At an Eden polling booth in 1949, I watched fascinated as my father lit a match beneath a wax stick and let the red liquid flow down over the brown string on the top of the ballot box. He then waited a few seconds and brought the government seal down sharply onto the drying wax. This vote security procedure sparked my interest in the political process at the age of five.
At birth, I had contracted polio, and consequently, as a youth, I didn't take a great interest in sport. I turned instead to the world of ideas, becoming increasingly fascinated by political debate in the news.Then, at the age of fourteen, I listened to a speech on the radio about freedom and democracy, made by Prime Minister Menzies, a great orator. I was hooked.
I set my sights on the Australian senate, where I took my seat in 1991. Along the way, as I developed an academic career and raised a large family, I would often hear criticism of politicians. I would leap to their defence because my future profession was being criticised.
When I did enter parliament, I was ill-prepared for the job ahead, even after the one-hour tutorial delivered by the clerk of the senate on my first day in the job. This focused on the 'tricks of the trade.' Although I had studied government at university and was heavily involved in party politics, even this didn't prepare me for the complexity of what we were expected to deal with as politicians in the parliament, and back in the community.
Suddenly, I was working a 60-hour week across a vast territory, especially with senate inquiries, where lengthy public hearings could be held anywhere in Australia. In the parliament, sittings of the chamber and estimates committee hearings would often continue late into the night.
This high-pressure work environment, with its long hours, often far from family for prolonged periods, results in an unnatural living environment for our legislators. It is against this background, that inappropriate behaviour by politicians and their staff, should be comprehended - but never tolerated.
Over 14 years' service, I watched many legislators come and go from the parliament. The overwhelming majority were good people, trying their best to do a difficult job in a unique work environment. Like any workplace, there may be allegations of inappropriate behaviour. What is different in the parliament is that this sometimes comes under the glaring lights of media scrutiny nation-wide.
This may destroy political careers without due process.
Kate Jenkins was given the job by the Prime Minister to "lift the lid on this can of worms" of our parliamentary culture.
For example, cabinet minister Christian Porter was touted as a future prime minister, but after trial by media, he is now leaving the parliament without any judicial proof of wrongdoing. In other cases where inappropriate sexual behaviour has been alleged, complainants faced an inadequate complaints process, as the case of staffer Brittany Higgins has clearly shown.
These problems are not new, but government and parliament are now belatedly scrambling to put in place fair and just processes to test the efficacy of claims of wrongdoing.
The Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins, was given the job by the Prime Minister to "lift the lid on this can of worms" of our parliamentary culture. This is something that none of his predecessors had attempted over the decades that this situation was allowed to fester.
The Jenkins findings are shocking. Thirty-three per cent of all staff surveyed reported sexual harassment. Bullying was even more prevalent, with 37 per cent of those surveyed claiming that they had been bullied.
Jenkins set out 28 recommendations to clean up this ugly culture, including a code of conduct, holding MPs to account, having specific standards, transparent reporting systems and lines of responsibility where complaints can be made securely and safely. It is recommended that an independent complaints body oversee this.
If these findings are implemented, it should dramatically improve working conditions in the Canberra bubble. However, a more fundamental underlying problem needs to be solved - who we choose to become our MPs. There is an urgent need to select more decent men and women with real-life experience to serve in political office.
Over recent decades the parliamentary 'gene pool' of aspirants has become shallower, with too many being picked with a background of university politics, working in a union or as a staffer and then vaulted into parliament at a relatively young age. Many had developed their bullying "skillset" in their former political jobs.
The parliament needs more people with successful career experience in another field or an outstanding record of service to the community. Such a change in selecting our MPs could result in a dramatic shift in the parliamentary culture. We might also be more wisely governed.
