Page 97 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 May 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Gardens, Ainslie. If you have not seen that terrific development in Ainslie, let me commend it to you. It was opened recently by Hazel Hawke, who is connected with another legislative assembly in this city.
Finally, I conclude on this note of thanks: one could thank many people, but may I personally say what an honour and joy it is to be a member of this Assembly at this stage in my life, and particularly in the company of so many good people on all sides of this Assembly. Let us, friends - and I am sure you will agree with this - grow old gracefully together.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Wood might like to make his second maiden speech to the Assembly.
MR WOOD (12.07): Mr Speaker, I thank you for that suggestion. Indeed, I will expand on some of the points I made earlier. It is with some trepidation that I follow my colleague Dr Kinloch, as I am awaiting with some anxiety the label that will be pinned on me. Most of us here in our introductory speeches have expressed some of our ideas, some of our aspirations for Canberra and for our role in this Assembly. I have detected very clearly a common purpose in those speeches.
We have for the most part dedicated people here, interested in the future of Canberra, with mainly common interests, varying in the particulars of the ways that we want to see Canberra develop. But my comments today will be directed mainly at the style of this chamber. It has been substantially imposed on us, I might say, by the Act that brought us into existence with the peculiar electoral system that was devised to get us here, with our unicameral chamber, with our combination of State and municipal functions and with still a very significant Commonwealth power over what happens in the Territory.
I can talk about another very important factor in the way that this Assembly goes about its business, and that is the way that we as members take it. Already we have seen some of the struggles between the traditions of Westminster government and the innovations imposed by the system we have. We are having trouble. It is not a problem, but we are having trouble establishing which is more important - a certain tradition or some of the facets of the innovative system.
The standing orders, I suspect, will be constantly changed. I want briefly to mention some aspects of those standing orders. I think they are in general excellent. I read standing orders first some 20 years ago and I had great difficulty understanding them. These are very understandable. They are written in plain English. They are also good in another respect, and it was not until it was pointed out to me that I noticed it: they are entirely non-sexist. Nowhere do we see he, she, him or her or any sexist language and that is a remarkable achievement.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .