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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 2590 ..

Debate resumed from 19 June 1997, on motion by Mr Humphries:

That the report be noted.

MS McRAE (11.22): I would like to begin by thanking members for allowing this inquiry to proceed and by thanking members of the Administration and Procedure Committee for so thoroughly examining the issues. The matter arose because I asked some questions which were obviously quite legitimate and which have been asked in other places. The matters were explored more thoroughly in the body of the report that the Administration and Procedure Committee produced as a result of our initial concerns.

We see that in every parliament the issue arises, because in every parliament members of the public are invited to observe proceedings and in every parliament the Speaker's authority can be primarily directed only to its own members. There are, of course, varying sets of rules, depending on how a Speaker can or cannot deal with members of the general public. The last thing we want is for a Speaker to be worrying about the vast majority - the great numbers and hordes - of the general public that come flooding in to watch us all, as well as having to worry about the speakers in front of him. Our new legislation will greatly help the Speaker. I hope that is coming along speedily as a result of this report, because quite clearly the Speaker's responsibilities in relation to these crowds and us should be defined, separated and articulated by way of proper precinct law.

The building, as you know, was always designed with the intent of allowing the public to be here, and that is why I, more than anyone else, am sympathetic to the problems that then creates. Here we are sitting cheek by jowl with and very close to members of the general public. In one of the initial drafts of the plans for the building there was actually a second-storey gallery proposed. It was in the more traditional form of the public's access to a parliament. It is much more traditional that they are up on a different level from members, as you would witness in most contemporary parliaments. But we thought that was pretentious beyond belief and agreed, as members, that it was much more important to actually allow the public gallery to be on the same level.

In the incidents that the Speaker had to deal with, we saw the consequent problems that can be caused to a Speaker because members of the public are not only close by but readily audible. I am glad that no suggestion of a glass wall, any sort of sound barrier, some sort of grille or anything more ghastly has been made. It is quite clear that the vast majority of members of the Assembly think it is very important to be quite close to our constituents and to maintain this atmosphere of the ready access by the public to our day-to-day work. The incidents here were disruptive.

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