Page 2922 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
To further improve accessibility, the protocol requires a contact point for information on each consultation which is being undertaken, and this could be advertised as the consultation hotline. It requires easily accessible locations for individuals to have access to relevant papers. In most cases, Mr Deputy Speaker, consultation papers should be made available through government shopfronts and library outlets, as well as to the organisations and individuals directly involved in the process. Members might be interested to know, as I have said, that we have already distributed a large number of copies of the draft protocol document - in fact, over 2,000 copies - and it has generated a lot of interest.
We have received a great many constructive comments - none from the Opposition, I am sorry to say. But I will take into account all of those comments in finalising the protocol later this year. Again, there is a contrast here between the Government's approach and the Opposition's approach to the consultation process. We have actually put out the document to the community for comment and we will respect their views. As a result of that consultation process, this protocol may well change. But, of course, what the Opposition has done is, with no mandate whatsoever, introduce a Bill on CIR, which most people do not understand and do not have a clue what it means. They know only that Mr Downer could not make up his mind about it. The Liberals at no stage campaigned on this, have not really explained it and have not really said how they will use it. They certainly have given no guarantees that they will not be abolishing compulsory voting as the next step. In fact, we know that the abolition of compulsory voting is, indeed, Liberal policy. So, it is all a bit of a worry.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe that the Government's approach to community consultation is the best way for the community to participate in government decision making because it is a continuous process across all issues. I do not believe that the referendum proposal, whatever its merits, is any substitute for that continuous process. What the protocol does is allow the community to explore all of the dimensions of an issue, and it is available on all issues. The danger, I believe, in CIR is that it does lead to polarisation of debate on an issue and is a decision making option for only those changes that require legislation. Our consultation, of course, goes well beyond that. As we are all aware, there are many aspects of community life and government which would be very hard to legislate for. Therefore, they would be excluded from the CIR proposal.
Finally, Madam Speaker, the draft protocol that I have put out actually requires agencies to undertake consultation with the community as part of their normal business. This is in contrast again to the CIR proposal, which is very resource intensive - about $1m for a referendum; one-off; yes, no, that is it, wham bam, thank you, ma'am. Madam Speaker, the approach to consultation that I have outlined, I believe, ensures that all members of the community have an opportunity to have a say in the decisions that affect them and I believe that it does outline the best way for the community to participate in government decision making.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .