Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Act 2024
24DApplication of Division
Start here
Get a plain-English read of 24D
Turn the raw legal text into a practical explanation grounded in Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Act 2024.
This Division applies in relation to a decision made under section 24CY by the decision‑maker for a conduct issue.
24DA Applying for internal review
Who can apply
(1) The respondent for the conduct issue may apply to the IPSC for review of the following decisions:
(a) a decision to make a finding that the respondent has engaged in relevant conduct;
(b) if the respondent is a core participant—any or all of the following:
(i) a decision to make one or more recommendations in relation to the respondent;
(ii) a decision to make a particular recommendation in relation to the respondent;
(iii) a decision to impose one or more sanctions on the respondent;
(iv) a decision to impose a particular sanction on the respondent;
(v) a decision to refer a serious breach finding in relation to the respondent to the Privileges Committee of a House of the Parliament.
(2) If the conduct issue arose from a conduct complaint or conduct issue referral, the complainant may apply to the IPSC for review of the following decisions:
(a) a decision to make a finding that the respondent has not engaged in relevant conduct;
(b) if the respondent is a core participant—any or all of the following:
(i) a decision to make one or more recommendations in relation to the respondent;
(ii) a decision to make a particular recommendation in relation to the respondent;
(iii) a decision to impose one or more sanctions on the respondent;
(iv) a decision to impose a particular sanction on the respondent;
(v) a decision to refer a serious breach finding in relation to the respondent to the Privileges Committee of a House of the Parliament;
(c) if a finding is made that the respondent has engaged in relevant conduct—either or both of the following:
(i) a decision not to make a recommendation in relation to the respondent;
(ii) a decision not to impose a sanction on the respondent;
(d) if a serious breach finding is made in relation to the respondent—a decision not to refer the finding to the Privileges Committee of a House of the Parliament.
(3) If the respondent for the conduct issue is a MOPS employee, the respondent’s employer may apply to the IPSC for review of a decision to make a recommendation for the employer to take an action in relation to the respondent.
Requirements for application
(4) An application for review of a decision must:
(b) set out the reasons for making the application; and
Section 24D - Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Act 2024 - Application of Division | Zoe
(c) be made within:
(i) 28 days after the applicant is given, under section 24CZ, a copy of the final report that sets out the decision; or
(ii) if the period within which the application may be made is extended under section 24DB—the extended period.
24DB Extension of period for applying for review
(1) A person may apply to the Chair Commissioner to extend the period during which the person may apply for review of a decision.
(2) The application must:
(b) set out the reasons for making the application; and
(c) be made within 28 days after the person is given, under section 24CZ, a copy of the final report that sets out the decision.
(3) The Chair Commissioner may extend the period if the Chair Commissioner considers that there are reasonable grounds to do so.
24DC Notice of application
(1) The Chair Commissioner must give written notice of an application made under section 24DA to:
(a) the respondent for the conduct issue concerned; and
(b) if the conduct issue concerned arose from a conduct complaint or conduct issue referral—the complainant; and
(c) if the respondent is a MOPS employee—the respondent’s employer.
(2) The notice must set out the effect of section 24DG (requirement to cooperate).
24DD Internal review
Review panel
(1) The Chair Commissioner must, as soon as practicable after an application for review of a decision (the original decision) is made under section 24DA, constitute a panel (the review panel) to deal with the application.
(2) The review panel must consist of 3 Commissioners, which must not include any Commissioner who made, or was involved in making, the original decision.
(3) The Chair Commissioner may reconstitute the review panel at any time.
Review panel may dismiss application
(4) The review panel may, at any time, dismiss the application if satisfied that the application:
(a) is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance or was not made in good faith; or
(b) has no reasonable prospects of success; or
(c) is otherwise an abuse of the process of the IPSC.
Process for review
(5) After reviewing the original decision, the review panel must make a decision (the review decision):
(a) affirming the original decision; or
(b) varying the original decision; or
(c) setting aside, and making a decision in substitution for, the original decision.
(6) If the review panel makes a review decision mentioned in paragraph (5)(b) or (c), the original decision as varied, or the decision made in substitution for the original decision, is taken to be a decision of the Commissioner or parliamentarian decision panel that made the original decision.
24DE Notice of review decision etc.
Notice of review decision
(1) The review panel must, as soon as practicable after the review decision is made, give written notice of the decision and the reasons for the decision to:
(a) the applicant for the review; and
(b) if the conduct issue concerned arose from a conduct complaint or conduct issue referral—the complainant; and
(c) if the conduct issue concerned arose from a conduct issue referral—the referrer; and
(d) the respondent for the conduct issue concerned; and
(e) if both of the following apply—the Prime Minister:
(i) the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a Minister (whether or not the respondent was a Minister at the time of the conduct);
(ii) the review decision is to make, or affirm the original decision to make, a finding that the respondent has engaged in relevant conduct; and
(f) if the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a MOPS employee—the respondent’s employer; and
(g) if the review decision is to make, or affirm the original decision to make, a recommendation for a person to take an action—that person.
(2) The notice under subsection (1) must also be given to the Leader of a Parliamentary party if:
(a) the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a Presiding Officer who is a member of that party; and
(b) the review decision is to refer, or affirm the original decision to refer, a serious breach finding in relation to the respondent to the Privileges Committee of a House of the Parliament.
(3) If the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a parliamentarian or MOPS employee, the notice under subsection (1) may be given to the CEO for purposes connected with the performance or exercise of the CEO’s functions or powers.
Copy of final report
(4) The review panel must also give a copy of the final report that sets out the original decision to:
(a) if the conduct issue concerned arose from a conduct issue referral—the referrer; and
(b) if the original decision was to make a recommendation for a Presiding Officer to take an action and the review decision affirms the original decision—that Presiding Officer; and
(c) if all of the following apply—the Prime Minister:
(i) the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a Minister (whether or not the respondent was a Minister at the time of the conduct);
(ii) the original decision was to make a finding that the respondent has engaged in relevant conduct;
(iii) the review decision affirms the original decision; and
(d) if the respondent for the conduct issue concerned is a member of a Parliamentary party and all of the following apply—the Leader of that Parliamentary party:
(i) the respondent is a Presiding Officer;
(ii) the original decision was to refer a serious breach finding in relation to the respondent to the Privileges Committee of a House of the Parliament;
(iii) the review decision affirms the original decision; and
(e) if all of the following apply—the employer of the respondent for the conduct issue concerned:
(i) the respondent is not a MOPS employee;
(ii) the original decision was to make a recommendation for the employer to take an action;
(iii) the review decision affirms the original decision.
Sensitive information
(5) The review panel must exclude any information that the panel is satisfied is sensitive information from:
(a) a notice given under subsection (1); and
(b) a copy of a report given under subsection (4).
24DF Conduct of reviews etc.
(1) A review panel may review a decision in such manner as the members of the panel think fit.
(2) The review panel must:
(a) complete the review as quickly as the requirements of this Act and a proper consideration of the matters before the panel permits; and
(b) observe the requirements of procedural fairness when conducting the review.
(3) Anything done by the review panel must be agreed to by a majority of the panel’s members.
24DG Requirement to cooperate
(1) This section applies in relation to a review of a decision on a conduct issue if the respondent for the issue is:
(a) a person covered by paragraph 6(1)(a) or (b); or
(b) a MOPS employee.
(2) The respondent must cooperate with any person who is performing functions, or exercising powers, under this Act in relation to the review.
Note: A failure to comply with this subsection may constitute a breach of a Behaviour Code.