Page 469 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 8 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Let us get back to Mr Brown and what he said. It is patronising to say that the ACT Assembly should remember that the national parliament has a key role in the planning and future direction of this, our national capital. The problem for Mr Corbell is that he said we all want a broader review of the self-government act. In that case, support the amendment. Mr Corbell did not know his process, and Mr Corbell just simply chose to ignore what the Leader of the Opposition has put forward in this excellent amendment.
There is an opportunity to have the broader review. How can the Greens and the government actually be against paragraph 3(b) where it says, “Let’s give proper autonomy to the ACT Legislative Assembly.” It will be interesting to see members vote against that. It will be interesting to see whether the Greens and the Labor Party are in favour of or against proper autonomy for the ACT Legislative Assembly. Mr Corbell said that it is not before us today. Well, read the amendment—it is actually before us today. You can choose today to send a message to the inquiry that is currently underway in the Senate to have a proper review of this act.
And I refer the government to the Hawke review. I refer the government to page 34 of the Hawke review where Dr Hawke says:
The lead up to the Centenary of Canberra in 2013 provides a timely opportunity for the Self Government Act to be reviewed, updated, and perhaps stripped of what might, despite their merits in the early years of self government, now be considered anachronistic colonial type powers. Of course, the outcomes of any such review could not alter the ultimate power and right of the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate for, or about, the ACT and the national capital, but it would be a significant vote of confidence in the maturity of the governance arrangements for the ACT.
So he was actually in favour of getting something broader underway. Let us start today. But, of course, the Greens are not serious about it, because we know Bob Brown’s position—the federal parliament has the right to intervene. He asserts that. He asserted it in 2001 when it suited them. The Greens now conveniently forget. What did Ms Hunter say when she hurriedly ran into the Alex Sloan program this morning? Something about throwing obstacles or logs in the way of this process.
Mr Seselja: She wouldn’t answer the question about Bob, though.
MR SMYTH: And she refused to answer the question about Bob Brown, as she would refuse to answer such a question. Why would you not want to look at all these arrangements? People have listed them: the size of the Assembly, numbers of ministers, other powers, things that are excluded in various sections of the self-government act that we are not allowed to do as a parliament. Why would you not want to see the autonomy given to the people of the ACT through their ACT Assembly? Because you probably do not believe in it.
Ms Hunter ran the Kenny defence. I thought it was quite amusing when she talked about the plumber on the roof and fixing the leaks and you have to start somewhere. We will see if that applies tomorrow. She said it is about the democratic right of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video