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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 11 Hansard (26 September) . . Page.. 3499 ..

MR MOORE (4.50): Indeed, less than one week, Mr Speaker. The original suggestion was that we would deal with the Electoral (Amendment) Bill Mr Humphries introduced this morning by introducing it last Tuesday and then debating it today during budget week. To be fair to Mr Humphries, he had given us an embargoed copy a week or so ago. In fact, I had time to have some amendments drawn up, but I have not had time to go through the thorough examination that this sort of legislation requires.

I think it is a far better method of dealing with the issue to extend the time. I guess it assists the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Greens, who need to put a return in this year both federally and in the ACT. The intention is to refrain from doubling up on that process - instead of having two different processes, to have one, for administrative efficiency. I have no problem with that administrative efficiency, provided that we have no loss of control in the ACT. This Bill, rather than having it go for an extra year, where they would have to do that, extends the time so that, should the legislation get through this Assembly, those parties will not have to go through a doubling up procedure. For those reasons, I shall be supporting this brief Bill.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (4.52), in reply: Mr Speaker, I should indicate to members how it came about that this Bill was necessary.

Mr Berry: You were late. That is all.

MR HUMPHRIES: I know that if you make a mistake it is always forces beyond your control; if we make a mistake it is because we are incompetent.

Mr Speaker, members will recall that the sitting dates were changed a few weeks ago to account for members' desire to have a longer period between sittings to deal with the Estimates Committee process. There was a decision made to put back the last three sitting weeks of the year by one week. That meant, Mr Speaker, that the original timetable the Government had put in place to have this legislation put forward - that is, introduced in September and debated in November, which is more than an adequate period, I would have thought - was knocked out because the date on which we are now going to sit in November, which I think is 20 November, is one day after the legislation requires the tabling of annual reports. That was a very comfortable timetable until that change was made. That change was made relatively recently. It meant having to bring the legislation forward. Mr Speaker, I originally had proposed that we do it a different way. Members did not like that idea, so we changed it. I am quite curious that we get excoriated for having responded to members' concerns. If you prefer, we will not do it next time. We will just try to ram it through.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

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