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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 2 Hansard (27 February) . . Page.. 317 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

made, using the device of a minister acting for another minister, as I recall, myself and Minister Smyth. That is better than the alternative, which is that Minister Moore, confronted with a cabinet decision with which he is unable to live, has to stand aside, according to convention, as minister for health. There is no sense in that.

The inflexibility of the position that the Labor Party has put to the Assembly today is a reflection of this very narrow, unyielding kind of approach they take on such matters, which does not accommodate the fact that there are people with a variety of views and a variety of issues of conscience which ought to be accommodated in a framework such as ours. We are a very small place, Mr Speaker. We do not have the luxury of huge numbers of members to play a large number of roles, and I think we should adapt our system accordingly. Indeed, the system we use here is the same system used in every other parliament in Australia.

Mr Stanhope: Not in relation to a conscience vote. It is different from every other parliament in the world.

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not know whether the issue has arisen in any other parliament in this way, but I dare say that if a minister for health found himself unable to act in respect of a particular matter like this, arrangements would be made in other parliaments to accommodate that person. I would be very surprised if that was not the case.

I strongly urge the Assembly not to give in to the sort of absolutist approach which Mr Stanhope has put in his amendment. It is not necessary. It does not achieve anything of importance or value in this place.

Mr Stanhope: So Westminster conventions aren't important. We've bloody seen that.

MR HUMPHRIES: I know that Mr Stanhope is a great defender of the Westminster traditions. It is a little surprising, I would have thought, for someone in the Labor Party to argue that. It is more traditional for my side of politics to be heard mouthing those words.

Mr Stanhope: Garbage. What a lot of garbage.

MR SPEAKER: Order! If you are upholding the Westminster tradition, I suggest you stop interjecting, Mr Stanhope.

MR HUMPHRIES: I think, Mr Speaker, the system needs to be capable of adaptation and change. The system needs to be made to work in the best interests of the ACT community. We do not do everything here according to Westminster, and nor should we, Mr Speaker. We should have a system which works in favour of our citizens and our requirements as a community on the other side of the world from Westminster. I am a great defender of Westminster. I think it is a very important political inheritance of all Australians and one that unites all of us throughout the Commonwealth world, but it should not be followed slavishly. There is no value in doing so.

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