What process should the committee follow when responding to an application for conciliation?

Let’s go back a few steps.

When someone lodges an application for conciliation, the onus rests on them to ensure their application is legislatively compliant, and the Commissioner and her delegates have the decision-making power as to whether to accept an application (i.e., it is compliant) or reject it (i.e., because it hasn’t met all requirements).

You can request the Commissioner reject the application and you’d need to state your reasons. If the Commissioner declines your request and accepts the application, then your next decision is whether you would participate in the conciliation session. Participation is voluntary and it seems from the tone of your emails that you would rather not participate. I would urge you to look at conciliation as an opportunity rather than something to resist and find reasons to have rejected. Conciliation has a proven track record in getting workable agreements for parties which then enable them to get on with their affairs. It’s also an opportunity to learn, as a conciliator also has a role to provide information to parties.

In relation to your specific queries:

• An applicant must attempt to resolve things themselves prior to lodging an application. The ‘50%’ process you describe can be seen as a reasonable attempt to self-resolve, but it’s certainly not the only way a dispute gets resolved and the Commissioner may decide that the applicant has already demonstrated other, reasonable attempts to resolve the matter
• The fact that the meeting was recorded without your knowledge, seemingly, is not of itself reason to reject the application. You can absolutely raise that as an issue if you wish. In relation to taking legal action about the recording, you’d need to obtain qualified legal advice