Page 461 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 8 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the underlying role, powers and, in many ways, the validity of the ACT Legislative Assembly itself.
This is an exceptional debate made all the more so by the real possibility that in the very near future we could see a significant and very positive change in the respect afforded by the commonwealth parliament to this place and, in turn, to the people who live here.
The Greens obviously support this motion. We have been protagonists for change for some time now. We believe in this parliament and we believe that there should be true and equal democracy for the 360,000 or so people who live here. Every member of this place was elected to represent the views and values of Canberrans, and we should do so in the same way, free of external threats and influence, as all state parliaments do.
Voting no to the proposed changes is not only a direct attack on this place; it is a slap in the face to all Canberrans. We are all accustomed to a level of Canberra bashing. Our city is often criticised as dull and boring. However, I do not think I have ever before heard such criticism of the people who live here.
Not only are those who oppose the change explicitly saying that they do not think this parliament is capable of fulfilling its function properly; they are also saying that they do not think the people of Canberra have a right to be represented as they see fit. I disagree. Whilst at times I do lament the decisions reached in this place, I respect the democratic process that has led to them.
I respect everyone’s right to their point of view and I think that as a democratic institution this place actually does rather well. So far the only argument I have heard against the change is that we are too well educated and too many of us are connected to the public sector to be trusted to be able to decide what we want for our community.
Whilst that argument is too stupid to engage with, I think it is indicative of the level of substance behind opposition concerns. We are at least as capable as any other jurisdiction of choosing who we want to represent us and the ideas and values we want them to bring to the legislature.
We have a good range of checks and balances—overall probably the equal of any state. We have an effective government structure and we are, of course, subject to all the same constitutional limitations as the commonwealth, which in some ways arguably means ACT residents are better protected against the misuse of power than residents in the states.
We have, of course, canvassed this issue as part of a number of broader concerns about the self-government act. I note that Professor George Williams in his submission to the Senate inquiry has given his support not only to the passage of this bill but also to a range of other changes that should take place and that will improve the Legislative Assembly for the people of the ACT. That is, of course, not any kind of reason not to fix this problem, Mr Speaker.
Mr Hanson interjecting—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video