Page 2595 - Week 07 - Thursday, 2 August 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It was not immediately apparent that both of these motions being passed places members who are on the committee in a very difficult position, thanks to standing order 241. Committee members cannot speak about committee deliberations or proceedings publicly. In this case this includes the impact of federal legislation and the process for achieving change. This is, of course, in contradiction to the unanimously passed motion of 1 November that all members in this place should be conveying to the commonwealth government and opposition the need to repeal the Euthanasia Laws Act and restore territory rights at every available and appropriate forum.
This contradiction has become apparent, and starkly apparent, in the past few weeks since Senator Leyonhjelm did the deal that now sees the federal parliament debating territory rights in coming weeks.
That five members of this place cannot speak of their home, cannot speak about the rights of where they live, cannot speak about the rights that should be afforded in this place simply because of one line in a committee’s terms of reference is, frankly, silly. I think there is a broader conversation that we can have in the standing orders review. But the fact remains that this is an issue right now.
During what is probably the best chance this territory has in having its rights restored, elected members of this place not being able to represent their constituents, not being able to represent their wishes when it matters most, is pretty much deplorable.
This is a simple amendment to the terms of reference. It recognises that the committee continues to have an important job to do, and that the federal legislation, while it exists, should be inquired into. It means that members in this place can also fulfil that which was contained in the earlier resolution of the Assembly, particularly at this most important time. I commend the motion to the Assembly.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (10.36): I rise to support Ms Cheyne’s motion. There are probably a couple of things to talk about here. From my point of view, and the point of view of the Greens as a whole, repealing the Andrews legislation has been our policy basically ever since there was Andrews legislation to be repealed.
The Greens have always felt that the citizens of the ACT are equal to the citizens of anywhere else in Australia, and we deserve to have the same legislative rights as anyone else. Our former leader, Bob Brown, moved to introduce legislation in that regard. Our current leader, Richard Di Natale, once moved to introduce legislation in conjunction with former Senator Katy Gallagher, and was preparing to do that again, until Katy Gallagher became former Senator Katy Gallagher.
The Greens policy on this issue is very clear. It is a little unfortunate to have the issue regarding committees, which particularly impinges on my and Shane’s ability to say things about this matter. I agree with Ms Cheyne that we do need to make some more substantive changes to the standing orders about what committee members may or may not say. The Greens proposed some changes along those lines in our submission to admin and procedure. I ask admin and procedure to look very carefully at the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video