Page 2905 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Duby: I have read every Bill that has gone before this Assembly that I have voted on.
MR STEVENSON: Congratulations. Exactly as I said. I did not think there would be many members who would be able to stand up in this house and say that they have read every Bill that they have voted on. You have just highlighted what I said. I think we well understand that there are some.
Now, reading the Bill and fully understanding it and being able to refer to Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice, House of Representatives Practice, or a dictionary, is an altogether different thing.
Mr Jensen: You wanted to abolish this, Dennis.
MR STEVENSON: You know I would if there was a vote, Mr Jensen. But while we are here, rather than bring things through this Assembly that Canberrans know absolutely nothing about, I think the least we can do is to allow Canberrans time to debate the matters.
As MLAs we need time to do that. We need time to discuss them amongst ourselves. I need to have time for a parliamentary wing gathering to discuss it within the abolish team and make a decision. We also need time - - -
Mr Duby: How do you resolve disputes?
MR STEVENSON: I resolve them very well. We also need time for assessment of the proposed legislation by the Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation Committee. It is a vital committee. It was an excellent thing that such a committee was introduced into this Assembly and we need to allow its members the time to do their job well. If they do their job well it will save a lot of problems for us.
Having read the Bill, having discussed the matter, having talked to our constituents about it, we also need time to research amendments to the Bill. We need time to have them drafted, and they could well be lengthy. We all understand that the law department cannot necessarily have these things done overnight. Quite reasonably it can take some time, so we need the time for amendments to be researched, drafted and then discussed with other members so we can get some agreement on them, and they are not a surprise on the floor of this Assembly.
I particularly make these points, as mentioned in the matter of public importance, because there is no house of review in the ACT. Were I to consider this Government legal - and when I say "Government", you know I mean the whole lock, stock and barrel, not just the people who happen to be sitting on the other side of the house - - -
Mr Stefaniak: Do you mean the whole Assembly, Dennis?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .