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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (21 August) . . Page.. 3015 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

People are entitled to choose between parties, for example, on the basis of their philosophy or their approach to government but also on the basis of what they think about particular policy issues. This one is the daddy of them all, the issue which is ultimately going to govern the way in which our community operates in the next few years if we do not get it right.

This community expects leadership from this Assembly on these issues. What we are offering them today is not leadership. What we are offering them is a vacuum. By not passing this bill, we are saying, "Trust us to sort this matter out in our own way after the election in our own time." Mr Stanhope says, "We will watch the New South Wales injecting place trial, and we will make a decision or assessment after that." He says, "There should be a national consensus on a heroin trial, and we will make a decision once we have got that in place."

Those are promises to put the decision off. Just as Mr Berry in 1998 said he wanted to put the decision off, just as the Labor Party voted against funding of the injecting place in 2000, and just as the Labor Party today does not want a referendum on this issue, it is an opportunity to put the matter off.

I do not like going to the electorate at any time, particularly at an election, and asking them to vote for me without at least some vestige of a solution to certain problems. An unquestionably large problem facing this electorate at this time is the problem of drugs. If we go to the electorate without a solution on that, we will have failed the electorate. Similarly, if we go to the electorate without a sense of involving them in the solution and we will have shown a contempt for the electorate.

I believe it is time for us to be strong enough, to show enough strength of leadership, to say, "Here are the arguments. We are putting them on the table. We know what the pros and cons of the issues are. We know how these issues are felt by the community. We are going to talk about them with the community. At the end of the day we will accept the community's view about these matters." That is not weakness. That is not a lack of leadership. That is in fact strength of leadership-to be able to say, "I have a view about this, but I will accept the view of the electorate if it is different."

People have attacked this notion in this debate today. Mr Stanhope in particular has said, "All the Liberal Party members will go around with their views on this matter, but then after 20 October will they be expected to vote in a particular way?" That is a phenomenon called democracy. It is a phenomenon which says you can express a range of views. You can argue your case out in the electorate, but at the end of the day you have to accept that people have the right to have a say in these matters.

I will campaign in this coming election campaign for a Liberal government to be elected, and I will vote consistently and argue consistently for the Liberal Party to be returned to office. But if on 20 October the Liberal Party is not returned to office, I will take the keys to my office out of my pockets and I will hand them over to Mr Stanhope and say, "Here you are. Here are the keys to the Chief Minister's office." I am a democrat, with a small "d". I believe in the democratic process. I believe the people have the right to make the decision about this issue, and they have the capacity, the knowledge and, in a place like Canberra of all places, the level of understanding of these things to be able to make a rational decision about them.

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