Page 2514 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
So, the issue I wish to put to bed is not that the constitutional arrangements should be changed; they should not. But if the commonwealth wishes to retain the power to legislate for the territories, as it inevitably will, then that should be done through the provisions outlined in the constitution, and those provisions alone, which is that the commonwealth parliament may make laws for the territory. That is the safeguard if, indeed, there is a need for one. The safeguard is that the commonwealth parliament can make laws for the territory.
If the executive of the commonwealth or the parliament itself takes offence at decisions or laws passed in this place then that is the way for the matter to be ultimately resolved, not through the exercise of executive power without reference to any democratically elected body prior to the decision being made. That is the government’s view. That is why the reform and the removal of subsection 35(2) of the self-government act are so important.
But, that aside, there are many other powers that can, and should, be repatriated to the territory where that has not already been done. That way we are more likely to achieve the level of autonomy and self-government that we deserve and should expect in a modern democratic nation such as Australia. I commend my amendment to members. I hope that we can indeed achieve a good level of unanimity on the need for reform of the current arrangements.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (5.38): At the 20-year anniversary celebrations for the Assembly, I noted that it was appropriate now to reflect on where we have been and where we wish to go. Indeed, that was a sentiment reflected by a number of others, including representatives of each of the parties in the Assembly. In making that reflection, I talked about some of the current systems and arrangements. I talked about the ability of the Governor-General to step in and dismiss the Assembly should the Governor-General deem, in his or her opinion, that the Assembly is either incapable of effectively performing its functions or is conducting its affairs in a grossly improper manner. I talked about the override powers, which have been the focus of much concern and, indeed, are the focus of Ms Hunter’s original motion. I also talked about the need to review issues around the ability of the Assembly to determine its size, and I talked about this most fundamental aspect of our self-determination. The issues around what is the correct size are a matter for debate.
I also talked about how, in any move to allow the Assembly this freedom and to remove any of these provisions in the self-government act, we needed to make sure that we got the checks and balances right. One of my biggest concerns going forward which I expressed at the time, and which I repeat now, is the issue of gerrymander. We know that most states have an upper house, so in order to change electoral boundaries and the like, you normally have to go through both houses of parliament. We saw, rightly or wrongly, years ago in Queensland the issue of gerrymander being a very strong one, and we have seen the same allegations levelled in WA. Our concern going forward about a number of these provisions is that I very much believe that it is time now that we look at how we should be able to govern ourselves and at some of the anachronistic provisions that are in the self-government act. I highlighted three in particular, but I also talked about the need to have safeguards in place.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .