Page 931 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of his students who had not put in the necessary work. Maybe he will not give this report a good mark. However, a parliamentary committee report, from my point of view, does not produce the numbers needed to make the Government think again about the future development of our city-state.
At this stage, I think it appropriate to comment on some aspects of the report. In paragraph 2.24 the majority committee report says that the committee does not support a referendum. As members are no doubt aware, I dispute this comment and, in fact, I have suggested that a referendum on the matter should be held. I am disappointed that the majority report from the committee does not fully explain the reasoning for this conclusion. I would be prepared to accept the results of such a plebiscite, provided there were no problems with the questions being used, and would seek to ensure that all interested parties were involved in developing the question or questions.
However, my report provides a compromise solution to this problem because of the cost of a referendum. Once again, all the key peak groups should be involved with the question or questions, and I would accept the results. In other words, what I am talking about is that we should have a properly constructed poll to enable a plebiscite of a lesser degree to take place. However, I think it important to ensure that the decision on this issue should, in the first instance, be provided by a free conscience vote on the issue on the floor of this Assembly.
Reference to things academic - and I refer back to my colleague Dr Kinloch - reminds me of the need to put in the effort if one wants results. It is also important to ensure that the work one does on a subject is balanced and looks at a number of options and arguments before coming to a final conclusion. At this juncture, Mr Speaker, I would like to suggest that the Government's advisers have been misled by an illusion, an illusion that a casino on section 19 will be the answer to all our problems in the construction industry, for tourism and for our budget.
I make the analogy with the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow; the quick-fix solution to all our problems. I note, Mr Speaker, that there was a comment made on the radio on the huge increase in gambling turnover at this time of economic stress. It seems that when things are tough we, in Australia, seek to find that elusive pot of gold that will solve all. Any of us who have ever put in a dollar or two, or even more in some cases, which I do not propose to mention here, know deep down that despite our hopes for the big win we will eventually lose out.
It is this sort of bankrupt, starry-eyed thinking, Mr Speaker, that we in Canberra risk repeating if we accept the "take it or you won't get it" argument we have had put to us each time the issue has been raised. In my report I have referred to the problems that come with being at the end of the line with a new idea. I have no doubt that the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .