A Difficult Dialogue: Statements of Compatibility and the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act

Abstract

As a ‘third-wave’ Bill of Rights, the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act is premised on the twin goals of creating a ‘culture of rights’ within the bureaucracy and the emergence of a rights-based dialogue between Cabinet and the Parliament of Victoria through statements of compatibility. The first objective has been advanced through a revised policy process within the bureaucracy, but a dialogic engagement between Parliament and the Cabinet has yet to emerge in a substantive way. A number of factors account for this modest parliamentary dialogue: first, the functioning of a statutory Bill of Rights in a moderately sized Parliament with a strong partisan orientation; second, the general reluctance of the Cabinet to alter legislation once introduced into Parliament despite compatibility disagreements identified by the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee; and finally, the approach by both the Cabinet and backbenchers to statements of compatibility that limit their ability to facilitate rights-based parliamentary scrutiny. This article explores the contemporary difficulties of a parliamentary dialogue emerging in Victoria that are, in large part, the result of an unintended tension between pre-introduction scrutiny by the bureaucracy on behalf of the Cabinet, and secondly, the weakness of post-introduction scrutiny facilitated by Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee via statements of compatibility.

Notes

¹The data are for the following period: 14 February 2007 to 24 June 2010. It is derived from reviewing statements of compatibility submitted to the Parliament of Victoria through the following search engine: http://tex.parliament.vic.gov.au/bin/texhtmlt?form=VicHansard.adv

²Interview conducted with C. Carli Member of Parliament, Brunswick, Chair, Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. February 10 2008.

³Interview No. 1. Department of Justice, Victorian Government (11 February, 2008) Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Interview No. 4. Victorian Government Solicitor's Office, Victorian Government (February 11, 2008) Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

⁴Interview No. 2. Department of Premier and Cabinet, Victorian Government (11 February, 2008). Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

⁵Interview No. 2. Department of Premier and Cabinet, Victorian Government (11 February, 2008). Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

⁶Interview No. 3. Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Victorian Government (13 February 2008). Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

⁷ Summary Offences and Control of Weapons Act Amendment Bill (2009) and Control of Weapons Amendment Bill 2010.

⁸Interview conducted with C. Carli Member of Parliament, Brunswick, Chair, Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. February 10 2008.

⁹Interview conducted with C. Carli Member of Parliament, Brunswick, Chair, Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. February 10 2008.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

James B. Kelly

James B. Kelly is Associate Professor of Political Science at Concordia University in Montréal, Canada. This research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada while a 2008 Visitor at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at The University of Melbourne. The author thanks David Erdos, the Journal's anonymous reviewers, Carlo Carli and those public servants that participated in anonymous interviews