Page 270 - Week 01 - Thursday, 14 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
On the Opposition's amendments - the amendments are being typed upstairs now and I will be able to circulate them this morning - there will, therefore, be one legal source of authority for inquiries in the ACT. That would be the Commissions of Inquiry Act. I think that in a new body politic, the Australian Capital Territory, it is an anachronism to talk of a royal commission, particularly when we do not have a direct relationship with a representative of the Sovereign that every other body politic has. There is no administrator here; there is no body exercising the royal prerogative, apart from the Executive. Lawfully such royal prerogatives as exist in the ACT are exercised by the Executive, and the Executive is the political group that controls the Assembly from time to time. They do not have the same aura in the public mind as the Sovereign. The legal reality and theory in any other State is that a royal commission is appointed by the Sovereign, but - - -
Mr Humphries: We could fix that.
MR CONNOLLY: Mr Humphries says that he will fix that. I think these royalist pretensions to establish an administrator are deeply held by at least one member of the Cabinet. I dread to think what property in the ACT they have their eyes on for Government House. Perhaps Calthorpes' House in Mugga Way might be seen as an appropriate vice-regal residence for Mr Humphries.
Mr Duby: No, we will build one.
MR CONNOLLY: Mr Duby says, "We will build one". We will see.
I think that it would be a sensible suggestion for this Territory to adopt a simple and modern form of statute to provide it with these necessary powers to conduct inquiries into matters of public importance. The Opposition can see no justification or need for two Bills. Given that it would, therefore, be more efficient to proceed with one Bill, our view would be that those powers ought be exercised by a body simply styled a "commission of inquiry" and clothed with the powers that are presently contained in the Royal Commissions Bill. For all practical purposes, they are the same powers that would be conferred, on the Government proposal, on the body created by the Inquiries Bill which will simply be called an inquiry.
We think a commission of inquiry in Australia in 1991 is a more appropriate body to establish in a newly self-governing Territory than a royal commission. This is not merely a political point on a republican principle - members of the Assembly may have different views on the issue of whether Australia ought in time become a republic - but we think that a royal commission is an anachronism. (Extension of time granted)
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .