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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 2924 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

I was rather staggered to find on my email system a message from our DPP disagreeing with the legislation that we are debating here. If he has a problem, he is perfectly entitled to go to the Minister to whom he is responsible and make his points. It is then a matter for that Minister whether he disseminates that information and those doubts to the rest of us, but I find it quite peculiar that for the first time in my memory - and I have been around this place a long time - on this issue, those two people saw fit to raise questions about legislation before the house. Are we going to have that every time we get a piece of legislation in future? Are those two officials going to write to us all and say, "You should support this" or "You should not support that lot."? I think it is improper that they chose to become involved in that fashion. I must say that I was rather surprised that the Labor Party grabbed that and brought it in here as though it should somehow persuade us that the course of action that we are proposing to pursue is wrong. I think that the two officials are out of order. I think the Labor Party was out of order in putting that to us.

Mr Speaker, there is a democratic process in this place. I know that some people do not like that. When I spoke before, I said I thought that there were issues in the wind that needed to be aired in this place. There were some who did not think that should occur. I do not know what they hope to gain by declining to allow us to debate the issue. We go through a two-phase process. Shortly we will be asked to vote on this Bill in principle. If, as the Chief Minister asserts, the people who are in favour of the legislation, whether you call us pro-lifers or whatever you like to call us, are in the majority the Bill will pass in principle. Then we will get to the detail stage. That is where the pressure is really on.

I presume from today's argument that the Chief Minister lumps Mr Moore in amongst the pro-lifers. You could have surprised me. I have never noticed him in that category before. Yet to my astonishment today Mr Moore is proposing amendments. He is doing what the rest of you should have done. He is proposing amendments that will make the legislation acceptable to him. That is the democratic process in this place. If you do not like the Bill, you put amendments forward. You do not do what some members did and challenge the rest of us to justify our position. You move amendments to correct what you think is wrong with the legislation. Where are all the amendments from all the people in this place who do not like the Bill that is before us? I have only two lots of amendments before me, one from Mr Moore and one from Mr Humphries.

Mr Corbell: Are you going to vote against the Bill? That is the third option. You can vote against it.

MR KAINE: You can vote against it but, given the numbers appear to be agin you, would you not think it would be worth while putting forward some amendments that would make the thing more palatable to you instead of just arguing against it and saying, "We will not compromise."? I have made the point before. One side of this argument is totally unprepared to compromise. The other side is prepared to do so. Mr Moore has recognised that. I do not agree with much of what Mr Moore has put forward but I accept his right to do so. I think that the fact that he has chosen to do so to try to make the legislation more acceptable to him means that he has come into this place with a good heart and with good intent. That is surely what we all ought to be doing.

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