Page 4047 - Week 13 - Thursday, 10 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries asserts that the majority report shows a belief that the electorate is incompetent to shoulder the responsibilities inherent in CIR. Talk about poetic licence, Mr Humphries! The truth of the matter is simple: It is a fundamental change to the way that we practise democracy in this town. If and when a proposal for CIR is adopted in the ACT in the future, we must get it right. This community does not deserve to have a continuing "Let us fiddle with and change our basic practices because we think it is a good election issue" approach to government. There are legitimate questions. They must be responded to. The issue must be understood - not by small groupings of interested individuals within the community, but by the whole community. Maybe the issue of CIR should itself be subject to a referendum.
Mrs Carnell: Fine; let us do it.
Mr De Domenico: Fine; let us vote on it.
MS ELLIS: Why have you not suggested that?
Mrs Carnell: What a good idea! Let us have a referendum on the CIR.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MS ELLIS: I will not bend to pressure because of the timing issue, or because I will be accused of not being in favour of consultation or open government. I doubt that many in this place could consult or seek the opinion of the community more than I do. Our community deserves responsible leadership from this place and everyone in it. Just because Mrs Carnell and the Liberals think that they have produced a great election product is not good enough.
Mr De Domenico: Let us vote on the Bill. You can vote against it.
Mr Stevenson: Why do you not mention the EIR Bill?
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MS ELLIS: Let us see what a committee of the next Assembly can do to address the issues, to respond to the doubts and to work towards the possible production of a proposal that will work for the benefit of everyone in this community.
I reiterate the comments that Mr Moore made in relation to the secretariat, particularly in relation to Chris Papadopoulos and his work, and to the fellow members of the committee on what was a very difficult inquiry, given the time, but given the responsible attitude of the committee to its task.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .