Page 3350 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 24 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of serious concern to the ACT electorate, such that it was considered that unfair or corrupt boundaries were being drawn. I believe that, if we are to avoid that, this legislation is a very good first step.
There are other things I will say about this Bill when we come to debate the amendments. I am pleased to say that we have managed to agree on most of the amendments. In particular, I think that we have reached agreement about retaining the services of technical experts, if you like - people like the ACT Chief Planner and the ACT Chief Surveyor - on the redistribution process right to the end of that process rather than only halfway through.
I am pleased that we have retained a high quality of chairmanship or chairpersonship in the commission in the way in which it has been structured - again a process which should provide for the maximum amount of independence and fearlessness in the way in which the commission does its work - and I am pleased that the process is one which is open, as far as possible, to public scrutiny. The decisions or tentative decisions of the commission are to be made public in a variety of ways. The commission has the power to open up its processes to public scrutiny and public contribution, and that, I think, will also free it, perhaps not entirely, from the likelihood of complaint about bias or inappropriate considerations. I think this is a laudable piece of legislation and I commend it to the Assembly.
MS SZUTY (4.44): I would like to say at the outset that I feel that the process which has brought us to this debate today on the Electoral Bill has been the right process, engendering broad agreement on what the Electoral Bill 1992 will encompass. The origins of this Bill go back to the counting of the votes in the First ACT Legislative Assembly election in 1989, which was replicated in 1992. The tortuous process that consumed many weeks before the election result became known demonstrated our need for a better system of electing local politicians. The referendum held on 15 February this year finally enabled Canberrans to reject the modified d'Hondt electoral system in favour of saying how they wanted their elected representatives to be chosen at the ballot-box. The Australian Electoral Commission outlined two options for consideration by the electorate - single-member electorates and the Hare-Clark electoral system. The 1992 election should be the last occasion where the Federal Government is responsible for ACT electoral matters.
The result of the referendum was known well before my own election to this Assembly. Since that time the Assembly and the Canberra community have been patient while the Government has been preparing this legislation. The legislation before us today is the first stage in the process that will see the Hare-Clark electoral system installed for the future election of ACT politicians.
While the Assembly has been patient, the Government has not been left unaware of the urgency placed on this issue by Assembly members. A matter of public importance debate occurred on 19 May, several questions without notice have been asked, and Mr Humphries set about establishing an electoral working group. On 14 October the Chief Minister presented the Electoral Bill 1992, which will establish the ACT Electoral Commission. We will now take the step of debating both the in-principle and detail stages of this Bill, with the promise of more detailed legislation to follow in 1993. The delay between the tabling of this legislation and debate has been appropriate, as it has given all members of the Legislative Assembly an opportunity to consult, and an opportunity for negotiation to occur between the Independent, Labor and Liberal members.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .