Daily Prayer

In committee:

Ms PENNICUIK (Southern Metropolitan) — I move:

That this house requires the Procedure Committee to inquire into and report no later than 1 December 2016 on a suitable alternative to the daily prayer, including looking at options adopted by other parliaments, and calls on the committee to request submissions from the public and conduct public hearings in the completion of its inquiries.

The purpose of the motion is to charge the Procedure Committee with considering options to the current practice of reciting a particular version, and only that version, of the Lord's Prayer, which is the traditional Anglican version. That is the daily prayer that is read by the President every morning according to the standing orders. The Procedure Committee is the custodian of the standing orders, and that is why this motion is directed to the Procedure Committee.

The motivation behind my motion is to look at alternatives that already occur in other parliaments in Australia and across the world which would better reflect our multicultural community in Victoria. This is an issue which is often raised with me by people in the community, and although change in Australian parliaments and others has been met with much resistance, I think the call for a change in this regard will continue, and it is a valid issue that people raise in that the current proceedings of the Parliament are not reflective of the community at present. The community would like to see the proceedings of the Parliament reflect the community as a whole, and at present the daily prayer as is currently practised does not.

I understand that some people will have and do have strong views on this issue, but I also know that there is support amongst individual MPs for the Parliament to look at other options, and there is support in the community for that to happen as well. As a member of the Procedure Committee and as a longstanding member of the former iteration of the Procedure Committee, the Standing Orders Committee, I have had a long interest in the proceedings of the Parliament as outlined and decided by that committee and outlined in the various versions of the standing orders and sessional orders that we have adopted to govern the proceedings in the Parliament.

I would also be keen to see the Procedure Committee look at other issues as well, such as family-friendly hours, which we now have in the Legislative Assembly, but the operation of the Legislative Council is lagging behind the Assembly in terms of family-friendly hours. That is another important issue I think the committee could be looking at, even though it is not part of my motion. If the committee meets, it could look at that issue. Also, one of the other issues that is outstanding is the operation of the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee. That could and should be looked at by a joint meeting of the Procedure Committee and the Legislative Assembly Standing Orders Committee, and there are a variety of other matters that the committee could look at.

I did circulate to the party leaders and whips and to the crossbenchers a document that outlines some of the changes that have happened in places around Australia and in other parts of the world with regard to the opening of a daily meeting of the Parliament. What that shows is that most Australian parliaments still have the daily prayer, and most now have acknowledgements of country or acknowledgements of the traditional owners as well. For example, in the commonwealth House of Representatives, the Tasmanian House of Assembly and Legislative Council and the ACT Legislative Assembly the acknowledgement is made before the daily prayer. In the commonwealth Senate, the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, the Queensland Legislative Assembly and the South Australian House of Assembly and Legislative Council the daily prayer precedes the acknowledgement of country or traditional owners. More recently, as we know, the Victorian Parliament has included an acknowledgement of country in both houses at the beginning of each week.

Interestingly, the only Australian Parliament that so far has moved away from the daily prayer in its routine is the Parliament of the Australian Capital Territory. In 1995 it moved away from that and instead reserves a time of silence when members can either pray or reflect. Section 30 of the ACT Legislative Assembly standing orders reads:

Upon the Speaker taking the Chair at the commencement of each sitting, and a quorum of members being present, the following shall be read:

Members, at the beginning of this sitting of the Assembly, I would ask you to stand in silence and pray or reflect on our responsibilities to the people of the Australian Capital Territory

Without wanting to pre-empt the outcome of any deliberations of the Procedure Committee, I find that that particular way of starting every day is one that includes everybody. Nobody is excluded by being asked to stand in silence and pray or reflect on the responsibilities to the people of, in this instance, the ACT, but of any place in which a particular Parliament may be.

There are other examples that I included in my information sheet. They do not cover every Parliament in the world; they are just some examples that the parliamentary library was able to gather for me in some research it did in 2012 when I first raised this issue in the Parliament. The library had another look at it for me last year and provided some examples from around the world. I thank the library for carrying out this research for me. I asked the library to concentrate on the Westminster systems around the world and also on the European Parliament and other examples where the traditional saying of a prayer may have been changed and a different start of the day instituted.

In Canada some of the provinces do not open their proceedings with a prayer. The Legislative Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador has never opened its Parliament with a prayer and neither has the Assemblée Nationale Québec. It has never used a prayer and in fact has a similar opening to that of the Australian Capital Territory, which is a moment of reflection by members of the Assembly every morning.

There are a range of arrangements across the states of the United States. For example, the Massachusetts Senate does not open each sitting day with a prayer but will use a prayer on special occasions. People may have realised that when the constitution was changed in South Africa — I think it was fairly widely publicised at the time — it opened its proceedings every day with a moment of silence, which is described as 'a moment of silence, silent prayer or meditation practised at the discretion of each member'. The reason behind that is to make it very inclusive for every member and for that member to use that silent moment of meditation to think about things of importance to them and to think about the importance of the job they are doing for the people of South Africa.

The Riksdag, the Parliament of Sweden, is another example where there are no prayer readings before debates. However, before the opening ceremony every autumn there is a short service, attendance of which is voluntary for MPs. It also has a small room for contemplation in the house. I know we also have that in the federal Parliament. In fact only last night we heard a former federal MP talking about that very thing. Tim Fischer was here launching a book written by Colleen Lewis and Ken Coghill about the need for professional development for MPs. In launching the book he spoke about often using the contemplation room in the federal Parliament.

No prayers are read at the European Parliament, and I think that is important. It explains in a publication that it is due to the fact that the European Parliament places great importance on its secular character and because it is composed of members belonging to many different creeds. I am very attracted by the idea of the separation of powers and the separation of church and state and that wherever possible the proceedings of parliaments, governments and public institutions should be secular. The European Parliament also refers to members belonging to many different creeds.

I took the opportunity to read the most recent census of 2011 — this year is a census year — and to look at the reported religions of Victorians. It is interesting to see under 'Religious affiliation' that of those in Victoria who responded to say they had a religious view, the top response, at around 25 per cent, was Catholic. The next group was 'No religion' at 22 per cent. That was followed by Anglican at 17 per cent, the Uniting Church at 5 per cent and Eastern Orthodox at 2.5 per cent. Of course many other religions are represented in Victoria, including Islam at around 3 per cent and Judaism at around 1 per cent. As I said, there is also a group 'No religion' at 22.3 per cent. Around 8.5 per cent of people did not state any religious affiliation.

There are a large number of Christian denominations mentioned such as Anglican, Baptist Brethren, Catholic, Churches of Christ, Eastern Orthodox, Jehovah's Witnesses, Latter-day Saints, Lutheran, Oriental Orthodox, Other Protestant, Pentecostal, Presbyterian and Reformed, Seventh-day Adventists, the Uniting Church et cetera. They make up around 55 per cent of the Victorian population. Other religions represented in the Victorian population include Hinduism, Islam and Judaism, as I mentioned. Also there are the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander religions. The census also mentions 'No religion stated' or 'Other non-specified religions'.

Many of those religions are represented in this chamber and indeed in this Parliament. We start every day with a particular denominational Christian prayer, but I do not think anyone could argue that while it may be traditional it is no longer representative or reflective of the general community in Victoria. I believe it is time for the Parliament of Victoria to look at this issue and perhaps look at what goes on around the rest of the world with some of the examples I have mentioned.

I am now going to refer to our local councils. It is not an exhaustive list, but I did a bit of a ring around of some of the local councils. Many of our local councils are ahead of us in this regard.

For example, I understand that Casey City Council rotates different types of prayer. Yarra City Council has not had prayers for at least 20 years. There are no prayers at the Surf Coast Shire Council, and I am advised that there was a lot of attention when that particular council replaced its prayer with an oath, which is said by one councillor while the rest of the councillors stand, and that while that was controversial at the time, it no longer is and everyone is relaxed with that. Of course it allows the councillors to reflect on their responsibility to the community which they are serving. The City of Melbourne begins its meetings with an acknowledgement of the traditional owners, as does the City of Moreland, which begins with an acknowledgement of the traditional owners and a recognition of the cultural diversity in that community.

In Glen Eira City Council there is no prayer, but there is an acknowledgement of the traditional owners and a reiteration of the obligations of the Local Government Act 1989, which are recited, again, to remind the councillors of what their responsibilities to the community are. It is very similar in Ballarat, where there is an acknowledgement and a recital of the affirmation or oath. Some councils, such as some of the country councils and the City of Stonnington, still do have their prayer.

I had a look at the minutes of the last four meetings of Greater Dandenong City Council. That council has prayers of the different faiths. That was actually started, I am advised, by the former City of Springvale, which developed its interfaith network in 1989, when it merged with the former City of Dandenong and the City of Greater Dandenong came into being. With over 150 nationalities, 200 languages and dialects and 100 faiths, it has been a central part of that council to rotate the openings of its council meetings so that every meeting is opened with an address by a member of a different part of the community. For example, on 15 March the meeting was opened by a representative of the Sikh community, on 22 February it was opened by a member of the Islamic community, on 8 February it was opened by a member of Jewish community and on 25 January it was opened by one of the local Indigenous elders. You can go back through all the minutes to see how the different meetings were opened by different members of the community.

That is what I am really looking to do with this motion — for us in the Victorian Parliament to consider the community that we represent and how we could open every parliamentary day with a procedure, I suppose, or an address or whatever the Procedure Committee can recommend to the Council that better reflects the community and also, as some of the examples I have raised today show, turns our thoughts towards why we are here, who we are representing and what our obligations are as MPs.

In fact having attended the Australasian Study of Parliament Group forum last night, which was about the professional development of MPs or the lack thereof and how its survey and the research it for its book found that many MPs across the world and in Australia have struggled with what their role is, I think it might be really worthwhile every morning for us to have a think about that in some sort of silent reflection or to incorporate some words that remind us of what we are here to do, what our role is and what our responsibilities are as MPs.

I put this motion forward in good faith, if I can say that. I understand that some people have very strong views, but I do understand that there are others in the chamber and in the community who understand that it really is time for us to be aware that perhaps the way we start every parliamentary day is not totally inclusive of everybody in the chamber. I have now passed five years and I am into my sixth year where I have not attended the daily prayer. Every single day I do not attend the daily prayer, and I am in that time span with my colleague Mr Barber. Mr Barber and I never attended prayer in the last Parliament, and neither did a former member for Northern Victoria Region, Ms Candy Broad, who also stood outside every morning.

Of course now every day there are at least seven of us not attending prayer and sometimes on the odd occasion even more, so 20 per cent of this chamber is often not attending the prayer. I do not attend because I believe that the Parliament should be secular, but as well as that I believe what I have been saying — that whatever we open the day with needs to be more inclusive and more reflective of the community. I do not pretend to speak for anybody else's reasons as to why they stay out. I do understand that not all of it is necessarily because everybody who is standing outside has no religious belief or faith but that they may also share the view that the current procedure is not as inclusive as it could be.

I think it is time in the community and it is time in the Parliament for us to take a look at this issue. It is something that the Procedure Committee could do easily by looking around the world and recommending to the chamber something that would better reflect the people of Victoria. I commend my motion to the house, and I am very much looking forward to hearing what other speakers have to say on it.