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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (15 June) . . Page.. 1916 ..

There are no real checks and balances there. That is such an incredibly broad category of people who can witness a signature. All this clause seeks to do is to ensure that the person who witnesses the signature is a person who can attest an enrolment claim under the Commonwealth Electoral Act. Yes, it does restrict it. Witnessing signatures for a lot of things in this country is restricted, and for good reason. This is a check to make sure that the person who says they are able to vote and wants to vote is in fact entitled and eligible to vote.

People in this Assembly have already talked, and will no doubt during the evening continue to talk, about all the dreadful things that can happen if you do not disclose the names of people who give money under $1,500. This is an area where there have been rorts. We know there have been rorts. I have given an instance of an attempted rort I saw. We need to be careful. We need checks and balances. Whilst there may be a tiny bit of inconvenience in having a signature witnessed, it will not be all that difficult, with all the categories of people who can witness signatures. At least there is some check and some balance, rather than a blanket approach of anyone over 18 being able to witness a signature.

This is one area that is open to rorts, and we have seen rorts in Australia, with people being put on electoral rolls when they should not have been there. We do need to be careful, because that does bastardise and corrupt our system.

MS TUCKER (8.22): I do not understand the argument from Mr Stefaniak. He seems to be saying that we are going to have an improved situation if we support this, but we do not know what the situation will be, because the Commonwealth has not come to agreement with the states about what the regulations will say. So why is it that you are telling us-

Mr Stefaniak: You have got a class of persons.

MS TUCKER: I have just had advice on that. It is still being negotiated. So why are you telling this place that it is an improvement when we have no idea what "it" is? If you want to change the situation, I suggest it would be better to wait until something has been agreed at the Commonwealth level. Then we can have an informed debate.

Clause 9 negatived.

Clauses 10 and 11, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 12.

MS TUCKER (8.23): I ask for leave to move amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3 circulated in my name together.

Leave granted.

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