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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (2 December) . . Page.. 4291 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

He has done that, I think, with some balance, and I applaud him for that. Unfortunately, the Labor Opposition led by Wayne Berry has shown none of that capacity. Everything that the Government does - in fact, everything that the Labor Party does not do - is criticised and attacked. They leave themselves extremely small parameters within which to work should they be elected in February, because much of what has gone before them are, of necessity, going to have to pick up and use in government themselves. If they have criticised it, they are going to be accused, quite rightly, of being hypocrites for picking up the very ideas and the very mechanisms which they have so roundly criticised. The $100m premium from ACTEW is one very good point from the Chief Minister's comments in question time.

So, Mr Speaker, I support the process being used here. I think the idea, for example, that I put on the table, of having a directly elected Chief Minister, was a worthwhile idea to consider. It obviously is only one of many possible formulations of government in the ACT. I am sorry that Mr Berry is so frightened of new ideas that he should feel that the conference needs to be condemned because Gary Humphries put this idea to the conference. That is a pretty strange argument, it seems to me. Before I take seriously any of the criticisms I heard from those opposite, I want to know what they will do to keep in touch with the people of Canberra after next February's election, when, according to the opinion polls, they will be on this side of the chamber running the Territory. What are they going to do? Let us hear about it.

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to make a short statement on the same matter.

Leave granted.

MR MOORE: I would like to start by quoting from page 251 of the record of proceedings. Mr Gary Sturgess, who was the facilitator of the conference, felt obliged to respond to the words of Wayne Berry. He said:

... I guess I would like to say some words in defence of the forum. I will be blunt as Chair. This is not representative democracy and representative democracy in some ways is a bit easier. This has been an experiment in direct participation. That is always messier, it is always harder, there are always questions about who should have been presented and whether the numbers were right. Representative democracy just takes away a whole lot of those disputes. It has been difficult. The time has obviously been too short, but then people have come away from work and other commitments to be here. This has been obviously a difficult process dealing with big questions in a short timetable, but I think that you are entitled to be proud of your participation in a discussion of issues.

Indeed, Mr Speaker, I am very proud of my participation in the discussion of those issues. But my pride goes much further than that. My pride goes back to 1992, when I went into an election saying that what we need is a vision for Canberra; that what we need to do is to look into the future at 2020; that what we need is a strategic plan for our city that combines the full range of things that our city does and proceeds down that path.

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