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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 09 Hansard (Wednesday, 18 August 2004) . . Page.. 3839 ..

to work long hours, then we set a very bad precedent; we are not working to build into all of our work practices a family-friendly nature, not just here in the Assembly but across ACT government departments and across all businesses in the ACT.

It is not okay for anybody to be working ridiculously long hours. It impedes decision making and it impedes the ability to deal with crisis situations that might arise. It is something we need to deal with in respect of health care and nurses who work extended shifts; it is something we have to deal with in a whole lot of professions; and I have no problem with the Assembly working to set a positive example.

I support changes to our practices that would make things more predictable for members with caring responsibilities, for members with health issues that are compromised by very late nights, and for members who are looking to see their families and spend time with members of their community. I would be comfortable with perhaps scheduling extra sitting days so that we take the overflow from long days. We could also look at sitting earlier in the day or taking a shorter lunch break.

I have some questions about the wording of the motion Ms MacDonald has put forward. I think there are problems in supporting a motion that implies that a fixed length of time should be set for debate on any given bill. I believe that everyone here has the right to put their position on the public record. Even if other members of this place think that a certain position does not add anything to the debate, we are elected by the community and we should have the opportunity to show the community what we think on all the different pieces of legislation or motions put forward for debate.

I think there are other reasons why debate becomes drawn out—perhaps due to repeated extensions of time because members are unable to express their feelings on an issue in a concise way. It has almost become accepted practice to grant extensions of time whenever requested. It does not seem that difficult to me. If we are working to a set time, why are we always extending it? There are situations where it is very important that the full reasons for a decision by a member go on to the public record. We have debated bills that have aroused great passion in the community. Most members have felt a duty to explain why they have made a decision and how they have reached that decision.

However, in most cases the constituents are not necessarily here in the public gallery to listen to what is being said directly. They find out what was said by researching Hansard. There is the option to seek leave to incorporate statements into Hansard. Maybe we need to look at using this option more often, when speeches are going beyond the set timeframe. If there are more points to be made, maybe they can be incorporated into Hansard so that more time is available for all members to contribute to the debate.

I think also that members should make a commitment to the legislative role we have as members of the Assembly. Members should put in the necessary time and effort and dedicate it to the hours set aside for making legislation. That does not amount to a lot of hours out of the entire time we serve as members of the Assembly. If we had that commitment, then maybe we could move through business a lot more quickly. We have not seen the Chief Minister this morning. That means that things due for debate in relation to environment and corrections will be delayed until later in the day because something more important is going on. I think that is quite a shame. We have

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