Page 1736 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
|
Ayes 2 |
Noes 13 | ||
|
Dr Foskey |
Mr Barr |
Ms MacDonald | |
|
Mr Mulcahy |
Mr Berry |
Ms Porter | |
|
Mrs Burke |
Mr Pratt | ||
|
Mr Corbell |
Mr Smyth | ||
|
Mrs Dunne |
Mr Stanhope | ||
|
Mr Gentleman |
Mr Stefaniak | ||
|
Mr Hargreaves | |||
Question so resolved in the negative.
Amendment negatived.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (12.20 am): I move amendment No 42 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1783].
This amendment aims to make authorisation of electoral material easier to understand. Over the past few years, brochures and advertisements have been circulated, often misleading or deceiving voters as to their authorship and/or the policies, the parties and the people they are attacking.
As a member of the Greens, I am particularly well aware of the many brochures produced by the Liberal Party that appear to obey the letter of the law but do not make their provenance clear to the reader. By the way, I have to say that this practice is not confined to the Liberal Party. In other states it has been one carried out by the Labor Party. Some of them simply misrepresent or overdramatise aspects of Greens policies. Others make undeniably false claims. Yet others purport to come from the Greens themselves or from official non-political sources, or from other political parties, such as Labor.
Opposition members interjecting—
At the federal election last year—
Mrs Burke: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am finding it hard to hear Dr Foskey.
MR SPEAKER: Order! If you are having conversations, please take them into the lobbies. Dr Foskey has the floor.
DR FOSKEY: At the federal election last year, the Liberal Party employed the technique with great enthusiasm. Canberra-wide direct mail from Senator Humphries offered voters the opportunity to apply for a postal vote. It appeared to be official electoral matter and, while it featured a promotion for Senator Humphries and was authorised by an official who was at that stage the Canberra director of the Liberal Party, it was by no means apparent to the casual reader that the document was produced by the Liberal Party or by Gary Humphries; it suggested that it was official government election material.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .