Page 442 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 19 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
after this debate today there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that he will now be consulted. It is quite clear that there is an enormous division in the Government ranks on what is their preferred system. We have heard Mr Kaine and, indeed, Mr Stefaniak speak glowingly of the Tasmanian system, the Hare-Clark system - - -
Mr Kaine: I did not talk about the Tasmanian system. I do not know who you were listening to.
MS FOLLETT: We have heard Mr Humphries talking about the d'Hondt system. Mr Speaker, we have heard those opposite endlessly complain about the Federal Labor Government inflicting the modified d'Hondt system on them. They are, of course, misrepresenting that situation entirely.
Mr Kaine: Which is what you are doing.
MS FOLLETT: The very amendments that we refer to and that caused the difficulties last time are known as the Hill amendments. Senator Hill is a Liberal. It was the Liberal Party and the Democrats in the Senate who brought us this bizarre system - this bizarre system which is now being spoken of in glowing terms by those opposite.
Mr Kaine: This bizarre system was a product of the Commonwealth Parliament - a Labor Government, remember.
Mr Jensen: Tell the truth. Tell the truth, Rosemary.
MS FOLLETT: If it had been possible for the Federal Labor Government to institute the electoral system of its choice, I assure you that we would now be enjoying single member electorates. It was because of the fact that Labor does not have the numbers in the Senate, and was obliged to debate and negotiate with the Liberal Party and with the Democrats, that we now have this situation. Let us be very clear about that. I know that you all try to skate away from recognising the blame of your parties, but that is the fact. It is a matter of historical fact.
Of course, what we now see is that the Liberals in this place realise that that is the only possible way they might ever be able to stitch up a government, that is, by using that endless preferential count to get their little mates up like the Residents Rally and the No Self Government people and form a coalition. They realise that that d'Hondt system that we had inflicted on us last time was the best gift the Liberal Party could ever have had. We are now seeing their agenda exposed. That is what they wish to keep.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Federal Labor Party genuinely wishes to improve the current system and is working towards that. We have heard, especially from Mr Humphries and from other speakers opposite, that they are quite satisfied with the current system. They are very quiet over there at the moment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .