Page 401 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 19 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
support of the Labor Party by about three times. Yet the Labor Party thought it had a mandate for eight or nine months, and they have kicked and screamed and shouted ever since we removed them from office. If there is a mandate, let us get down to what this mandate is really about. There are four originally elected members of the Liberal Party on this side of the house and, if we are going to talk about a mandate and what we went to the electorate with, I think it is very easy to demonstrate that the Liberal Party went to the election with a very firm commitment to an electoral system. It is in our policy papers. If you have not read them, I suggest, you do. To argue that we do not have any kind of a mandate is absolute rubbish.
For the Labor Party to claim, on the other hand, that it does have some kind of mandate is equally rubbish because, when you get down to it, the Labor Party has only five members out of 17, and that says something about the so-called mandate that you people claim. It is a spurious debate.
Mr Connolly: I think 32,000 votes to 21,000 votes is the - - -
MR KAINE: It is a spurious debate, Mr Connolly, no matter how you couch it and in what terms you couch it. To address the specific question that is before us, and that is the question of a referendum - - -
Mr Berry: Yes, about time.
MR KAINE: You, no doubt, will spend most of your time ripping into the Residents Rally as though that is some sort of a contribution to the debate.
Mr Berry: I will save some for you too.
MR KAINE: That is fine, but you will have difficulty finding anything to criticise me about when it comes to electoral systems and referenda. I have always made quite clear what my view and the view of the Liberal Party is. I have always made it quite clear that we are in favour of a referendum. So I do not quite know how you are going to criticise us. That view has been put strongly from the very first day. It was and is my position. So I will be interested to see how you think you can attack me on the basis of this motion that is before us. If you want to range into the esoteric, like Mr Connolly did, and material that has nothing to do with the motion before us, then you might find something to be critical about; but I very much doubt it.
This is an important motion that is before the Assembly and I would just like to recommend some caution. I know that it is not the popular thing for members of one party to pay tribute to the work of members of another party, but I think that in this debate we should not denigrate the work
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .