Page 230 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
writing what you are committed to doing over the next four years, as the Greens have done in our 16-page agreement with the Labor Party. It takes courage to put in writing, commit yourself and to sign on the dotted line to get certain outcomes. That is what the Greens have done, because we believe in the long-term solutions and in getting real outcomes that will continue to deliver for the ACT community over a sustained period of time.
We have already had a win on conclusive certificates, which Mr Smyth just referred to, because as a result of the Greens-Labor agreement, the government will support the removal of conclusive certificates. I think this is a significant improvement to transparency in the ACT. The Greens have only been in this place for a couple of weeks and we are already seeing the removal of conclusive certificates. Whether it will be through Mrs Dunne’s bill which she tabled yesterday—and, giving credit where it is due, Mrs Dunne has been raising this issue for a significant time—we will be pleased to support either her legislation or an amalgamation with what the government brings forward. Amendments have already been made to the standing orders as a result of having Greens in this place. The Greens have already improved transparency and accountability in the Legislative Assembly, and will continue to do so over the next four years.
That is why we are putting forward this amendment, because we have committed to having an independent arbiter to adjudicate on these matters into the future. It requires integrity to stick to that position and not to stand here today, in speaking to a motion, and having regard to the politics of tomorrow’s newspapers, simply take a stand that is inconsistent with the agreement we have already signed up to. This is as much about integrity as it is about the courage that the Greens have already shown.
That is why we have put forward this amendment. We believe this amendment is a good outcome for the ACT. It will set a precedent that will mean that, in the future, we do not have to have these debates, that we can focus in this Assembly on the matters of the day and that we can rely on independent arbiters to give us a consistent, well-thought through and applied approach to these kinds of documents in the future, which we believe is an important approach.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (4.06): I am pleased to make a contribution to the debate this afternoon. There is no doubt that it is contested ground between the legislature and the executive when it comes to the release of executive documents. It is not just contested ground in the ACT, it is contested ground in parliaments around the country and, indeed, around the commonwealth in particular where these matters are tested most frequently and most regularly.
I think it is important to note in this debate that it is contested ground and that there are reasons on both sides of the debate why a certain approach is believed to be the appropriate one. From the legislature’s perspective, it is, of course, a recognised matter of importance and significance that the parliament has the ability to call for documents. That is an important check and an important power available in a Westminster democracy. Equally, there are principles at play, as the Chief Minister has outlined, on the importance of responsible cabinet government and the need for
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .