Page 1689 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Surprise Party, the Sun-ripened Warm Tomato Party and a couple of other parties, which Anthony Rumore formed, standing for the first Assembly. You can take care of a lot of that too by simply having a reasonable threshold for people to nominate, which I think the Electoral Commissioner does. It probably finds a fairly good balance by deterring absolutely frivolous idiots from nominating but ensures that people who do not have a huge amount of income still have the opportunity to participate in our democratic system. If people want to do that through non-party groups, why not?
I criticise to an extent a couple of members of the Osborne group, but they did many good things in this Assembly. Some of Mr Rugendyke’s legislation is still here—the burnout legislation, for example, a legacy of Dave Rugendyke, one of the non-party groups on a ballot paper in 1998. That has stood the test of time, obviously. No-one has tried to amend that or throw it out.
It is all part of the democratic system and the rich democratic system we have here in the territory which has served us well—a system supported by the people of the territory and recognised, I think, by learned political commentators and people who take a great interest in democracy as one of the fairest systems you can have. And it is a system, obviously, that serves Canberra well.
Perhaps that was the government’s reason for this particular recommendation to get up. As I said, I accept it is made totally in good faith and for a number of valid reasons. I do not necessarily support those reasons, but they are understandable reasons, by Mr Green and his officers. Clearly, these non-party groups are seen and always are seen by the Labor Party as posing a threat. I think Labor traditionally—certainly in this territory, but perhaps Australia wide—seems to have a problem working with the coalition, with independents or with minor parties.
I can understand Mr Corbell’s position here too. I think his party has a historical aversion to going into government with anyone, and an aversion to having to rely on independents and other minor parties and groupings. You had better get used to it because—and I cannot see into a crystal ball, but I would certainly be prepared to wager—if you are going to be in government at all after the next election you will be a minority one. I think that probably applies to whoever is going to form the government. You are going to have to get used to it.
That too seems to be a part of our democratic system here—it is not always the case of course—a part that clearly the history of this Assembly to date has shown to be the norm rather than an aberration. I think you just have to get used to it. Clearly, the people of Canberra will be deprived by not having non-party groups. It is different from registering a party. Why on earth should we change a system that I think has fundamentally served us well? Why on earth should we deprive several independents who are like minded from forming a non-party group?
Why on earth, if the Save Our Schools group did not want to form a party but wanted to run two candidates in the next election, should they not? They are running on a specific issue. Why the hell should they not be able to form a non-party group? What really adverse effect does that have on our democratic system?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .