Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 7 Hansard (17 October) . . Page.. 1750 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Mr Whitecross interjected on Ms Tucker - it was perhaps a little cross-chamber banter rather than an interjection - and suggested, "If you think this is sloppy drafting, draw up an amendment". Normally I would say that that was right. If I thought I could achieve something by drawing up an amendment, that is exactly how I would do it; but in this case I object to the thing as a whole, so there is no point in drawing up an amendment to make it work. It is true that I think it is sloppy drafting, but I am sure that it could be drafted to resolve those specific problems. However, I am not interested in doing it because in principle I oppose it.

MR BERRY (4.31): One sure thing is that when somebody does not have much of an argument in a debate they will try to recraft history. That is just what Mr Moore is attempting to do and that is what the Liberals have attempted as well. Nowhere in that document does it say "No how-to-vote cards". Stop pretending that it does. It never did say anything about how-to-vote cards. Mr Moore, no matter how you try to rechisel the tablets of stone, you cannot change the fact that the document never said it. Do not keep up the pretence. You are saying that in the referendum the words "like in Tasmania as I, Michael Moore, said" were stuck in everybody's mind. The fact of the matter, Mr Moore, is that they considered the document and nowhere did it say "No how-to-vote cards".

Mr Moore also tries to create the impression, as do the Liberals, that under a system of how-to-vote cards people do not have the choice to vote how they like. That is patently ridiculous. I am surprised that normally intelligent people would even suggest that. It just shows how misleading and devious people can be. You are perfectly entitled to pick up a how-to-vote card and not follow it. There is no requirement to follow a how-to-vote card. It advises a person on the strongest way to vote for a particular political party.

One of the problems all those opposite who oppose us on this matter have is that they have decided to go down a certain path, and they know that the strongest vote for a party is one which follows a ticket. Another thing that upsets them is that we can now argue that when we put forward our how-to-vote card we can demonstrate to the traditional Labor voters and to other people who intend to vote Labor that we have gone through a merit preselection system. We have faced our peers and the order has been settled. We are saying, "If you vote this way, these are the people who will implement Labor Party policy".

The Liberals adopted a very weak position and made the big mistake of not going down that path. We intend to pursue that course. Indeed, we are happy to advise people on how we would like them to vote and we are happy for them to make up their own minds; but we are not going to take the outrageous, weak-kneed, gutless position of the people who support this Bill of refusing to supply information to individuals at the polling place. What an outrageously weak argument you have put up!

We heard Mr Kaine arguing at great length about how the environment was going to be affected by all of the paper thrust into people's hands out the front of polling places. We have given you the answer, Mr Kaine. You do not have to thrust it into their hands. Voters can leave paper in the polling station. There will be only one sheet of paper for each voter. We have answered your questions. You can vote with us, and your argument

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .