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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 25 May 2004) . . Page.. 2167 ..

That Ms Tucker’s amendment No 1 be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

MR SPEAKER: Ms Tucker, you don’t want to proceed with your second amendment?

Ms Tucker: No.

MRS CROSS (12.27): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 2177].

This amendment will make this bill a disallowable instrument. Whilst I have supported in this instance the government’s removal of appeal rights for the citizens of Canberra, I do not seek to allow the government to build the GDE unchecked. The Assembly must have some role in holding the government accountable over the building of the Gungahlin Drive extension, and this amendment allows that.

I am disappointed with Mrs Dunne regarding her duplicate amendment. I advised her office yesterday, Mr Speaker, that I would be moving this; and it is disappointing that she could not let my office know that she was just going to copy what I was doing. It is very disappointing when she accuses a minister of being someone full of pride. She should look at herself in the mirror on this issue.

This has been a debate, an argument and an issue which we have had to actually think about and work on for some time. The reason this has been a difficult one for me is that I am a very strong supporter of everyone’s right to appeal. I was, however, enlightened yesterday when I discovered that there has been a precedent set in the Senate on the denial of appeal rights in various pieces of legislation by parties other than the major parties. I do respect Ms Tucker’s position on supporting and maintaining the rights of people to appeal, but Ms Tucker probably knows—I am not sure whether she does—that the Greens in fact in the Senate did, on a number of pieces of legislation which passed through the Senate, support the removal of appeal rights, which surprised me. But there has been a precedent set in the federal parliament.

I suppose, on this issue, what I will say is: how many categories of a democratic right to appeal are there? We stand up in this place and say we should not deny people’s rights to

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