Page 154 - Week 01 - Thursday, 9 April 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES (11.45): The motion that the Attorney-General moved yesterday in the Assembly was a very significant one. It took the initial step which needs to be taken by this parliament of indicating this parliament's support for the move by the Commonwealth Parliament to transfer the ACT Supreme Court to the control of the ACT Legislative Assembly. As such, the Opposition welcomes this motion and, indeed, fully supports it and will offer what I hope will be unanimous support around the chamber.
Madam Speaker, I think we all welcome the fact that the Supreme Court is finally coming home to the ACT by the middle of this year. I was going to say "repatriated by the middle of this year", but I suppose that "patriated" is a slightly better term since it has never actually been part of the control of the ACT Government or Assembly.
The Supreme Court is perhaps the last major State-type function yet to be transferred to the ACT. I can think of some small things, such as certain powers of censorship and so on, which are not yet in our hands; but this is the last major component of self-government which is yet to be transferred. It has come later than some of us had expected. I know that the former Attorney-General worked on this question, and I think it is very welcome to see that this Attorney-General has finally reached a position which is acceptable to the parties concerned - and I will refer to that in a moment. It complements and completes, to a large extent, the process of giving the ACT full control over its own affairs.
I think, to put it bluntly, Madam Speaker, the fact that this is happening now is quite possibly a reflection of the fact that the Commonwealth now views the ACT, and particularly the ACT Assembly, as being sufficiently mature and stable to allow us the responsibility of managing the highest court of the ACT. Perhaps I am being overly cynical when I say that, but I think that it is not entirely accidental that it is happening now rather than, say, 12 months ago. This move gives us full control over our own affairs, as I indicated, although this is, in one sense, more symbolic than real since there will not be much that actually changes about what the Supreme Court does, how it operates and so on.
In one sense it is a pity that Mr Stevenson is not here to hear this. In one sense the transfer of the Supreme Court is very much the completion of the process of actually granting the ACT self-government because, of course, there are three arms of government - the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Having the Supreme Court under the control of the Federal Government has meant effectively that one of the three arms of government in the ACT has not been fully under the control of the ACT until now. So, it is good to see that this is happening now; it does indeed, as I said, complete the process towards self-government.
I recall appearing in the Supreme Court on the occasion of an admissions ceremony on the day before the 1989 ACT election and hearing the Chief Justice speak about the process of self-government, and in particular the question of the future of the Supreme Court. I felt that he was at some pains to emphasise his own and perhaps the court's concerns about that process, and in particular about the question of the removal of judges for impropriety or misconduct. The view expressed at that time was that in the circumstances, at least temporarily, the Supreme Court ought not to be subject to the complete jurisdiction of the ACT Legislative Assembly, then about to be formed, but rather should be under, in that respect, the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .