Page 5105 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 12 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
More often individuals and organisations have been presented with a fait accompli and plans which were never going to be overturned by consultation in any respect. So, to that degree Mr Stevenson is right; consultation is not the strong point of this Government. Empowerment of the community through consultation is not the strong point of this Government, even though it tries to present, in the overall sense - with the exception, of course, of Mr Duby, so far, who has made the admission that he is not interested in consultation - the image that it is in some way interested in consultation. Well, it is not.
I think the most recent example of that is its Health Services Bill. The Government is in some trouble with that particular piece of legislation because of the way it presented it to this place and failed to consult with organisations which would be affected by it, during the contemplative stage which, of course, is the key to proper consultation; that is, consulting with people when you first think it is a good idea to do something.
Indeed, groups caught in those circumstances often do not have the resources to liaise with, as Mr Stevenson puts it, "their members, MLAs and MPs". I am not sure how MPs would be affected by Bills that are put in this place, but MLAs may not be consulted, through no fault of their own, and this applies also to organisations that might wish to liaise and consult with MLAs to turn the head of Government around on its approach to legislating. That, of course, is very important and, if one has not taken into account the resources of the organisations that might wish to have an input into the legislative process of this Assembly, then one has not considered the process of consultation properly, and I suggest that what they are doing is quite wrong.
Of course, that takes into account the "consideration of the full effects of and", as Mr Stevenson puts it, the "alternatives to the proposed legislation". I suppose that what he is talking about is whether in this Territory we have or do not have certain products which depict certain actions. I think that what Mr Stevenson is alluding to there is that he would not have time to bus in a rent-a-crowd to complain about certain publications in the Territory if he does not get adequate time - and he needs time to organise that. Nevertheless, it is a valid point that he raises.
With respect to his approach on the issue of assessment of proposed legislation by the Scrutiny of Bills Committee, I do not recall hearing any complaints from that committee that they have not sufficient time to consider any legislation that comes before the house. I am sure that if they feel that way they will draw it to the attention of the Assembly and the matter will be dealt with in due course. One would hope that any government with any common
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .