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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 4 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 957 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

In tabling his amendments to the Territory Owned Corporations Act, Mr Corbell commented that this was a very important piece of legislation, as it was "a proposal which brings greater power to the Assembly, and thus to the people of Canberra, in decisions affecting assets that they own, notably Territory-owned corporations". But we really do need to consider Mr Corbell's Bill, alongside his proposed amendment to standing order 134, to understand what Mr Corbell is really about. Here lies the real purpose behind Mr Corbell's proposal. It has nothing to do with bringing greater power to the Assembly and to the people of Canberra; it is all about bringing greater power to the Labor Party, despite their poor showing at the recent election. Mr Corbell first wrote to me on 24 April 1998 about his proposal that a two-thirds majority of the Assembly would be required before a Territory-owned corporation could be privatised. So much for Mr Corbell's comments that this was nothing to do with a two-thirds majority. His letter indicated that it was.

Mr Corbell was subsequently advised that section 26 of the self-government Act meant that the Bill, to have effect, would need to be passed by a two-thirds majority and be approved by a referendum. Mr Corbell was wrong again. Now we find Mr Corbell craftily trying to circumvent the self-government Act, our constitution. The amendment to standing order 134 would enable just six members of the Assembly to decide a particular outcome concerning Territory-owned corporations. It is, by no strange coincidence, that the Labor Party has - wait for this, Mr Speaker - six members in the current Assembly. Mr Corbell knows very well what this means. This means that the Labor Party would be able to override or veto decisions that would otherwise be determined by a simple majority. This means that the Labor Party would be able to fetter the Government and the Assembly all by themselves. So much for democracy! This means that the Labor Party would be governing by default. In proposing that one-third of the Assembly should be able to override or veto decisions that would otherwise be determined by a simple majority, Mr Corbell is undermining the constitutional provisions of section 26 of the self-government Act.

Unlike Mr Corbell's crude attempt to work around the self-government Act, the Government will abide by the requirements of the Territory Owned Corporations Act and bring any proposals to privatise a Territory-owned corporation before the Assembly; it is already there. By proposing that a two-thirds majority approve the sale of a Territory-owned corporation, Mr Corbell is asking the Assembly to remove the Government's and the Assembly's prerogative in deciding these matters. Consequently, the Government does not support the Bill; nor does it support the proposed changes to standing orders. This is simply a silly Bill. It is a Bill that decides quite simply that the six members of the Labor Party - six of 17 - should be able to veto a particular piece of legislation or a particular Government decision.

As I have said, already there is legislation in place which means an amendment would have to be brought before the Assembly. This would be an opportunity for members to vote. But, not comfortable with that, because Mr Corbell obviously believes that possibly a simple majority of this Assembly would support, under the right circumstances, a sale of a Territory-owned corporation, he has decided to make sure that the Labor Party,

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