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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 10 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3010 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Certainly, later he made it clear that at that stage it was their preference to have four-year terms but that this should be publicly known through an election period. That happened without causing much anxiety in the community, apart from one or two people. Now that the legislation is actually on the table, it may well be that a huge amount of anxiety is generated in the community. If that is the case, then it is probably an appropriate issue to put to referendum. If anxiety is not created and there is no clear objection to this change to four-year terms, then I think we should avoid the cost of a referendum, understand that it is not the desire of the people to take it to a referendum and proceed with the legislation.

Even in the referendum legislation that Mr Humphries has tabled in this house there is a threshold point at which the community asks for or requires a referendum to be carried out. Whilst on an issue like this we would not necessarily look for that threshold, we would want to see a fair level of community discontent with what we were doing before we actually moved to put this issue to a referendum. As I say, that may well occur now that the legislation has been tabled and people can see what we are talking about. I believe that this is an appropriate move.

I refer to a couple of other small points. There is always the possibility that an October election will clash with a Federal election. At the moment, if a February election clashes with a Federal election, we change our election to April. Similarly, if there were a clash in October we would change our election to the first week of December. That is consistent with the recommendations of the Electoral Commissioner. Changing to four-year terms would also require a couple of amendments to the Act in respect of disclosure periods and records. They are in the Bill. I hope that members can see their way clear to support this legislation, which I believe is in the best interests of the community as a whole.

Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.

MR BERRY (10.50): Mr Speaker, I move:

That this Assembly:

(1) notes the review of Belconnen Bus Services by ACTION which proposes to cut services to Kippax from the suburbs of Charnwood, Flynn, Fraser, Melba, Scullin, Hawker, Weetangera and Cook and furthermore notes proposed changes to the 409 service which would severely limit access to the aged residents of Collingrove Court in Scullin;

(2) therefore calls on the Government to review this proposal and ensure that services to Kippax are not cut from the abovementioned suburbs and access to public transport for the aged such as the residents of Collingrove Court is not reduced.

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