Page 1936 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
ELECTORS INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM BILL 1994 [NO. 2]
MR STEVENSON (10.42): Madam Speaker, I present the Electors Initiative and Referendum Bill 1994 [No. 2].
Ms Follett: Is it getting better, Dennis?
MR STEVENSON: Yes.
Title read by Clerk.
MR STEVENSON: I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Often when a Bill is introduced into the house - and a Bill to this effect has been introduced more than once - we wonder who has the credit. I want to address that briefly. First of all, I once again give my thanks to the Scrutiny of Bills Committee, who continue doing a marvellous job in picking up any things that can be looked at. Changes have been made that they suggested, and I appreciate that. It is a great help. It has been referred to as my Bill, but I do not feel comfortable with that. Who deserves credit? I think the Swiss over 100 years ago deserve much of the credit. There is no doubt that the ALP in Australia, from the time of their origins in the 1890s, for over 70 years, had this principle as a major objective of their party, and they deserve a great deal of credit for that. The Democrats have been staunch advocates and campaigners for the right of citizens to get involved in the legislative process.
I must particularly mention a solicitor who must have spent thousands of hours working on the Bill and in this area. He is Keith Mortenson, a solicitor in New South Wales. He is a remarkable individual who is ever available to talk on this principle with me, or anybody else. He deserves commendation for what he has done. The New South Wales Parliamentary Counsel had a great deal of influence in the drafting of this Bill and drew heavily on the South Australian Bills that have been presented. As for my credit, I did not think of the idea, I did not write the Bill and I did not develop the idea. I certainly support the principle; but, then again, so do about 80 per cent of people all over Australia. The Bill, or information on the Bill, has gone out to over 300 groups. Feedback has come in from different individuals, groups and organisations, legal people, academics and others from all around Australia. Note has been taken of that and changes have resulted.
Let us look briefly at the safeguards in the Bill. First of all, the Bill requires a minimum of 5,000 signatures to introduce a referendum at the next election. Ten thousand are required if the matter is urgent, or is perceived to be urgent by the citizens of Canberra. A couple of very important safeguards did not come from me. An Electors Bill Committee of 12 oversees the entire process. What a good idea! That committee, the signature collectors and the scrutineers are all approved before they can do that job. It cannot be just anybody. There has to be some appointment; some approval. It is greater the more important their role.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .