Page 2018 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 5 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Hanson will no doubt say in response—and I am sure I will get the interjection shortly—that the only reason I want more members in each electorate is because it will help get more Greens elected. Perhaps having electorates with more members may get more Greens elected, but it is not in itself the Greens’ interests that I am here today defending. I am also defending the interests of proportional representation and the diversity of interests, concerns and values that proportional representation brings to our parliament.
I am defending the opportunity of those people in the ACT community who, in the past, voted for other people to represent them in this place, including the Democrats, the Gungahlin Equality Party, the Nurses Good Government party, the Canberra First Party, the Christian Democratic Party, the Liberal Democratic Party, Free Range Canberra, the ACT Equality Party, the Marion Le Social Justice Party, Community Alliance, the Australian Motorist Party, Mr Osborne, Mr Rugendyke and even the Bullet Train for Canberra Party. In the future there may well be people who will vote for the Palmer United Party, the Australian Cyclists Party, the Sex Party and the Animal Justice Party.
It may surprise members to know that I care about the interests of those voters and these parties, some of which include what I would consider to be radical right wing parties and even perhaps what I might consider to be illogical single-issue parties. But the ACT has chosen a far more democratic electoral system than the federal House of Representatives and most state lower houses.
I believe, and the Greens believe, that our parliament and our government are enhanced by the presence of people other than representatives of the Labor Party and the Liberal Party. The reason I think this is so is because they represent the diverse views of people in the community and they bring new ideas to this place; they put ideas on the table that have not been brought into this place before or perhaps for a while. They cause us to rethink our previous positions, perhaps justify them, perhaps change them, or perhaps solidify them, and they challenge us to think differently in new ways. This comes down to the idea that simply parties who get 40-odd per cent of the vote should not be the only ones represented in this place. If people vote, say, eight, nine, 10 or 12 per cent for a candidate, that is a solid vote and it is a vote that is worth representing in this place.
Mr Coe: And 12 per cent will get you there.
MR RATTENBURY: Not under a five-member electorate it will not, Mr Coe, depending on preference flows. You know well—
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, members! This is not a conversation; this is a debate.
MR RATTENBURY: It is for these reasons that I have just outlined that we should never be threatened by the presence of other parties in this Assembly. Yet as we move a bill to make our Assembly include more people, the Labor Party and the Liberal Party have decided that they do not want more types of people; just more people like them. That is a real shame. It is a shame for the representation of the people of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video