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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 9 Hansard (7 September) . . Page.. 2973 ..


MR BERRY (continuing):

That surprised me a little, but that is not to say there is anything untoward about the process that has been followed so far. I was a little curious about that.

Then I had a close look at the legislation and discovered that what was being said was true. There are certain provisions that apply to Independents that do not apply to party members. These are provisions which would have applied to the Independents when they were members of a party but the situation changed when they dissolved their party. That was the first time I have bothered to focus that closely on the issue. My immediate reaction was to say, "Why don't we have to report this?" That was my immediate reaction. When I came into this game I think I came in with the view that there was not going to be much of my privacy left anyway. It came as a little surprise to me that I was not required to report in the same way as the Independents. Having considered the matter, I automatically came to the conclusion-I think it was just the natural thing to do-that we should all report to the fullest. There should be nothing that can be described as being secretive.

Now, there will be comparisons drawn with other pieces of legislation that apply in other parliaments, I have no doubt about that, but for my part, when it comes to these sorts of issues, it is about ratcheting it up rather than ratcheting it down. I think the ordinary passer-by in the street outside would say, "What the hell are they doing in there? Why are they ratcheting it down?" The suspicious nature of constituents would lead them to the conclusion, I would think, that somebody is trying to hide something, whether that is true or not. I do not want to be part of a process which suggests to the community that this place is trying to hide something which really ought not be that painful to disclose.

It seems to me that if you decide to go into politics and you become a legislator and you participate in the making of laws which affect the lives and property of our constituents, and which in certain circumstances would create a certain suggestion of, say, a conflict of interest, you ought to be required to declare everything you have. One is always drawn then to what one's personal circumstances are in the scheme of things.

I remember when I was first asked to fill out a form for disclosure in the Assembly. Everything I owned had to be declared just in case I had a conflict of interest. I rather jokingly decided that I would put down on my declaration of interests that I had a garage full of rusty Ford parts. I have these two old rusty Fords that are really not worth much at all, but I cannot take them off the declaration because somebody might say, "What is going on? He still has them. He has taken them off his declaration. Have they turned to gold or something?" So here on my declaration are these old rusty Fords which will stay there while ever I am in this Assembly. This may require me to declare any gifts of rusty Ford hubcaps that might come to me, but I don't care, to be quite frank.

Mr Smyth: They can be very valuable.

MR BERRY

: They might be one day. It is all good old rusty stuff. The point is your privacy. Where do you draw the line so far as your privacy is concerned in this place? I do not think you can draw the line too high. I do not think it really matters that much. It does not matter at all to me. If somebody looks at all of my private financial and property ownership schemes, they will not find them very exciting. In fact, they would say, "You pay more attention to your work in the Assembly than you pay to your own affairs." That is probably true of most of us, in a lot of respects. Nevertheless, I am quite happy to


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