Page 1738 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008

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

---

MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra) (12.26 am): I tend to agree again with the attorney. It is getting late. But also, just looking at it legally, it is terribly broad and there is a bit of vagueness in it too; so it might be somewhat difficult to—

Dr Foskey: Yes, some of these authorisations are pretty vague as well.

MR STEFANIAK: Not necessarily. I think there could be some real problems there, just in terms of how it is interpreted, but I hear what the Attorney-General has to say as well; so we are not going to support it.

Question put:

That the amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (12.30 am): I move amendment No 39 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 1779].

This amendment is intended to remove bumper stickers from the list of items that are exempt from authorisation. Following criticism of this proposed change, the government amendment will retain the existing requirement for these items to carry an authorisation statement.

DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (12.31 am): Mr Corbell and I think alike on this one. This amendment relates to the authorisation of electoral matter. Keeping voters informed of who they are voting for and why is a key factor in any election. The authorisation of electoral material is vitally important in allowing voters to make an informed decision.

As we all saw in campaigning for the federal election, conflicts over unidentified electoral matter are common and contentious. Take the New South Wales seat of Lindsay, for example. This seemed to be a case where the standard Liberal Party

---

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