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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1905 ..

MRS CROSS: I had a motion on the notice paper, as most members know, on the Cyprus referendum that took place a couple of weeks ago, but, due to the long day we have had and a conversation that I have had with the president of the Cypriot community in Canberra, I decided to make a statement instead to save time so that members could go home earlier tonight.

A couple of days ago a journalist asked me why I was raising the matter of Cyprus in the Assembly and what relevance did it have to the ACT. I guess that was a fair question. I like to limit the issues that I bring into this place to ACT-related issues. The answer, however, is that I am doing it on behalf of the many Greek Cypriots in the ACT constituency, on behalf of all the Greek Cypriots who have made their homes in Australia, and specifically Canberra, and who have contributed strongly to Australia through their energy, enterprise and strong family community values. And I am doing it as an affirmation of democracy, as a reminder that placing expediency ahead of democracy is not really a helpful way of solving disputes.

Let me explain. Members no doubt know that, on 24 April, the Greek and Turkish communities of Cyprus voted in the referendum on the recently presented United Nations plan for the reunification of the island. Two-thirds of the Turkish Cypriot community voted for the plan, while three-quarters of the Greek Cypriot community voted against it. This came as a great surprise to many, given that in recent years most of the efforts towards reconciliation and reunification have come from the Greek Cypriot side.

In his comments on the result of the referendum, the President of Cyprus said:

The will of the sovereign people should not be misinterpreted by anybody. The people did not say ‘no’ to a solution. They said ‘no’ to a specific plan. We want the reunification of Cyprus and the two communities in conditions of security, with human rights and fundamental freedoms safeguarded.

Mr Speaker, I am sorry. There is too much disruption in the gallery.

MR SPEAKER: Order! There is too much discussion in the gallery.

MRS CROSS: Thank you. But despite acknowledgment in a statement by the European Commission that this was “the democratic decision of the Greek Cypriot community”, the result immediately triggered a spate of copycat criticisms of the Greek Cypriot population for not approving the plan and so failing to satisfy the expectations of a number of commentators within the European Union, the United Nations, the United States, the United Kingdom, Turkey and, of course, somewhat surprisingly, the Australian government. A cynical person could be forgiven for thinking that this shared response was orchestrated.

What is most disappointing, however, is that the response reflected what the complainers themselves wanted. They wanted the problem solved and done with; they wanted a concurrence between the long-anticipated entry of Cyprus into the European Union and the reunification of the island; they wanted another positive event to add to the celebration of the enlargement of the European Union.

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