Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee, , 2:13:21 to 2:33:11
Senators inquire about the selection process for the new court's judicial officers, emphasizing the need for independence, merit-based criteria, and a balance of stakeholder backgrounds.
Topics: Workplace relations, Integrity
Speakers: Senator Paul Scarr, Elizabeth Brayshaw, Greg Manning, Senator Marielle Smith, Unknown Speaker
I'll move on to appointments, potential appointment processes, and I think you touched on this, Ms. Brayshaw. Okay, we'll see how far we get. Again, I'm harking back to the ART process. This will be a process which is carefully watched. And Ms. Brayshaw, you you spoke at a high level in relation to appointment processes, but is the task force considering the need for there to be independence with respect to that selection process, but also the need for there to be clear confidence amongst all stakeholders that the process of appointment is independent and is sufficiently at arm's length in terms of at least the assessment of skills, etc. from executive?
Senator, I think uh as I mentioned earlier, the and I think the Minister has said that the government's position is that there should be a merit-based process for these appointments. And so uh I think my answer would be yes to your question about that it would be seeking to do a merit-based process to identify candidates and consideration of appointments as happens now with other judicial appointments.
So would there be an independent selection panel?
Senator, these um I I note that these are still matters for uh decision by government and that that's some way down the track, we're still at those uh earlier stages around the design and um features of the court. Uh these will be matters that government will need to consider.
Will there be public selection criteria?
I think these are still matters under consideration, but I would envisage that a merits-based process on notice.
And I would just add in relation to this line of questions, said I'll be there there's existing arrangements overseen by the Attorney General's portfolio. And so it may be that they we can take them on notice uh given the task force is working there, but it may be matters that we're relying on them to answer, noting that no decisions have been made about any adaptations or changes or the particular arrangements in relation to this court. Our starting point would be looking, obviously I would have thought of those existing arrangements. There's the stated aim about ensuring workplace relations expertise, but um but so I'm just making the point we'll take it on notice, but I think we're going to have to get the assistance of the Attorney General's portfolio to answer some of these questions.
Sure, but last question before we go to morning tea. You you appreciate Mr. Manning, especially on the basis of your experience that there's always this issue of perceptions, uh, especially in this area, dealing with industrial relations, that there's an appropriate balance between people with uh legitimate union backgrounds and also people with uh who have worked for employer organisations or for employers. Do you recognise that?
Yeah, it's an issue that comes up from time to time in relation to Fairworth Commission, sir.
So is it is the task force considering ways in which to make sure that that balance is appropriately calibrated and to make sure that perceptions that that balance has been achieved in a correct way as is that on the agenda of the task force?
I I think as I said, I think the idea of a merit-based process where um and the approach that's taken now with uh appointments for judges is would be the starting point. And of course, what Mr.
Senator, in the sense that um these aren't matters that in which formal decisions have been made, but I would certainly expect that the task force is turning its mind to how to achieve uh a balanced uh a court that's balanced merit selection processes and that and having that workplace relations expertise that the government's committed to.
Um thank you, Senators. We'll now suspend for 15 minutes, which means we're returning at 1116. Committee will now resume.