Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 1 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 122 ..
MS TUCKER (continuing):
committee could then deal with what comes after that. But it is not normally seen as the role of a committee to engage in the educative process. The committee process is usually about seeking views and input in determining a particular position that the Assembly is interested in.
My motion is saying that we need to have that preliminary work done. We have already had consultation to some degree with the Pettit inquiry. We need to put the case in some way but people might legitimately think it would be odd for a committee to do so. My proposal is that the government does take responsibility for putting out the case in some way and then we use the committee process to deal with that.
I would make another point. Some people seem to be under the impression that my motion is saying that this is just about three electorates of seven members. If you look at the wording of my motion you will see that it says "the desirability of". So obviously there is scope in that to look at other models. But we are focussing on that particular one. When you look at Pettit you can see that this is the logical combination. I think the work done by Pettit needs to be respected and carried over into this current discussions, and not treated as if it just did not occur at all. I hope that members are aware of this basic premise in the Pettit review. I would be happy to point it out to people who are not aware of it.
MR HARGREAVES (11.32): I move:
Omit all words after "Assembly", substitute the following words:
(1) "requests the Chief Minister to undertake discussions with the Commonwealth Minister for Territories on the possibility of amendments to the Australian Capital Territory (Self Government) Act 1988 to devolve to the Assembly the power to determine the number of members, with the aim of commencing any change to the Assembly at the election scheduled for 2004; and
(2) refers to the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs for inquiry and report by the last sitting day in June 2002 the appropriateness of the size of the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory and options for changing the number of members, electorates and any other related matter".
Mr Speaker, the issue of whether we have enough members has raged every since I have been in this place. It is an issue which has captivated the minds of media. Very few people out there in the electorates really worry about it, other than voice their abhorrence of politicians anyway. What we need to do is make sure that the people out there in the electorates are well informed about the truth in respect of the appropriate size of the Assembly.
It then boils down to a question of which is the best consultation process for that to occur within. The Pettit report was brought down. In the last Assembly a select committee into governance had another look at it. I think, Mr Speaker, that the most appropriate course of action would be for the Assembly to refer this matter to a standing committee. That standing committee would need to engage the community on the basis of true consultation. We would not be saying to the community, "This is our preferred option, what do you think?" We would be saying, "All right, it's your parliament. You elected us to provide governance for the ACT. What are the options and what do you have to say
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .