Page 2526 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (6.22): Madam Assistant Speaker, as has previously been said, after 20 years of self-government in the ACT it is time to reflect on what has gone before and to learn from the experiences and map out the future. Any organisation worth its salt would do so. It would review its reason for being, its aspirations and its modus operandi.
The Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act is, in essence, the ACT’s constitution. It establishes the jurisdiction of the ACT and provides the basis of governance in the territory. It was enacted by the commonwealth parliament under the Australian constitution. So any review of the ACT’s constitution, which is founded under the Australian constitution, is a serious business. It is a serious business because it goes to the very foundations of government and governance in the ACT. Indeed, it is so serious that it should not be predicated on a single issue. It is so serious that it should not be done in a piecemeal fashion. It is so serious that it should not be done on a whim or in a knee-jerk reaction to something that someone thinks might create an inconvenience. It is so serious that it should not be in response to cries of political injustice, repugnance or unwarranted restrictions.
Any review of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act is so serious that it should be undertaken in a careful, measured and considered way. It should be done in full consultation with the ACT community and with cognisance of the desires of the Australian community. A review should be above politics and sharply focused on achieving outcomes that are for the benefit of and in the best interests of the community it serves—the people of the ACT, the people who pay our salaries.
It is unfortunate that Ms Hunter’s motion falls far short of the respect that a review of the ACT self-government act really deserves. It fails on every count of those elements that I outlined earlier that a review should not be. It is a piecemeal approach focusing on just one element of the act. It is predicated on a single issue. It is a knee-jerk reaction to that single issue. It makes assumptions about what the people of the ACT want and it fails to call on any kind of consultation with the community to find out the community’s thinking, even on the single issue that Ms Hunter’s motion seeks to address. It fails to take a holistic view of the ACT self-government act. It is not even respectful to the commonwealth parliament. Its language is not respectful, but it expects the commonwealth parliament to drop everything and turn its attention to this single issue in the ACT.
Madam Assistant Speaker, all of that said, the Canberra Liberals support the notion of a review of the self-government act. However, our approach is quite different. We want the review to be done properly, founded on the principles that I have outlined earlier about consulting with the community and taking a holistic view. One of the issues that will have to be considered in a review of the ACT self-government act, whether it is done by the Assembly or by the commonwealth and whether we like it or not, is the issue of precedence and impact on other jurisdictions.
By way of example, yesterday in this place the Attorney-General, in answering a question from Ms Porter, sought to compare the ACT’s self-government act with that in the Northern Territory and, in doing so, he demonstrated his lack of knowledge of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .