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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 1 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 120 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

(2) undertake public consultation on:

(a) the desirability or otherwise of expanding the size of the Assembly; and

(b) the specific proposal to increase the Assembly to 21 Members, with 7 Members representing each of the 3 electorates;

(3) report to the Assembly on the implementation of this motion by the end of June 2002.

Mr Speaker, this motion is very similar to a more detailed motion that I put up in November last year to initiate action on this important issue. That motion was amended and passed by the Assembly. I note, however, that the former government did not implement that motion, so I am putting up the motion again in the hope that the new ALP government is prepared to take this issue further.

This debate began with the Pettit review of government for the ACT, released in 1998. That review found that the territory was underrepresented relative to the other states. It pointed out that in 1996 the ratio of the ACT population to the number of representatives was about 1:14,500, whereas the average ratio in Australia was 1:2,250. So the ACT ratio was over six times higher than average.

More striking was the comparison with other small jurisdictions, where the ACT ratio is 10 times higher than the ratio in Tasmania, and over 50 times higher than that in the Northern Territory. Of course, having more politicians doesn't necessarily imply that the place is better governed, but there are some specific areas where the number of members is an issue.

A larger Assembly would allow a more diverse range of members to be elected, including members from currently underrepresented sectors of the community such as women, people from non-English speaking backgrounds and indigenous people, and thus there would be a greater scope for constitutions to find a member who may be able to assist them in a particular matter. There is likely to be a greater talent pool of members from the government side from which ministers could be selected. It would also provide a greater number of backbenchers and non-government members to participate in the Assembly committees, thus making them more effective and spreading the workload.

Unfortunately neither of the major parties seem prepared to tackle this issue, even though there is some recognition that the current size of the Assembly is generating problems. The major parties seem to want to treat this issue like a hot potato rather than looking seriously at the effectiveness of this Assembly in fulfilling all the demands that have been placed upon it by the ACT community.

I put up a motion on this issue in the last Assembly because I did not believe that this Assembly could continue indefinitely with its current number of 17 members-a number set before self-government in 1989-bearing in mind the population changes that have occurred in Canberra since that time and the growing experience of problems that have arisen in the Assembly due to the relatively small number of members. Members here need to bite the bullet and start to examine the issue of the appropriate size of the Assembly to ensure the good governance of the territory, even though this move may be unpopular with some people in the community who have a negative attitude towards politicians.

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