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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2569 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

We have this fairytale notion that somehow the Opposition is here to create ideas, to do things for the good of the Territory. It is an absolute fairytale notion that is held by people who do not understand the Westminster system. We have a Government, with 17,000 public servants to support it. We have an Opposition, whose role it is to scrutinise, criticise and create the alternative viewpoint. We are not here to give policy to the Government to implement. We are here to scrutinise; otherwise we will fail.

The role of the Independents is different. I grant that. They can play it out in any way they wish. But I think an opposition or a government that shirks the fundamental conflict that the Westminster system is there to manage, to focus on, to sharpen and to allow the community to know that the alternative viewpoints are being considered with some depth, seriousness and passion is merely playing with what power is and playing with its own populist notion of what popularity is and what the roles of government and opposition are.

You may criticise what we do until the cows come home; but it is the most important role that the Opposition has - to actually face that conflict, to create that conflict, to sharpen that conflict, to argue that conflict and to ensure that the people for whom we stand are not forgotten in any debate that we are involved in. That responsibility has been recognised by the Remuneration Tribunal. It is a responsibility that is recognised by any serious commentator on parliaments. If we evolve to something different, we will evolve; but we will not evolve through the fanciful, populist, ridiculous notion that is being put before us that somehow, by magically waving a wand and dispensing with one position, we are improving the Westminster system. It is a travesty of the Westminster system not to take those two roles seriously and it is a travesty of the Westminster system to think that we should all be dancing around in a circle like sweet little children, coming to some sort of consensus and somehow magically making the world a better place. We will not. By ignoring conflict, we will not be doing our job.

MS TUCKER (5.43), in reply: Mr Speaker, it has been a very interesting debate this afternoon. I will just respond to a few comments that various members have made. The picture that Mr Osborne painted was that he did not think it was appropriate to change the way we play the game at this late stage of the three-year term. I really think he needs to understand that this is not about changing the game or changing the rules. The rules do not fit the way the game is played. That is the point I have been making. The rules are actually caught in the past when there were two parties in the parliaments. There are not just two parties in the parliaments. There is a broad representation here. This is a minority government. The way the game is played is not represented by the rules. So, it is just bringing the rules into line with the reality of what actually happens in this place. I thought that the way he explained that the current system is actually maintaining the artificial divide between the two major parties - for their own ends, of course - was quite good.

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