Page 3797 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 8 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the calibre of the Assembly. Speaking of the calibre of the Assembly, Madam Speaker, I think we might also see a much higher quality in speeches by members if they were conscious of the fact that any part of their speech could be used from a recording rather than simply being recognised by the number of people currently in the gallery. That would be interesting. I think, Madam Speaker, that it has those benefits. It would also encourage members' attendance in the chamber, knowing that they are always being recorded. As we know, Madam Speaker, there are some members who are very keen to be in the limelight and to be on camera all the time. At the other extreme, Madam Speaker, there is one member who seems to be very rarely here, other than in question time.
Mr Humphries: Name him; name him.
MR MOORE: Madam Speaker, I hear a call to name him. I will not do that, Madam Speaker. The spirit in which I raise this matter of public importance today is to seek support from all members. Although it is not amongst our highest priorities, it is something that we ought to be dealing with. If any of the members here are in the next Assembly, they might raise the issue then. Should I not be here, I would be happy to pass on my draft Bill.
It is also important for us to compare the ACT Assembly with other parliaments. The ACT, in many ways, has been a leader in procedural reform, I think, in terms of our parliamentary processes. The current debate before the Select Committee on Community Initiated Referenda is part of that whole debate. In fact, Madam Speaker, in the evidence you presented to that committee you raised a whole range of issues as to how we can become publicly more accountable; how we can bring about changes to procedure in the ACT; how we can pick up good ideas from other parliaments as to how we can improve our procedures. In the Northern Territory, in New South Wales and in the Federal Parliament there is some form of broadcasting, and I think it is important for us to recognise that what we are seeking to do is not to break the ice in this way but rather to follow some other sensible procedures.
I note, Madam Speaker, that in the guidelines in the Federal Parliament there is an issue about when somebody has been asked to withdraw a statement. That statement having been withdrawn, it ought not then be reported. Once something is withdrawn, in terms of the Assembly, it ought not be part of a reporting procedure. If there is live reporting of the Assembly, that is not such a critical factor. Somebody who is listening to the whole process live rather than taking snippets can hear somebody raise an issue, can hear that they are asked to withdraw it, and can hear that they are forced to withdraw it; so the matter is dealt with in its whole context. I think the reason for that part of the guidelines in the Federal Parliament, in terms of their broadcasting of proceedings, was to ensure that when somebody has been made to withdraw a comment it cannot be taken out of context and left as though it was made without reference to it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .