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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (23 August) . . Page.. 3296 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

all of us like every bill that passes here or every motion that passes here. The same thing with the citizen-initiated referenda. In terms of referendums in Australia, I am sure members would have different views on some of the questions asked. I will come back to the questions in referendums in Australia.

We talk about history. I think Mr Humphries made a very valid point about looking several hundred years into the future of democracy, when people would think, "Why on earth did they have that debate then? What on earth's wrong with citizen-initiated referendum?" Such referenda may well be commonplace then. Our democracy is, of course, an ever evolving institution. The constitution enacted in 1901 had provision for the constitution to change, not by simple amendments or acts of parliament but by referendum; not exactly citizen-initiated referendum, but referendum nevertheless. So we have had a history in this country of referendums dating back over 100 years.

I think people who worry about citizen-initiated referenda really have a lack of faith in the Australian people. Perhaps they do not trust the good sense of the people of the ACT, and impliedly, of course, the people of Australia. I think one only needs to look at the federal referendums to see vindication of their commonsense and the detailed thought that would go into a yes or no answer in a referendum by the people of Australia, including, of course, the people of the ACT.

I can go back to a number of issues. Mrs Burke mentioned some. I refer to the conscription issue of 1916-1917 and Billy Hughes campaigning for conscription. One thinks of the patriotism of those times. Australians went off to fight a war for a number of reasons, but primarily because they were part of the British Empire and felt part of the British Empire, even though we were an independent dominion. He thought they would support a call for conscription. They didn't. That was tried at two referendums. The soldiers at the front line did not support conscription, and I think that might have played very heavily on the population back home. Australia maintained a very strong volunteer army in World War I, unlike the other participants in that conflict. You would think surely, in time of war, in a life-threatening struggle, that people would back the government that wanted conscription, but no; so people obviously thought about that a lot.

There was the referendum in 1951 when Robert Menzies tried to outlaw communism. The Iron Curtain had descended over Europe. We had many people who had emigrated, fleeing from communism in Europe, my father being one of them. North Korea had invaded South Korea, backed up by China and supported by the Soviet Union. We were engaged in the Korean War. We had a very active Communist Party in Australia, which was probably somewhat subversive. It supported one of the worst totalitarian regimes in world history, that being the Soviet Union of Joseph Stalin. The Prime Minister of the time, whilst his country was engaged in a war against communism, in Korea, wanted to ban the Communist Party. He lost.

I can remember talking to my mother about that. I do not think my father was a naturalised citizen at that time, but he probably would have voted yes. Even though I think he voted Labor most of the time, I think he would have voted yes to outlaw communism. My mother was a vehement anti-communist and a long-time Country Party or Liberal Party voter. She was a great supporter of Menzies. I think she worked with Sir Earle Page as the press secretary's secretary at about that time. When I asked her,

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