Page 3734 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 22 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Although a significant proportion of Canberrans had some doubts about self-government when it was first established, I believe there is now an acceptance of self-government by the people of the ACT. As we all know, a system of self-government is unique, combining the roles and responsibilities of both state and local government. It does so with remarkable economy in terms of the numbers of elected representatives.
The self-government act is also unique, in that there is no governor or administrator whose function it is to appoint a chief minister and executive. Rather, the Chief Minister is elected by the members of the Assembly from among their own ranks. This is indeed a unique political system that functions well, commands popular support and should continue to enjoy the autonomy established by the self-government act. However, while the self-government act may give the Governor-General the bare power to disallow an ACT law, the mere existence of a statutory power does not excuse the exercise of that power, particularly when constitutional convention has been for the Crown to not interfere with the law-making activities of an elected parliament.
This Assembly has proven itself to be capable of making laws for the people of the ACT. That capability needs to be formally recognised and total legislative authority given to this Assembly. Amending the self-government act would achieve this and give ACT residents the same democratic rights as other Australians.
I would like to turn to some of the comments made during the debate in the Senate. Given that Senator Brown’s bill would have removed the ability of the Governor-General to disallow the laws of the ACT parliament without proper debate and passage through the commonwealth parliament, it was with much interest that I followed the debate in the Senate on Thursday, 14 September.
The lack of support and, in some cases, pure contempt for the ACT shown by some of the Liberal senators who spoke to the bill was very telling. Senator Gary Humphries, having previously crossed the floor in relation to the ACT’s Civil Unions Act being overridden, seems to have changed his mind on the right of the ACT government to govern for the people of Canberra.
During the debate on 15 June, Senator Humphries told the Senate that the ACT government is entitled to pass laws in an area of its legislative competence to effect an explicit promise made to the ACT community. Yet, while speaking against Senator Brown’s bill on 14 September—a few months later—Senator Humphries said:
… I state very clearly my view that I think in this particular case Senator Brown’s legislation takes too far the principle that the territory government ought to exercise this power untrammelled by intervention from the federal government in this way …
It would seem that Senator Humphries supports the right of the ACT government to govern for itself, just as long as we do not get too carried away with ourselves. What is more, these views were supported by the ACT opposition as reported in the Canberra Times on 14 September. This is a dreadful admission by the Liberal Party
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .