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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 2 Hansard (20 May) . . Page.. 372 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

Historically, government consists of the Crown representative - in the ACT's case, the Governor-General - the parliament and the judiciary. All of those divisions of government are separate and distinct, but they are bound together by the necessary service to the Canberra community. It is therefore surprising to me that the ACT's superior court still does not display the coat of arms of the city of Canberra. The city's coat of arms is prominently displayed here at this Assembly, both in the chamber and outside the building. The Commonwealth's coat of arms is displayed prominently on the High Court and the Federal Court, and remains displayed on the ACT Supreme Court. But I need to remind all members that the Supreme Court is not a Commonwealth building anymore and that control of its activities, as far as possible under the doctrine of the separation of powers, was transferred to the ACT.

Mr Speaker, the court consists of four judges, a master and a registrar, as well as their support staff. These officers are the highest judicial officers of the Territory. Last year, the ACT Government made the first appointment of a judge since the court passed to the ACT's jurisdiction. While it is true that three of the four judges hold commissions as judges of the Federal Court of Australia, they do not sit in our Supreme Court building as Federal Court judges. The fact that judges hold Federal Court commissions does not mean that their first responsibility is to the Federal Court. Their first responsibility is to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory and the jurisdiction that that conveys to them. All supreme courts, to the best of my knowledge, display the coat of arms of their jurisdiction prominently - some in addition to historical arms dating back to pre-Federation.

We should be proud of our Supreme Court and aim to have it proudly display the coat of arms of our city - the same coat of arms which sits in this chamber behind you, Mr Speaker. This motion asks the Government to commence that work. I understand that the work would require some sensitive negotiation with the Chief Justice and other judges; but the parliament of the ACT should acquaint the judiciary of its wish to see the coat of arms of the city of Canberra displayed, now that the court belongs to the people of Canberra.

The fact that the Commonwealth crest is still on display may simply be an oversight, Mr Speaker; but I believe that it sends an important message. It is saying that, although this is a court that is set up to administer justice in this jurisdiction, it has not accepted the transition to self-government. Mr Speaker, on the face of it, this may seem like a small issue; but we are talking about the highest court in our jurisdiction. We are talking about a court that is funded by the ratepayers of this city. We are talking about a court that spends all of its time enforcing laws passed in this place. It is important that the court accept, and be seen to accept, its rightful place in local government.

I have not spoken to the judges about this; but I cannot imagine that a simple change of crest will cause any of them grave disquiet. I could be wrong, though. We will just have to wait and see. I hope that all members here will support this motion, Mr Speaker.

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