Vowles: ‘What Happened at the 2002 Election?’ Paper presented to the NZPSA Conference 2003; Vowles et al, Proportional Representation on Trial, p.227, 2002. The figure is estimated because this is an exit poll survey.

Chief Electoral office, Ministry of Justice: Voter/Non-Voter Satisfaction Survey 2005 General Election.

http://www.elections.org.nz/news/voter-survey-2005.html

[2] Chris Eichbaum (Victoria University) and Richard Shaw (Massey University)

 

• OUR MPs | 
• FEATURES | 
• LATEST NEWS | 
• SPEECHES | 
• PORTFOLIOS | 
• POLICY | 
• MULTIMEDIA | 
• SEARCH | 
• CONTACT US