Page 4825 - Week 15 - Thursday, 8 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stevenson: Even more than voted for you, Michael.
MR MOORE: Even more than voted deliberately for it. It is amazing how the negative vote can go. But we do know about the positive vote, Madam Speaker. Based on this booklet on the referendum for a new electoral system for the ACT Legislative Assembly on 15 February 1992, we were talking about 5.6 per cent or 7 per cent; but over 65 per cent of people did support this system. The system was then subjected to an attempt by Labor to undermine that referendum result by providing for above-the-line voting. Madam Speaker, it is critical that this Bill goes through the Assembly today and is then gazetted as quickly as possible, so that we can have the electoral system entrenched. If that requires a compromise with the Labor Party to have compulsory voting, that is an easy compromise for me, because I agree with that 100 per cent.
I have some real difficulties with 17 members, because I do not think that part of the referendum can be binding. I think the time will come when it will be appropriate for us to have 21 members. I believe that this Assembly would actually work somewhat better with 21 members. However, Madam Speaker, it is not a huge problem, as far as I am concerned. I think that that can go to a referendum and people can consider it. At this stage, I believe that we have approximately one politician to 13,500 constituents. The nearest State is New South Wales, with about one to 2,500. In Tasmania and the Northern Territory, the figures are, roughly, one to 600 and one to 800, respectively. Madam Speaker, those figures are off the top of my head; but that is what my memory tells me, and I know that they are in the right sort of order.
Mr Humphries: That does not count local government either, does it?
MR MOORE: Those figures do include local government. Individuals are still represented in a democratic way. So, Madam Speaker, I think that there are real reasons for us to consider the issue of how many members we have; but I would argue that the time is not yet ripe for us to change the number of members in the Assembly. It is far more important for us to use at least another term to consolidate what we have and then to look at improvements. If that means going back to the electorate to argue that there is a very good reason for it, I feel very comfortable with that as well. So, although I have reservations about that particular amendment, I accept it.
Madam Speaker, I think that Mr Humphries, in particular, needs to be congratulated for putting this Bill together. It was a very difficult task to do it in such a tight timeframe, considering the difficulty he had following the passing of the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1994. Madam Speaker, this Bill will finally deliver for the people of Canberra what they have wanted in a referendum. I discussed this issue with people in Canberra and said to them, "We need to put this Bill through. This is the most important piece of legislation that we have to deal with in the last couple of weeks". They said to me, "But that was not done? We voted on it by referendum. Was it not binding?". People certainly believe that it is already binding. So, I think that what we will deliver to the people of Canberra is an appropriate piece of legislation to bind our electoral system and to remove any doubts about the electoral system.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .