Page 1959 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 24 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
that perhaps highlights the necessity for the smaller parties to have the opportunity to hire consultants - naturally, within the allocated budget.
Why can the Government not simply lay out the legislation, or lay out its plans, in advance? There really can only be two reasons: either there is a hidden agenda and it hopes to ambush the Assembly on the proposed legislation or it is simply a matter of ineptitude. It can only be one or the other.
The Deputy Chief Minister, a few moments ago, made the point again and again and again that parties have been consulted. That is simply not true. The parties have not been consulted. The Deputy Chief Minister has not visited my offices or invited me up to his offices to consult on any of the matters he suggests. There was one instance, but it was not in relation to the matters that he suggests.
He also said that the Chief Minister made invitations that we have a chat about the optometrists Bill, but these things need to have some sort of a meaning behind them. An invitation without any follow-up action is of no use. I have been trying to get some cooperation with the Government on the "Legislative Assembly (Members' Staff Restriction) Bill", as I call it, for some two and a half or three months, and that has not been forthcoming.
The Deputy Chief Minister mentioned that there was a meeting called, and this time I was present. Indeed, it is an excellent idea, but it must mean something. Simply doing something without any useful determination is of no use, because what happened last night? The Deputy Chief Minister mentioned that items of importance that we wanted to discuss about legislation could be raised. That sounds wonderful. I raised one with the Chief Minister about the members' staff Bill and what she said was, "That's not a matter to discuss now", yet it was a matter that was scheduled for discussion. So it is all very well stating that we are given opportunities. I have not been given an opportunity, but such an opportunity must mean something and be more than political rhetoric. Valid consultation is needed, and I make a plea for a more logical approach before any Bill is introduced.
Firstly, the Government should demonstrate a compelling need for such legislation. The idea of introducing Acts for the sake of introducing Acts is not on. There should, first of all, be introduced a compelling need for the legislation. Secondly, the options to address that compelling need should be defined before the Bill is introduced. These things have not been done. Thirdly, the Government should define the advantages and disadvantages of those options, once again before the Bills are introduced. Then, and only then, can we have what is truly a parliament.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .