Page 429 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 19 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
nonsense about other people's philosophies being represented in here. Total Labor, single member electorates, first past the post, no preferences - that is what Mr Berry's proposal suggests.
I believe that nobody in this Assembly in their right mind will support this. I would suggest that even the other members of the Labor Party ought to listen very seriously to what Mr Berry said. I do not believe that they can support this because it is total hypocrisy, given the vote that we took a little while ago on a referendum.
MR MOORE (9.50): It is my pleasure to support the motion put forward by Mr Humphries. I think that Mr Berry has quite missed the point of the third issue that Mr Humphries raised - the concern at the Federal Government's apparent intention to abolish preferential voting in the ACT. It was quite clear from Mr Simmons' comments that the intention was to take the preferential part out of the d'Hondt system.
Mr Berry attempts to get around that - obviously feeling very uncomfortable with Mr Simmons' recommendations - by his amendment expressing support for a system of single member electorates which incorporates preferential voting. So, as far as Labor is concerned it is okay to have preferential voting with reference to a single member electorate system. However, with reference to the d'Hondt system it is quite clear, from the approach taken by the Federal Minister, that they wish to eliminate the preferential sector. That is the point that Mr Humphries is correctly making. We should be chastising the Federal Labor Party for even considering it.
All I can say is, "Thank goodness the Labor Party and the Federal Government do not have the numbers in the upper house and that they have not had the opportunity to push through this idea". Quite clearly, the amendment moved by Mr Berry is an absolute nonsense. Of course, it is part of what one would expect from the Labor Party. It has not dealt with the particular issue over which Mr Humphries is taking issue with the Minister, and that is the notion that he can suggest any form of voting for the Australian public without a preferential system. It is absolutely appalling. It is the sort of thing that, no doubt, Mr Stevenson will refer to as taking us back to the Stone Age; and it is, as far as electoral systems go. I welcome the motion by Mr Humphries. I am absolutely delighted to support it in its original form.
MR HUMPHRIES (Minister for Health, Education and the Arts) (9.52): Let me speak very briefly on Mr Berry's amendment. I have to say that it is most mischievous of Mr Berry to suggest that it is the intention of this motion to support the present set-up. That is not the case. I indicated clearly that what we are trying to do is to send a signal, on behalf of the people of Canberra, to the Federal Government about what we do not consider to be democratic
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .