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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4756 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

As I said at the beginning, Mr Moore, in bringing forward this Bill, is seeking to effect a cultural change in the way the Executive operates. I reject the suggestion by the Government and by the Chief Minister that the law is, effectively, redundant because the Chief Minister always consults with us on all these matters anyway. That is simply not the case. Certainly, if the Chief Minister had consulted with the Opposition before she went to the recent Premiers Conference, we could have set her straight on whether a GST was a progressive tax or a regressive tax. Unfortunately, because the Chief Minister did not consult us, she went off and signed an agreement in relation to tax reform in the mistaken belief that a GST is a progressive tax. So, there are clear benefits in some consultation, because the Chief Minister would avoid embarrassing herself by making mistakes like that in the future.

It is simply not the case that the Government always consults with other members of the Assembly before entering into negotiations or agreements. Mr Moore's Bill, I think, does seek to raise an important issue about changing the culture of the way the Executive treats the legislature. Of course, I think any Executive now or in the future would be well advised to heed the message Mr Moore is sending in this Bill about the importance of ensuring that the legislature knows what the Executive is doing before it does it.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister): I seek leave to make a brief personal explanation.

Leave granted.

MRS CARNELL: I will be very brief, Mr Speaker. Mr Whitecross indicated that at COAG I had signed an agreement with regard to tax reform. He is wrong again, Mr Speaker; no agreement with regard to tax reform was signed at the last COAG meeting. It is unfortunate that Mr Whitecross does not worry about the facts.

MS TUCKER (4.26): The Greens will be supporting this Bill and the amendments that have been put forward. We believe that this Bill addresses the very important issue of how this Assembly deals with actions arising in the ACT from decisions made jointly by Commonwealth, State and Territory governments. We recognise that interstate agreements need to be made for a range of reasons, such as to ensure consistency in laws across Australia. The historical development of the separate State governments in Australia created a range of problems in trying to get consistency across governments in how business and individuals were treated, in the development of government infrastructure and in the setting of various government standards.

The situation of sometimes having different laws dealing with the same issue across each State government has been slowly corrected over the years, and we recognise that this process will continue. Problems arise, however, in that the development of national approaches can sometimes conflict with the democratic right of persons in a particular State or Territory to decide for themselves how they want to deal with a particular issue.

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