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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4904 ..

Motion (by Mr Stefaniak) agreed to:

That the Assembly, at its rising, adjourn until a day and hour to be fixed by the Speaker either:

(1) at the request of the Chief Minister; or

(2) on receipt of a request in writing from an absolute majority of members

and that the date and time of meeting shall be notified by the Speaker to each member in writing.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (10.45): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move a motion relating to the Review of the Governance of the ACT.

Leave granted.

MRS CARNELL: I move:

That this Assembly supports the joint Commonwealth/ACT Review of the Governance of the ACT, being chaired by Professor Philip Pettit and recommends that the Fourth Assembly gives serious consideration to the report arising from the Review.

Mr Speaker, it is with great disappointment that I feel I have to move this motion today but I suppose I move it with a degree of excitement as well. This week I received a letter from the chair of the joint Commonwealth-ACT Review of Governance in the ACT, Professor Philip Pettit, which I table. It would be a good idea if it were circulated as well because I think it is important that people read the letter. He advised me that he has had discussions with various members of the Assembly, namely, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Berry, and members of the crossbenches, concerning the review. Understandably, Professor Pettit was seeking an assurance that if a new government is formed after the February election there will be enough support for the review to ensure that the committee's recommendations are not shelved without a fair hearing.

I am advised by Professor Pettit that this assurance has not been forthcoming. I understand that Mr Berry in particular has advised that he is unable to provide Professor Pettit with the assurance he requested. Mr Berry expressed concern about the timing and the terms of reference of the review. I understand that he also advised Professor Pettit that if there had been any discussion in the Assembly about the review then it would not have been endorsed or the terms of reference would have been different.

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