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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 12 Hansard (18 November) . . Page.. 4205 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

They earn it by passing good law and making good decisions, and they do it I think with some circumspection. You need to make sure that the punishment fits the crime, the tax fits the charge, the fee fits the requirement. What we cannot afford to do is reduce standards to the lowest common denominator. If Mr Corbell does not understand what he has done, we should be taking action.

I think the amendment that has been passed to this motion to substitute the words "grave concern"changes fundamentally the view that we should have of executive government in this place. What it means is that the accountability measures are watered down. What we need to be aware of when we go out into the community is that they view all of us in the same way. We are politicians first and foremost, I suspect, and given that various surveys show that politicians rate somewhere between used car salesmen and often journalists, we should be working to build up our standing in the community.

Mr Quinlan: This is helping?

MR SMYTH: Mr Quinlan interjects in an ironical sort of way that he is so good at, "This is helping?"In the report Mr Quinlan found Mr Corbell guilty of contempt.

Mr Quinlan: With perspective on the incident.

MR SMYTH: He found him guilty of contempt. And so get a rider: Mr Quinlan interjects "With perspective"-a man with perspective.

MR SPEAKER: It doesn't help that you respond to interjections which are-

Mr Quinlan: You haven't got a speech. What is he going to do?

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Quinlan! The interjections are out of order and there is not much point in responding.

MR SMYTH: But it shows quite clearly, Mr Speaker, that not even Mr Quinlan could dissent from the finding of contempt. He has found excuses afterwards and he has got a couple of add-ons. But not even Mr Corbell's colleague could find against the contempt. The three members of the committee made a finding of contempt.

My fear is that now this has been watered down we will have a minister who thinks he has got away with it. My greater fear is that now we have started to codify what a contempt is we will have a sliding scale. As a result, we will diminish the way that we hold in check and we hold accountable those that would be in government.

Mr Speaker, I am in the main pleased with the report of the committee. The committee found that a number of contempts were committed and this provides to the rest of us the message that we need to be careful about what we do. I am disappointed that I think we are not taking seriously enough the finding of contempt because what we have now done is water down the whole concept that is set out so clearly in House of Representatives Practice and the clear understanding that other jurisdictions have of the seriousness of contempt. I think what we are doing sets a new benchmark and I suspect we may regret it.

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