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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (27 November) . . Page.. 4810 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

utterances the Treasurer might make in a social context will have an effect on the economy in this place and, in fact, do. And so they should. He is the best Treasurer we have had since the commencement of self-government.

I have to say that pronouncements are made-I suggest the opposition will support this view-of government policy, government intentions and government programs with a certain degree of fear that the whole lot will be scuttled by some crazy person sitting on the crossbench. We all come in here with the best of intent but, every now and again, people end up not displaying that. Incidentally, I base my opinions on the antics of the Fourth Assembly and not the Fifth. I make that very clear. I felt that the government and the opposition of the day in the Fourth Assembly were held to ransom by the crossbench once or twice too often. It was refreshing to see an improvement.

I support very sincerely the move to four-year terms, as I support very sincerely an increase in the number of members of this place. I have a minimum number of members in my mind. If we are going to be playing in the paddock of politics with our state counterparts, we need to be in the same sort of environment as them.

Ms Dundas did not give us a valid argument as to why we need to stay with three-year terms. She just said there was no valid argument to go to four-year terms. I would argue that the valid argument to go to four-year terms is there, but I have not heard anybody advance a valid argument to stay at three-year terms.

I reject the notion of a concept or perception of self-interest. We are putting this bill forward in this Assembly 10 months out from an election. If the members of the crossbench want to make much media out of this and go to the electorate and say, "We did not vote for four-year terms, so kick those people out and leave us in,"they are welcome to do that.

If anybody wants to say to me on the hustings, "I'm not voting for you, mate, because you have just feathered your own nest,"my reply will be: "Fine-go for it."There has been plenty of time for that. There is no self-interest. There is no such thing as a safe seat in this place, with the exception, of course, of the Chief Minister and Treasurer. There is no such thing as a safe seat. We are all going to be judged on how we have contributed to the community while we have been here.

The perception of self-interest and people saying, "Okay, we can do it for four years"is garbage. We must remember that no-one is safe in this place. This place has a history of dealing with people who do not do things necessarily in the community interest. We have knocked off a Chief Minister and we have changed the government a couple of times because it did not work the way the community or the Assembly wanted it to.

There is nothing safe about this. Jacking it up to four years right now does not mean that any one of us-other than, as I said, the Chief Minister and Treasurer-is guaranteed to come back for four years. So I reject entirely the idea that the democratic system has been compromised. Just because we are saying, "You have to wait another 12 months for an election; you do not want to go and vote for that"I do not think has much to do with it.

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