Page 4139 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 23 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it is relevant to note, however, when talking about entitlements and workloads, that as Mr Moore says, and as Mr Humphries highlights, this Assembly is different. There are only 17 of us. Even when you do get a significant party group, such as the Labor Party or the Liberal Party, you still have only four or five members who still have a large amount of legislation, if you are in opposition, to look at. It is interesting to note that in the Federal Parliament the one Independent has been given an extra staff member because of the vast amount of legislation there.
I do not think this Bill is the right way to go. There are other means to which members have alluded and which Mr Collaery could follow in relation to additional staffing entitlements to cope with the workload and the particular make-up of this Assembly. I wonder whether, in fact, we are just too far down the track in this Assembly for that. We may well be. But that perhaps is something that should be looked at in the very early days of the Second Assembly, if it is not looked at immediately.
There could well be, in the next Assembly and in future Assemblies, a number of groupings like we have in this one. I imagine that there will be fewer next time than in this one, but there could well be a number of groupings and consideration does have to be given to ensuring that members, all members, have the ability to do their jobs properly. That might mean some additional resources being given to the more minor parties, to ensure that they can do their legitimate role properly. Mr Collaery's Bill is not, I think, an appropriate one - certainly not at this time.
MR STEVENSON (11.51): Yes, I think it is inequitable for whichever Leader of the Opposition we have at the time to have the level of funds that is available. I have mentioned before in this Assembly that no person holding the title of Leader of the Opposition ever led me, or ever represented me, and hardly ever consulted with me. So, any suggestion that we had, first of all, a leader of - - -
Mr Berry: Does that suggest that you are out of step with everybody else?
MR STEVENSON: Mr Berry suggests that I am out of step with everybody else. Well, I would not necessarily say "everybody else". I presume that there are some people in here who understand exactly what government is, and also understand that in Australia we do not have that.
I think we should look at what the constitutional requirements are in Australia. We have a monarchical system which has, as government, the Crown in both houses. Mr Prowse, in presenting his Bill on citizens referenda earlier, said quite rightly that it would act as a house of review. Indeed it would. In all parliaments in Australia except that in Queensland, which is a sad situation, we have a house of review. That was the correct system that was introduced to Australia. It should have been upheld.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .