Page 1955 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 24 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have not seen yet from this Government, Mr Speaker, a legislative program to give effect to the impact, the bringing into law here, of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act and other administrative matters to the Territory. We wait to see the impact of the review of a large number of discretions that still exist in local ordinances and regulations.
Mr Speaker, it is the scope and character of this Government's vision that is in doubt in this motion, not the fact that this Government and this Chief Minister are new to government. It is not a fact that the Rally wishes to say that Rosemary Follett has been a total failure. The fact of the matter is that there is a corporate failure by the four Ministers sitting opposite me to ensure that they have got from their ministerial groups an adequate indication of what matters could properly be brought forward. That is not to say that the public service itself should set the tone, should look for more reform on a political basis, but certainly one wonders whether there has been adequate consultation and adequate grass-roots discussion in public service areas in relation to necessary law-making and necessary law reforms.
Mr Speaker, the final aspect of the motion is to attend to the need to properly scrutinise legislation. We have seen that this Government has finally relented and agreed to the establishment of a Bills scrutiny committee which will hopefully be apolitical and professional in its approach. In addition, the Government is hampered by not having a solicitor-general, an eminent lawyer, to pass comment from time to time on matters of this nature, and one hopes that the Government will cease seeing its Bills schedule as a method of trapping and cajoling parts of this house and will see it as a necessary joint function of government in this Assembly.
MR WHALAN (Deputy Chief Minister) (3.49): Mr Speaker, the senior lawyer opposite who has just finished speaking raised the question of, I think, the style of the Government or something to that effect and suggested that the Government had built its style based on party rooms and party caucus rooms. He spent a considerable time in his speech referring to the style of government. I notice, Mr Speaker, that no-one took the point and so I would like to take this opportunity just to relate a particular anecdote about Mr Collaery's party and relate that back to the style of their approach to legislation in this Assembly.
Mr Kaine: Is this an anecdote or antidote?
MR WHALAN: It is an anti-dope. I conducted a little quiz. I went up to a person in the street and I said, "Who do you think is Canberra's Sir Robert Sparkes?", and the person said immediately, "Chris Donohue". I went up to another person in the street and said, "Who do you think is Canberra's Sir Robert Sparkes?", and the person, a complete stranger, said, "Chris Donohue from the Residents Rally
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .