Page 3805 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 8 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The advice that I have had from the Clerk thus far is that probably our own broadcasting legislation will be the way to go. To reiterate the issues that most of us have already raised, we need to look at the legal requirements, we need to look at the costs, and we need to look at the nature and style of broadcasting that we need. I, as Speaker, would be more than happy to facilitate that next time around, should I be honoured with this position again.
MR STEVENSON (4.38): The role of members of parliament is mainly threefold: Firstly, to obey the constitutional law. Secondly, to obey the majority expressed will of people. Thirdly, to make sure that constituents within their electorates are well informed on all issues. This proposal would do that beautifully, provided that certain conditions were met. There are so many benefits from presenting what goes on in a legislature, or a council, or any parliament, to the people in that constituency. One of the benefits is that it is simply a matter of general education. We have research facilities that are excellent. When we talk about issues we can bring a lot of interesting information to bear. Purely and simply from a general education of the entire population of our electorate point of view, that would be beneficial.
Another educational aspect is the issues that people are concerned about in their local electorate. It would give people a wonderful opportunity to find out what we are proposing. Many people do not realise what we propose until after it has been proposed and passed, and actually impinges on them in the community. Then they say, "Where did this come from?". If we televised or broadcast the proceedings of this Assembly, that would give people little opportunity to say, "Look, I cannot get along because I am working" or "I cannot get along because I am looking after the children", or any other reason. The night session, our Tuesday nights, would come into its own if a broadcast were live.
It has been suggested by members of parliament down the ages that communities should not be allowed to have a direct say on legislation because they are not well enough informed. I could put it in more crude terms that have been used by members of parliament over the years, behind the scenes; but let us say that sometimes they say, "Why should the majority of the community be allowed to have a say on these matters? They are not well informed". There are two points that are important here. Firstly, in surveying the great number of issues that we have surveyed during the last 5½ years, not only in Canberra but also in other communities, we have found that people usually make sensible long-term moral decisions. Perhaps there are times when members of parliament do not quite meet the same standard. With citizens-initiated referenda introduced into the ACT, broadcasting what we talk about would give people a great deal of information on the subject that would be proposed by the citizens to initiate a referendum.
I think it is vital that any such broadcasts go out unedited. The difficulty we have in Australia, and in Canberra, particularly, is the censorship by ABC radio, as an example. The Canberra Times is another example. I understand why this is so. It certainly does not benefit the people of the ACT by allowing them to have an overview of all the issues.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .