Page 2361 - Week 08 - Friday, 21 June 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR COLLAERY (8.51): Mr Deputy Speaker, of course, I am obliged to say, with the greatest respect, that Mr Connolly is entirely wrong.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: You can speak only to the amendment, Mr Collaery.
MR COLLAERY: I am speaking to the amendment, Mr Deputy Speaker. Mr Deputy Speaker, the self-government Act requires - and I believe that members should dwell on this, particularly Mr Connolly - that all questions arising at a meeting are to be decided by a vote. That is section 18. Now instead, Mr Deputy Speaker, Labor and Liberal have combined to deem Mr Humphries the Leader of the Opposition.
The motion that is going to be passed by the duopoly reads as follows:
The Leader of the Opposition of the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory shall be -
my underlining -
the Leader of the largest non-Government party ...
Hence the question of filling the vacancy caused by Mr Kaine's resignation and, a priori, the further one, on Mr Connolly's argument, are resolved by the passage of a standing order which deems a person elected. The Government, in effect, elects its own Opposition Leader. It does that without a vote of this Assembly. By denying those on this side of the house a vote, you breach section 18 of the Act. I have a press release prepared and that will go out shortly, as soon as you go through this charade, this improper act.
MR STEVENSON (8.53): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak on the amendment. The amendment would have the effect of abolishing the position of the Leader of the Opposition and, indeed, that is what should happen. That is what we are talking about. In this Assembly there are at least six groups - five of them, after the ALP. The suggestion that one of those five groups could speak on behalf of the other four is, of course, nonsense. Yet, what we have in this Assembly is people in the Labor and Liberal parties standing up and suggesting that it has something to do with democracy.
I think it is obvious that it has to do with power. It is not to do with stable government; it is not to do with tradition; and it is certainly not to do with democracy. What Craig Duby said he was going to do was to take the position in name, but not to take the money. I suggest that, if Mr Humphries feels that the position is so important, he should take the position in name, but not the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .