Page 43 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 13 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD (4.33): Mr Kaine said in his speech that he understood the concept of the separation of powers. I believe I do also. I am sure we all do, because these days you could never admit that you do not understand it. It has brought disaster to people elsewhere. But Mr Kaine and I may have different understandings or different views.
I think the problem was expressed by Mr Kaine when he made his speech. He said that he had been proposing a collegiate system of government before the election, and no doubt he was. Then he came in here, and late last year decided to get this up and running, and this is what we have. We have half a collegiate system and half a system that is based on the Australian model of the Westminster system, and Mr Kaine is trying to merge these two. Mr Kaine, you can have a collegiate system of government or you can have an Australian model of the Westminster system, but you cannot have parts of each and try to weld them together, because then we have confusion. That is what has developed here, and this is, I think, where the problem arises.
In its pre-election literature the Residents Rally made a great deal about no machine politics, no party politics, but what they have done in collusion with Mr Kaine, as they have developed this unique system, is to give us a system of political parties or political operation that is now very, very rigid, because we have the potential for a rigid system within this Assembly. It remains to be seen how they are going to apply that potential, but I would be fairly pessimistic at this stage about the future of the openness and the freedom that has hitherto applied in this Assembly. What we have with the sharing of power - to use those words that Mr Humphries used a moment ago - is a block on the Government side of the house that also sits upstairs on the fifth floor and makes its decisions. That same block dominates this house through its numbers. You have the Executive coming down here and there is no opportunity for difference of opinion. There is this quite significant difference between what is the potential here and what happens in the Federal Parliament and in the State Parliaments.
It is true that in Australia we have Executive Government and the governments are invariably very powerful, more or less, depending on the style of government. It is true that the executives are powerful. I do not argue about that at all. Mr Jensen made a remark before that the Labor caucus can overturn the decisions of government. Well, I am delighted that they can, but now there is no caucus on your side of the house that can overturn the decisions of government because you are all in there together. You come down with your decisions, and that is it. There is no potential for a backbench revolt. The system was different - - -
Mr Kaine: Did you not feel it was that way when you were on the backbench, Bill?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .