Page 1949 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The organisers have made a point of asking me to thank publicly the Attorney-General and Minister for Urban Services, Mr Connolly, and his various areas of responsibility for the valuable assistance with the organisation of the event. The walkers will be accompanied by, amongst others, Kenny Koala, Recycle Roo and the ACTION 1947 Bedford bus. The Fire Brigade antique fire truck, I understand, is also going to be on call. Waste management recycling bins will be provided. I understand that the Australian Federal Police cycle patrol will be there to help walkers who need a bit of control and that the FM104.7 gorilla is going to be there to urge the walkers on. I understand that all of these services and attractions are being provided free of charge to the community event. Here is the poster advertising the event. I commend the management and the board of the Tuggeranong Valley Rugby Union and Amateur Sports Club and the management and staff of the Valley View for this valuable initiative. I urge all members of our community, including those in this Assembly, to participate if they have the time available on the 29th.
Legislative Process
MR WESTENDE (5.07): Madam Speaker, earlier this afternoon Mr Connolly mentioned cooperation between the parties. During last week's debate on the Animal Welfare Bill I could not help but ask myself why we have such acrimonious and lengthy debates. With a little compromise and understanding we could function so much better, so much easier, and produce so much better legislation. With all the brain power at our disposal I am sure we could come up with a bipartisan or collegiate approach where legislation passed through a certain flushing out group or committee comprising all parties of the Assembly. Such an approach would be the best in Australia and would be a credit to the ACT. With a little understanding and cooperation we could save a lot of unnecessary and wasted time in the Assembly. I do not have all the answers, but I would hope that collectively, under your guidance, we could develop a model which could be the envy of most legislatures in Australia.
I suggest that it would be far more productive for major Bills such as, for example, the Animal Welfare Bill to be reviewed by a committee comprising members of both parties and the Independents for clarification before they come to the house. If there was concern about certain clauses, this would enable imperfections to be rectified. It would also enable certain compromises to be made, so that we could reach consensus on matters on which there is general agreement in principle before debate in the parliament. Madam Speaker, it is my view that the best interests of the Assembly would be served by such an approach, the best interests of the community would be preserved and we would have a chance of producing a better quality of legislation.
Madam Speaker, I found the debate on animal welfare to falter on a narrow-minded approach because some people refused to acknowledge flaws in the legislation. What we need is Bills that are capable of being administered with a minimum of confusion, Bills that are readily understood by all - the judiciary that has to administer the laws and people such as the animal welfare groups or any other group of the public or the public at large who are affected by those Bills.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .