Page 4043 - Week 13 - Thursday, 10 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, we took the issue very seriously. When Mr Humphries says that a number of submissions took a particular view, I do not disagree with that; but the comment needs to be put in context. That is what I am saying, Madam Speaker. It is also very important to add that Mr Humphries says that not one person who appeared before the inquiry thought that the legislation should be deferred. That is not true. At paragraph 8.56 of the report it states:
At the hearing, Mr Henry agreed with Mr Evans that, though they could see no reason why the Assembly, given its resources, could not amend the legislation and still pass it in the life of this Assembly, it would be wiser to defer the legislation than to pass it in its present form.
Others, like Mr Chapman, wanted it passed now; though he thought that it would be toothless if it were not binding on the Assembly.
Mr Humphries: We cannot bind the Assembly; you know that we cannot.
MR MOORE: The Electoral Commissioner's evidence raised issues that needed to be dealt with. These issues need to be dealt with appropriately when we are dealing with a new form of referendum.
Mr Humphries: After the election.
MR MOORE: Mr Humphries interjects, as he is wont to do today, "After the election". Thank you, Mr Humphries, for that interjection, because it raises an issue that I raised before: The Liberals are interested in this so that they can take it to the election as an issue, rather than deal with the issue itself. It is reasonable to say that, prior to this issue being raised in the middle of each term by the Liberals, there were only two people in this Assembly who had spoken positively about CIR. Mr Stevenson was one of them. He actually had in his platform that he would raise it. Clearly, he has a mandate to run with it.
Mr Humphries: And who was the other one?
MR MOORE: I was the other one. I have spoken on many occasions of my positive attitude to CIR, which still remains. I am not going to stuff it up with pretend CIR that will undermine the CIR process. I am not going to be party to a system which, in Mr Chapman's words, if I may paraphrase him - he is the representative of the Movement for Direct Democracy - is likely to undermine the current political system if you have a non-binding referendum. Madam Speaker, this Assembly has had enough trouble struggling to stand on its own two feet and not be the joke of the community. It is appropriate that we do this, but it is also appropriate that we take great care to ensure that we do it properly.
Madam Speaker, we already have two particular warnings about what happens with pretend CIR. The first one relates to what happened to the petition with 50,000 signatures, when Mr Humphries and Mr Kaine were part of a Liberal Alliance, and they said, "So what?".
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .