Page 3632 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 8 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, I still have serious concerns about some elements of the Bill, and I know that others in this place do as well. I have to say at the outset that I will not be a party to legislation in this place which either is or has the potential to be substandard in some way. I cannot be sure that this Bill, which was presented in its final form just 20 days ago, albeit similar in some respects to legislation tabled at the beginning of this year, is entirely up to scratch, and for that reason I will be supporting the motion foreshadowed by Mrs Carnell to move this matter to the Social Policy Committee for consideration.
We have seen tremendous angst on the part of the Government, tremendous stamping of irritated feet, because of this view that this should be adjourned. Madam Speaker, that attitude reflects, in my view, an approach to the conduct of legislation which I will never accept, and that attitude is that the passage of a Bill through parliament is the last and the least important stage - that the legislation needs to be put through in order to put it on the statute books. There seems to be the view in some quarters that parliament is merely a rubber stamp which simply puts its imprimatur on legislation already worked out carefully by the Executive in other places. I know that I sound like a broken record on this subject because I have said that many times before; but unfortunately, Madam Speaker, it has to be said again and again because this Government, regrettably, does not appear to be unwilling to keep testing the issue.
The Minister in particular has been extremely upset about the approach that has been taken, and I assume that we will hear his point of view in the near future. He said earlier in the debate that the community feels jilted because the Assembly has had the audacity to want to refer this matter to a standing committee of the Assembly for examination for a couple more months. I must state my view, Madam Speaker, in response to that: It is not the role of government to decide what is or is not the view of the community. The Government is a single party which received a large percentage of but by no means a majority of the votes at the last ACT election. The entire Assembly is the best indicator of the view of the community, and the entire Assembly must have the chance to consider properly legislation which is put before it. If the Assembly, at least in its majority, cannot approve that legislation, it should not go ahead.
Madam Speaker, I have concerns which I do not wish to air tonight in great detail. There was extensive consultation by my party some months ago - in fact, I think, in the middle of last year - particularly about the vexed question of access to information. I remain concerned about that issue. The view which was put to my party and which my party has adopted as a result of consultation it conducted at that time is a different view from the one which is put forward in Part V of this Bill. I am prepared to concede the possibility that that view is no longer the correct one and to consider whether that should not take account of changes in important places like New South Wales. I am certainly mindful of the experience which has occurred in New South Wales and that certain things have happened or not happened in New South Wales which might lead us to believe that we can accept some of the provisions in this arrangement. But, Madam Speaker, I am not yet ready to reach that conclusion and I want to make sure that I can reach that conclusion before I support this Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .