Page 3799 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 8 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It seems to me that we have developed. We have grown since those days, and our community has grown also, I think, in its knowledge and its tolerance of the Assembly; but we still have a way to go before the ACT community could fairly be said to accept this Assembly as their Assembly, to accept responsibility as a community for their our parliament. I think the broadcasting of proceedings ought to assist in that regard.
I do caution members that the experience in other States, and especially federally, seems to indicate that the broadcasting of proceedings most certainly does not add to the popularity of either politicians or their parliament. In fact, I have been cautioned by members of all persuasions in other States about the dangers of broadcasting proceedings and the effect that it can have on personal popularity. I think that that is all part of the maturing of our parliament. As Mr Moore said, if it means an improvement in the standard of debate and the standard of behaviour of members, I think that is all to the good.
We support the principles of open government, and I think the openness of the Assembly has to be part of that. We have taken a number of steps in this Assembly that are not common in other State parliaments and assemblies. Our Estimates Committee process, for instance, is not shared by all States. When we brought it in it was, in fact, a quite rare process for State or Territory parliaments to indulge in. It is part of the commitment to openness, as is our statement of pecuniary interests of members and that statement being a matter which can be made public. Again, it is a matter of the openness of our processes. There are all sorts of other processes there. The committee system itself, and the consultative procedures that both the Government and the Assembly adhere to, all are aimed at improving accessibility and accountability for everything that we do.
In time, I have no doubt, the Assembly will come to broadcast its proceedings. I think that the wait has probably been worth while. As members know, we have just moved into our new and permanent home, and in making that move there have been quite a few expenses and quite a few bedding down issues that have had to be addressed. I know that some members, for instance, have had their computer systems updated. I think we all have. It is only the Executive that has not. That has been quite a cost. It has been a quite technologically challenging project. The question of furnishings and fittings for members and for the Assembly itself is one that we are going to be addressing for years to come yet.
Had we, as members, been prepared to commit the ACT community to the kind of wild extravagance of the Northern Territory Assembly, we probably would have insisted on building into our new Assembly a broadcast system. I believe that that is what they have done in the Northern Territory. I also think that, if any objects can be made of marble or rainforest timber or be gold plated, you will probably find them in multiple copies in the Northern Territory Assembly. It is that kind of a place. All members here agreed that our new Assembly would be modest and appropriate and would be within the financial resources of the ACT. I believe that that was a very wise decision.
However, now that we have not built in a broadcast system, there are, of course, costs to be addressed if we are to move towards such a system in the future. The kind of costs that I have heard - it is a rough costing and it certainly has not been in any way detailed - is that the equipment itself would cost about a quarter of a million dollars, plus staffing,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .