Page 4378 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 19 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
law reform and in the issue of the media and ethics. I stress that, welcome though these moves are, I confidently predict that they will suffer the same constipation as have reform moves over the last 13 years. They do not deal with fundamental issues of court rules and court procedures.
Mr Connolly states in his speech, somewhat ambiguously:
On 14 August this year this Government announced its intention to join the eastern States ...
As I understand it, although we announced that we were ready for marriage, we did not receive the offer.
Mr Connolly: Yes, we did.
MR COLLAERY: Mr Connolly interjects that we did join it. I accept that statement. We did join it. He then says:
... we have given every support to the eastern States ...
In fact, that support was already ongoing when I left as Attorney. In particular, a very innovative working party on the collateral issue of the media and ethics had been formed with the South Australian Law Office, which Mr Connolly has not referred to.
Not wishing to be churlish, but showing from the Alliance's perspective our displeasure with his comment that somehow we had a lapse in the matter and that it was regrettable that we had not joined the eastern States, let me assure Mr Connolly that I had a very good relationship over the years with the New South Wales Attorney, Mr John Dowd, as is well known. The upshot of all those arrangements was that we were fully informed, fully briefed and aware of what the processes were. We offered, on the other hand, to take on the politically perilous task of looking at the media and ethics reform. I know how perilous that was, particularly for me, and I am constrained in responding further on that, due to some legal proceedings.
I stress that the moves the Attorney has spoken of are very welcome to the ACT community. They are very welcome to all the people who are concerned about the outdated, outmoded defamation laws; but there are collateral issues that this Government could deal with without the problems of other governments which live in close proximity to media barons.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .